2023 NFL Conference Championships
#3 Kansas City Chiefs @ #1 Baltimore Ravens (-3.5. Total: 44.5)
12 PM PST, CBS
Kansas City Chiefs: 11-6, AFC West Champion
WC: 26-7 v Miami
Divisional: 27-24 @ Buffalo
AFC Championship Record: 3-3
Last Appearance: 2023
This is the 6th straight year the Chefs have made the AFC Championship. ****.
Also did you know Taylor Swift is dating Travis Kelce?
Also did you know Britney Mahomes was seen in the box with TayTay?
Why the Chiefs will be in the Super Bowl
You can sit here and lament the sheer boredom of this all you want but the reality is Patrick Mahomes is the only player in the NFL with GOAT equity. This offense ****ing sucks. Between all the drops, between Toney being alive, between Hardman doing whatever the **** that was and the Walrus allowing it to happen, it's truly wild Mahomes has gotten them here by sheer force of will. If you had to pick one QB in all the world to win a single game with your life on the line, it's Mahomes.
Baltimore Ravens: 13-4, AFC North Champion
WC: Bye
Divisional: 34-10 v Texans
AFC Championship Record: 2-2
Last Appearance: 2013
Not bad for a runningback
Why the Ravens will be in the Super Bowl
In the revolving door of MVP candidates this year, RB1 is the first one that is beyond repute and you can objectively say deserves the award. They have been the best team in the AFC by a WIDE margin, their defense has been fantastic and Zay Flowers has emerged as a competent WR which is a very new thing for Lamar. Andrews seems likely to return but even if he doesn't Likely has been phenomenal. If we are being honest, Buffalo beat themselves on Sunday. Baltimore has proven themselves to be too smart to fall for that bullshit
#3 Detroit Lions @ #1 San Francisco 49ers (-7. Total: 50.5)
3:30 PM PST, Fox
Detroit Lions: 12-5, NFC North Champion
WC: 24-23 v Rams
Divisional: 31-23 v Buccaneers
NFC Championship Record: 0-1
Last Appearance: 1992
Won't lie, it's a pretty ballsy bet to name your kid the god of sun and air and have him turn into one of the elite WRs in football
Also. YOU BETTER LOSE YOURSELF IN THE BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
Also. Detroit-style pizza pretty good
Also. FREEGEAR
Why the Lions will be in the Super Bowl
I'm not stupid enough to say "fate" so i won't. That said:
Dan Campbell is pretty **** it YOLO which is the kind of mentality you are going to need to beat a superior (on paper) team on the road.
The Random Number Borkerator can roll snakeyes, in which case fml this is going to be a long ****ing night.
The Lions are playing with house money literally regardless of what happens. While Goff hasn't exactly been a world beater the rest of the roster has been. Hutchinson is a ****ing monster, Campbell is no coward, this Gibbs guy seems decent and Sun and Air God is a decent receiver. Look, I just watched the niners almost lose to the Packers.
Which brings me to my next point: the 9ers are the only team left that objectively didn't deserve to win. The mistakes the Packers made do not seem to be mistakes the Lions will replicate; if the 9ers bring that same energy on Sunday the Lions are going to ****ing smoke them.
San Francisco 49ers: 12-5, NFC West Champion
WC: Bye
Divisional: 24-21 v Packers
NFC Championship Record: 7-11
Last Appearance: 2023
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHA
**** my life
My oven is screwed
Side note: if the 9ers win no matter who they play it'll be one of the 2 teams to beat them in a Super Bowl. So that's cool i guess.
Why the 49ers will be in the Super Bowl
Objectively speaking the 49ers are the best team in football. In the 12 regular season games they won they looked like generational greatness. In the 4 (**** you i don't count the Rams) losses they looked like ****ing buffoons with no concept for reality.
Until the Packers game there has never been a game where people could point to and say "Bork willed this team to victory" and look, Bork was the reason they almost lost, but with the chips in the middle he won that game.
The 9ers are fantastic at all aspects, but the reality of it is that the Random Number Borkerator needs to come up 11. That has already happened 12.5 times. Just needs to happen one more time.
Or who knows, maybe Kyle pulls a Womp and decides Bork won't throw more than 8 times. The only position where the 9ers are objectively inferior is idk maybe kicker? I shouldn't be worried. I am anyway.
Let's rumble
The conditions were why I reduced his chance to make from inside 48 from his career 90% rate to 75%.
What does his kicking % have to do with the 25% chance of scoring a TD
I actually think this is probably close to as reliable than 4th down bot. If your opponent really doesn't want you to do one of two things, then generally doing that thing is best.
Excellent point. You will see this effect often when each coach is deciding to call TO near end of 1H. Obviously one side benefits more than the other, as it is a zero sum game (win prob always sums to 1.0).
If Kyle knew that Lions kicker was sub par from 46 yards, I believe he would hope they go for FG, miss it, get 8 extra yards in the process, and benefit from a big momentum boost for the home fans and team.
That seems to be the easiest path to get the game turned around IMO.
Of course stopping them on 4th and 2 also changes momentum, without the additional 8 yards and also with the risk that Lions succeed and run an additional 3-4 minutes off the clock, keep 9ers D on the field, kick a 90%+ FG or get a TD that would likely put them in < 10% win equity position.
If FG chance is < 50% it seems going for it is sound. If it is 75%+, I suspect kicking it might be better. I want to take a few minutes tomorrow and get the break even #s and get a more substantive answer.
The Campbell error is when people reduce complex decisions to simple rules of thumb. He looks at ev in the abstract with no situational contextualization and with no further thought. If a > b shove, otherwise no, doesn't matter what oponent is doing, has done, or might do. Never mind that he overrates the precision and robustness of his ev calculation.
The timeout is "worse" in a sense that it's obviously bad but couldn't have cost very much win equity
It obviously doesn't. I was referencing my post 1341 in which I estimated his chance of making the FG at 75% even though he is 90% from that range career, allowing for the conditions. The 25% estimation of scoring a TD if going for it starts with 60% chance to get the first down, and then is estimated from routine NFL data as to TD rates 1st and 10 from just outside the red zone, allowing for the slight chance of TD on the 4th down itself. I used approximate marks not equal marks. I think it holds up pretty good.
I mean it’s obviously hard to say, but I have to imagine what little win equity existed got obliterated when the only non-onside kick path to victory was taken away
I still say in this situation you kick a bloop middle ball, or a hard squibbler. With 10 men up and only one back, you now have a loose ball with 11 guys going head long for it versus one, with of course the up front line of 10 dropping back as well but surprised as to the situation. There are 50 yards in there with nobody in it, and the ball bouncing around irregularly. It's a abeutiful play and if I was Belichick's special teams coach he would give me a raise.
It obviously doesn't. I was referencing my post 1341 in which I estimated his chance of making the FG at 75% even though he is 90% from that range career, allowing for the conditions. The 25% estimation of scoring a TD if going for it starts with 60% chance to get the first down, and then is estimated from routine NFL data as to TD rates 1st and 10 from just outside the red zone, allowing for the slight chance of TD on the 4th down itself. I used approximate marks not equal marks. I think it hol
Sorry my fault I wasn't clear at all - the 25% chance of a TD I think is about right, but why do you think if they convert the fourth down it's either a TD 25% of the time or nothing 75% of the time? What % of the time do they take a field goal?
Sorry my fault I wasn't clear at all - the 25% chance of a TD I think is about right, but why do you think if they convert the fourth down it's either a TD 25% of the time or nothing 75% of the time? What % of the time do they take a field goal?
Yes I didn't cover that. I also grouped the 90% from inside 48 together but obviously at the outer limits of that range it is nowhere near 90% as you get longer within that range. And if they get some more yardage on the next set of downs the FG% is going up up up.
My main argument is that you don't introduce huge swing factors into the game when up big late ... as in eschewing a chance to go up 3 scores thereby risking giving opponent a possession to cut it to 1 score. 40% chance you are giving them that by going for it. Of course he wasn't really 90% to make that FG or even 75% (my adjustment factor) probably, maybe more like 67% given the top of the range of the stat and the conditions.
I wonder where Campbell's breaking point is not to go: 4th and 4?? I guess the season stats would tell.
That no one contested the main point here even though my position is unpopular seems important. Cliff Notes: You don't introduce explosive swing factors into the game when you are in an 75% win position already. Nope, you increase the 75% equity to 85%.
I don't know what the live line was but was it around 75% when they went for it and what did it drop to?
I get wanting to decrease variance as a fav but there was a full 22-23 minutes left in the game and their defense sucks. Seems like his analysis of "our defense sucks" held up nicely. Their offense had done whatever they wanted to that point in the game. You say "up big late", there was a quarter and a half left.
If they kick the FG and he misses, everyone just says why wouldn't you let them cook like you did all season you weak ass bitch
My main argument is that you don't introduce huge swing factors into the game when up big late ... as in eschewing a chance to go up 3 scores thereby risking giving opponent a possession to cut it to 1 score. 40% chance you are giving them that by going for it. Of course he wasn't really 90% to make that FG or even 75% (my adjustment factor) probably, maybe more like 67%...
All things equal of course reducing variance with the lead is the preferred choice.
But comparing kicking a FG as an equivalent to gaining the 1st down is so far off.
Besides he was more like 55% to make it from 46, and they were in the low 40s to convert. The variance difference is basically irrelevant.
4th and 3 is a different conversation.
