NFL Week 6

[NOLA]

I was told the Bucs weren’t that good since the Bears beat them

The Bucs are not only good, I'll go out on a limb and say that will be the best team the Bears will end up having played this year. I could see them finishing 12-4 this season.

Yeah, they’re legit as long as Brady’s arm doesn’t fall off. Not crazy about Ronald Jones as a top tier RB, but those receivers and that D put them up there.

[minnesotacubsfan]

How the hell are JPP and Suh still in the league

[Cubfanintheknow]

Aaron Rodgers got benched!!!! :yahoo:

 

***OK, I live in Wisconsin. Shut up and give me this.***

[NonProfitCow]

I was told the Bucs weren’t that good since the Bears beat them

The NFC is pretty bad this year.

[bukie]

I was told the Bucs weren’t that good since the Bears beat them

The NFC is pretty bad this year.

The NFC East is bad this year. The NFC contenders are right there with the AFC contenders, going by efficiency at FootballOutsiders. 3 of the top 5 are NFC (SEA,TB,LAR), and the top 10 (NO/GB) and top 12 (MIN) and top 14 (CAR) are evenly split.

 

The AFC is pretty heavily split between the good teams (BAL/KC/PIT/IND/TEN) and the really bad teams (NYJ/CIN/DEN/JAX)

[NOLA]

I was told the Bucs weren’t that good since the Bears beat them

The NFC is pretty bad this year.

The NFC East is bad this year. The NFC contenders are right there with the AFC contenders, going by efficiency at FootballOutsiders. 3 of the top 5 are NFC (SEA,TB,LAR), and the top 10 (NO/GB) and top 12 (MIN) and top 14 (CAR) are evenly split.

 

The AFC is pretty heavily split between the good teams (BAL/KC/PIT/IND/TEN) and the really bad teams (NYJ/CIN/DEN/JAX)

Pittsburgh, KC and Baltimore seem a level above everyone else. Steelers at Ravens in two weeks is going to be epic.

[jersey cubs fan]

The first half of this tweet seems to be contradicted by the second half.

 

[WrigleyField 22]

How do they know the first test was false positive, and the second test isn’t false negative?

I listened to a podcast a few weeks back and forget the exact details.... but what I recall is basically what they are doing is the first test given that would trigger a positive isn’t the most accurate but faster and done daily, when a positive is triggered off of that test they do a test that takes longer (2-3 days iirc) but is more accurate to confirm or not. All the players wear some sort of tracking devices too and if they’ve been around a positive test person they have to take the more accurate test too before being cleared and isolate/quarantine until results come back.

But they aren’t taking 2-3 days to announce the false positive was false.

Is it a single sample that gets split into two tests, so its basically;

 

D+0 - Take sample

D+1 - Quick test ready

D+2 - More accurate test ready

 

Effectively duplicating the efforts/costs, but trying to catch stuff ASAP without otherwise slowing it down?

[jersey cubs fan]

[bukie]

The NFC East is 2-14-1 against teams outside their division. The tie was Philly against a terrible Bengals team, with wins by the Cowboys with a huge comeback over the Falcons, and the Eagles over a beat up 49ers team.

 

Advantage Philly, I guess?

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

[NonProfitCow]

KC ran for 245 on Buffalo. And they add Le'Veon Bell to split carries next week.

[soccer10k]

Adam Gase is 30-40 as a head coach.

 

31 of those 40 losses are by double digits (77.5%).

 

So Adam Gase has more losses by 10+ points than he has wins.

 

For a little added context, Hue Jackson went 1-31 over a two year span with the Browns but only lost 19 games (61.3%) by 10+ points.

[WrigleyField 22]

Actually reading through this, I think it was a little more complex than "knows Hou will score". It would be dumb just to concede a score. But you do want to use your TOs in succession to stop after 1st down, 2nd down, 3rd down. At 2 and 1 you give them the 1st and 10 and try to get 3 stops with 3 successive TOs. The 5 yards therefor is what might analytically be worth the extra time, with the expected point change being minimal I assume. It would have to be 2nd and 4th or less to make this a potentially desirable move I think.

[raw]

Actually reading through this, I think it was a little more complex than "knows Hou will score". It would be dumb just to concede a score. But you do want to use your TOs in succession to stop after 1st down, 2nd down, 3rd down. At 2 and 1 you give them the 1st and 10 and try to get 3 stops with 3 successive TOs. The 5 yards therefor is what might analytically be worth the extra time, with the expected point change being minimal I assume. It would have to be 2nd and 4th or less to make this a potentially desirable move I think.

 

Definitely worth the time in that situation. The likelihood of converting 2nd & 1 is extremely high. And they were already in very make-able FG range. So, the concession is the first down. If you are going to give up a 1st anyway, you might as well get it over with and save time when that is a factor.

[Derwood]

Imagine going 34/54 passing and only scoring 10 points.

 

lol Cowboys

[WrigleyField 22]

Actually reading through this, I think it was a little more complex than "knows Hou will score". It would be dumb just to concede a score. But you do want to use your TOs in succession to stop after 1st down, 2nd down, 3rd down. At 2 and 1 you give them the 1st and 10 and try to get 3 stops with 3 successive TOs. The 5 yards therefor is what might analytically be worth the extra time, with the expected point change being minimal I assume. It would have to be 2nd and 4th or less to make this a potentially desirable move I think.

 

Definitely worth the time in that situation. The likelihood of converting 2nd & 1 is extremely high. And they were already in very make-able FG range. So, the concession is the first down. If you are going to give up a 1st anyway, you might as well get it over with and save time when that is a factor.

Yea, I think ultimately knowing the projected points at different yardages would be critical. For example is 2nd and 4 from a similar spot in the field equally as tough, or would you start burning your TOs in that spot and try for the stop. I know there is the occasional "they're gonna score, so preserve the clock" situations, but I don't think this was quite it.

 

Funny "let them score story"; Senior year of HS we were down late 6 to 7 and on defense and the opposing team bust off a huge gain to get inside the 5 yard line. So the call came in to let them score so we would get the ball back with time to try and tie. At the snap 10 of 11 of us stood and just let them run it straight up the middle. Our middle LB, who was kind of dopey, was the only guy who didn't get the call and went and lit up their RB, causing a forced fumble, probably due to the fact the RB was so caught off guard as well. We recovered the fumble and then had a chance to outright win (which we unfortunately weren't able to do, but it was a pretty funny sequence of events anyways).

[NOLA]

Imagine going 34/54 passing and only scoring 10 points.

 

lol Cowboys

Cowboys gonna Cowboy.

 

[raw]

Actually reading through this, I think it was a little more complex than "knows Hou will score". It would be dumb just to concede a score. But you do want to use your TOs in succession to stop after 1st down, 2nd down, 3rd down. At 2 and 1 you give them the 1st and 10 and try to get 3 stops with 3 successive TOs. The 5 yards therefor is what might analytically be worth the extra time, with the expected point change being minimal I assume. It would have to be 2nd and 4th or less to make this a potentially desirable move I think.

 

Definitely worth the time in that situation. The likelihood of converting 2nd & 1 is extremely high. And they were already in very make-able FG range. So, the concession is the first down. If you are going to give up a 1st anyway, you might as well get it over with and save time when that is a factor.

Yea, I think ultimately knowing the projected points at different yardages would be critical. For example is 2nd and 4 from a similar spot in the field equally as tough, or would you start burning your TOs in that spot and try for the stop. I know there is the occasional "they're gonna score, so preserve the clock" situations, but I don't think this was quite it.

 

Funny "let them score story"; Senior year of HS we were down late 6 to 7 and on defense and the opposing team bust off a huge gain to get inside the 5 yard line. So the call came in to let them score so we would get the ball back with time to try and tie. At the snap 10 of 11 of us stood and just let them run it straight up the middle. Our middle LB, who was kind of dopey, was the only guy who didn't get the call and went and lit up their RB, causing a forced fumble, probably due to the fact the RB was so caught off guard as well. We recovered the fumble and then had a chance to outright win (which we unfortunately weren't able to do, but it was a pretty funny sequence of events anyways).

 

That story is hilarious!

[OleMissCub]

re: some of the recent talk about Tunsil. Good lawd

 

[BigbadB]

Actually reading through this, I think it was a little more complex than "knows Hou will score". It would be dumb just to concede a score. But you do want to use your TOs in succession to stop after 1st down, 2nd down, 3rd down. At 2 and 1 you give them the 1st and 10 and try to get 3 stops with 3 successive TOs. The 5 yards therefor is what might analytically be worth the extra time, with the expected point change being minimal I assume. It would have to be 2nd and 4th or less to make this a potentially desirable move I think.

 

This game was a few tv's down from the game I was watching, but I was a bit blown away with how it ended, and I didn't even know about the purposeful 12th man on the field penalty. It was actually after that penalty that things got weird for me. The score was 30-29, Houston. Houston got into the endzone to make it a 7 point game. Instead of kicking the extra point, they went for 2. I'm thinking to myself, an 8 point lead is a guarantee of no worse than a tie with no time left. Why in the world are they going for two here? They don't make it, of course. Tennessee marches down the field and gets the TD and kicks the extra point to send it to overtime and then on to victory.

 

An interim coach trying to go up 9 instead of a cozy 8 point lead which in turn loses you the game. Ouch. I mean, I get that the Titans have Derrick Henry and trying to keep him from running 2 yards is hard, but it only takes one goal line stand.

[WrigleyField 22]

Actually reading through this, I think it was a little more complex than "knows Hou will score". It would be dumb just to concede a score. But you do want to use your TOs in succession to stop after 1st down, 2nd down, 3rd down. At 2 and 1 you give them the 1st and 10 and try to get 3 stops with 3 successive TOs. The 5 yards therefor is what might analytically be worth the extra time, with the expected point change being minimal I assume. It would have to be 2nd and 4th or less to make this a potentially desirable move I think.

 

This game was a few tv's down from the game I was watching, but I was a bit blown away with how it ended, and I didn't even know about the purposeful 12th man on the field penalty. It was actually after that penalty that things got weird for me. The score was 30-29, Houston. Houston got into the endzone to make it a 7 point game. Instead of kicking the extra point, they went for 2. I'm thinking to myself, an 8 point lead is a guarantee of no worse than a tie with no time left. Why in the world are they going for two here? They don't make it, of course. Tennessee marches down the field and gets the TD and kicks the extra point to send it to overtime and then on to victory.

 

An interim coach trying to go up 9 instead of a cozy 8 point lead which in turn loses you the game. Ouch. I mean, I get that the Titans have Derrick Henry and trying to keep him from running 2 yards is hard, but it only takes one goal line stand.

And all it takes is one goal line conversion to ice the game.

 

I don't hate it. Interim coaches ought to be aggressive like this. Why fall victim to all the awful cliché conservatism of NFL Head coaches, you're just a caretaker anyways. Go for 2 every time! Never punt on your opponents side of the field. Go for it on every 4th and 1. Go wild. Make football fun again.

[raw]

Texans interim coach is 73 years old, he knows he's not an option to get that job full-time. He went for the win to end the game right then and there. For a team that's been top 5 pick bad, he was trying to get his team a win.....especially since they have no incentive to take with no picks in the first 2 rounds. I don't hate the move to go for 2. But there's probably no other situation I can think of where I would do that. Also, should be noted, the playcall was fine (unlike the Eagles try for 2 and a tie vs. the Ravens), it was just a good defensive play.

[Andy]

Texans interim coach is 73 years old, he knows he's not an option to get that job full-time. He went for the win to end the game right then and there. For a team that's been top 5 pick bad, he was trying to get his team a win.....especially since they have no incentive to take with no picks in the first 2 rounds. I don't hate the move to go for 2. But there's probably no other situation I can think of where I would do that. Also, should be noted, the playcall was fine (unlike the Eagles try for 2 and a tie vs. the Ravens), it was just a good defensive play.

Houston's defense was playing like garbage - in no small part because Derrick Henry is an actual mutant - and as Crennel probably feared, the Texans never saw the ball again in that game. It was unequivocally the right call and I loved it.