Week 15 TNF: Kansas City Chiefs 9-4 at Los Angeles Chargers 8-5

[LeotheLion]

5 minutes ago, Kael said:

I disagree. 

Brandon Staley and his approach to football is exactly what the Chargers need.

For far too long the Chargers have played not to lose. Have played it safe. Even dating to vaunted the Marty era. The Chargers played to not lose. I know, I watched all of it. There was not but one goal, don't lose. Spoiler, they lost.

Brandon Staley comes in with only one goal, win. The Chargers may lose the game. But they will leave it all out there. Sometimes that just win mentality costs them. Sometimes they win.

But as a fan I can't describe how pleased I am to have a head coach that try anything to win and lose, than one who will do anything possible to not lose, and lose.

Regardless of what you think of the philosophy, all coaches goal is to win lol. Some just take different approaches. McVay is one of the most conservative 4th down coaches in the league. He's not playing to lose. 

 

[Malfatron]

2 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

Regardless of what you think of the philosophy, all coaches goal is to win lol. Some just take different approaches. McVay is one of the most conservative 4th down coaches in the league. He's not playing to lose. 

 

so does Mike Zimmer. hows that working out for him?

[LeotheLion]

Just now, Malfatron said:

so does Mike Zimmer. hows that working out for him?

But is he playing not to lose? I know Dan Campbell was at one point one of the most aggressive coaches. 

My point is every coach is basing every decision on winning. The decision making process on how you win a game is what is different. I don't know historically, but there was a time this year the Pats were also one of the worst 4th down decision makers based on Baldwins model. 

[Kip Smithers]

There’s no right or wrong answer to this. Well actually there is. If you’ve got the personnel and you like your chances then by all means go for it. If you don’t then I suggest you play it safe. I don’t think any of the 4th down calls were bad decisions. Heck the statistically least likely of the attempts should’ve been a TD were it not for a freak injury and occurrence. All goes down to personnel and assessing the best and worst case scenarios 

[Kael]

7 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

But is he playing not to lose?

Yes. 

 

7 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

I know Dan Campbell was at one point one of the most aggressive coaches.

Just because you are playing to win, doesn't mean you will win.

It is just that I would rather play aggressive to win, than play scared and conservative to not lose.

[Bearerofnews]

I don't mind staley being aggressive. But that was too much. Just take 1 of those fgs and its a win. It's ok he is a rookie HC. 

[Broncofan]

TBH, I had no problem with Staley's decisions to go for it.   They don't win the 1st KC game, nor the LV MNF game, nor the PHI game, without that same level of all-out aggression.  It's who they are. @Thelonebillsfan, @mse326 &  @Forge  covered the rationale - and MOST importantly, it's literally something the Chargers have fully embraced.    If ppl want to talk results - they won 3 games with that same approach they likely lose (PHI) and most certainly do lose (with KC/LV game IMO).   The wide-angle lens view paints this discussion very differently.

Having said, that, the play calls were the issue IMO tonight.

-With the 2Q final play, if you're going to pass - GET EKELER IN GAME, so the KC D has to respect the possibility of the run.

-With the 3Q missed drive - they ran it to the 1 on 1st down.  HOW DO YOU NOT SNEAK IT AT LEAST 1x, if not 2X with 6'4, 240 lb Herbert and no Chris Jones?   Awful sequencing.

-Finally, if you're going to go metrics-based - when you go up 7, you actually go for 2.    There's no point to play it only part of the time.   If LAC goes up 9, who knows if Reid feels compelled to go for 2.   I also get the argument it's not as cut/dried, but if you've believed in it up until then, then you're being consistent there by going for the 2.    Even if KCwent for 2 and scored, LAC makes them do it again the next time (or LAC goes for 2 again with next score and makes it a 9-pt game).   But we'll never know.   

The Chargers should get into the WC, so they'll get their chance to see if they get a 3rd game, albeit with a much harder path now (but if there's a team that won't mind playing on the road, it's LAC - half of their home games are road games lol, if not more).  It would be something else to see, with James missing the 2H and Samuel missing the game, and Rashawn Slater not playing, and KC getting Chris Jones & Willie Gay back, that would be a great matchup on both sides.

The most compelling take-home message was actually delivered to DEN & LV - if you want to win the AFCW, better to find the gunslinger QB who can caffeinate an O that can hang with KC & LAC.   Until you do, it's not going to be a sustainable way to compete with Mahomes & co. or Herbert & co.

Edited December 17, 2021 by Broncofan

[Chiefer]

29 minutes ago, Bearerofnews said:

I don't mind staley being aggressive. But that was too much. Just take 1 of those fgs and its a win. It's ok he is a rookie HC. 

I mean the Chiefs could've taken their easy FG too in that scenario 

One of those 4ths failed, but Nwenna(?) made that amazing interception and they scored a Td right after. Wouldnt that be a net gain statistically?

Edited December 17, 2021 by Chiefer

[Bearerofnews]

13 minutes ago, Chiefer said:

I mean the Chiefs could've taken their easy FG too in that scenario 

One of those 4ths failed, but Nwenna(?) made that amazing interception and they scored a Td right after. Wouldnt that be a net gain statistically?

I mean yeah technically. Just feel chargers definitely left more points on the field than KC, with the dropped tds and skipping multiple kicks. But it is what it is. These 2 teams will have many more years of close games.

[Nex_Gen]

I truly don't know how Staley walks around with those hunormous balls of steel. Win or lose, I find the Chargers must see TV every week knowing there's gonna be a balls to the wall 4th down attempt from their own 35 yard line six minutes into the game. Among others...

Edited December 17, 2021 by Nex_Gen

[Lum Edwards]

Thanks for nothing, Chargers. Why did Tom Cruise feel the need to go for it on every 4th down? Why did that little sawed off running back think he could jump over all those monsters into the end zone?

Edited December 17, 2021 by Titans Yall

[Dr A W Niloc]

1 hour ago, SkippyX said:

Most of these analytics calls are close calls.

When you are down 15 and score a TD do you get the 2 now or save it for later?

You are not stupid either way. Its feel.

 

     There is a correct answer here:  Down 15 you go for 2 immediately if you score a TD.  You've got to do so with one of your two TDs.  Going for 2 with the first TD tells you whether or not you will need a third score.  There is no similar advantage to waiting and going for 2 with your second TD.

[Malfatron]

1 minute ago, Dr A W Niloc said:

     There is a correct answer here:  Down 15 you go for 2 immediately if you score a TD.  You've got to do so with one of your two TDs.  Going for 2 with the first TD tells you whether or not you will need a third score.  There is no similar advantage to waiting and going for 2 with your second TD.

yep, objectively this is correct

[Nightmare]

Not sure why ‘going for it on every 4th down’ is seen as this heroic attempt to win at all costs.

Sometimes taking the three points is simply the smarter play. And playing smart rather than reckless will often give you a better chance of winning football games.

I kind of get it from the point of view that the Chargers have been historically dreadful at things like important kicking situations, and maybe Staley is just trying to shed that narrative. But at what point is he just creating a new issue where his continuous 4th down attempts also cost the team games? To me that’s what happened here.

[Bearerofnews]

Just hope Parham is ok.