Bad Coaching Thread: Matt Eberflus canned like chunk light tuna

Yeah that's really really bad if it's true. Even though I still don't think it's an enormous mistake to have taken the ball first, it's horrible to not at least have a crash course on the rules with the captain that's going out for the coin toss. Although Shanahan could have just told him to go ahead and take the ball if they won it.

Still think the calls on 2nd and 4 and 3rd and 4 and not going for it on 4th down were worse.

I just did a tree on excel.

Touchdown percentage: 22%
Field goal percentage: 16%
Two point: 50%

When 49ers make a FG on first drive:

KC TD: 25%
KC FG: 20%

When 49ers score a TD on first drive:

KC TD: 30%
2 Pt: 50%

It slightly favored the 49ers but my scoring percentages are probably low all around given how tired the defenses were. Also, didn’t factor in turnovers. Think my KC percentages after a score are probably low, too, when they have four downs to work with.

Yeah, I agree your KC #s seem low in context.

I put the win equity gained in receiving OT kick and tie after 2 possessions around 15%, absent what is lost with 2nd possession team playing auto pilot with 4 downs. I'm guessing 2nd possession team can probably make up that 15% and then some.

Also, team getting ball first is in big time trouble with a 3 and out, as SF almost experienced. Punting from your own 25 is pretty rough when a FG walks you off.

Second possessing team is always first team with a chance to walk it off.

Yeah, the Talking Heads arguing about taking the ball second are completely ignoring the option of going for it on fourth down for the Niners. If both teams score TDs, what are the odds fat Andy goes for two? With Mahomes I think I would.

The more I think about it, the more I agree that it is a pretty large step down in equity to take the ball first, even with the FG-FG-FG and TD-TD-FG possibilities.

Besides the usual stuff that's been discussed, there's the meta thing of the team getting the ball first winding up in some ugly spots where it's very easy to make a bad decision. Like let's say on your first series you wind up with a 4th and 1 just inside your own 35. You should be nearly automatic to pick it up, but do you really want to risk your whole season on it given that your opponent could score without gaining a yard? What about a 4th and 2 around the opp 30, when the FG isn't quite automatic yet, but a conversion doesn't guarantee you a TD at all, and it's not deep enough penetration to have that security of your opponent being pinned deep if you miss? There are lots of chances to make the opposing coach turtle up in a -EV way.

Would be crazy stupid not to go for 2 in that scenario.

If you take Kyle at his word that he knew the rules I really think this is being overblown and Kyle is probably correct (and if not outright it’s close).

This isn’t college rules where it’s shot for shot. You have 1 drive then it’s sudden death. To that end the advantage is putting the onus on the opponent to match you then getting the ball in sudden death. Really feels like the only reason people are shitting on Kyle is cuz of how it played out but if you defer, chefs score a td, you score a td, then chefs get a walkoff field goal people are shitting on you for deferring

Putting yourself in a position where you’re the last person who holds the ball is the move. The failure is not getting the td

Plus even if we’re engaging in the hypothetical ‘would the chefs go for 2’ now you’re putting them in a position when they get the ball where it’s ‘get 8 or you’re ****ed.’ Could the chefs have done it? Probably but that’s not the point. You’re still putting the pressure on them to respond

My mistake I remember it being bad and thought there were 2 mins left. Still no way it's correct with 3 time outs and Manning who was shredding defenses all year.

That wouldn't happen though. If the first team scores a TD and the second team matches that, they have to go for 2 to end the game there. Not doing that would be crazy.

The scenario where going first helps is the one where both teams score a FG.

not going for it in regulation was even worse than not going in OT imo, the risk is essentially the same in either scenario, you lose the game if you dont convert, but the reward is much greater in regulation because you win the SB 95+% of the time if you convert.

Or neither team scores.

There probably are some dipshit coaches that don't go for 2 if they score the second TD.

I also don't think it's a foregone conclusion that teams will go for 2 in that spot, it depends on how the defenses are playing.

Although in this game it was pretty clear both defenses were toast at this stage. So Reid would have been looking at a spot where there's a ~50% chance of losing the game right there with a missed 2PC, vs. an estimated, say, 65% chance of losing to a FG drive thanks to defensive exhaustion if they kick? (And it's not like the other 35% is a win for KC, sometimes SF drives to midfield and then pins you at the 8 and then you're still not in amazing shape). So in this spot, yeah go for it.

IMO SF should only have settled for a TD on the opening drive once they got into FG range. Kicking the FG there means you have to rely on your defence to stop KC from making 35 yards to tie. The odds of that are slim especially since they have 4 downs to make a first down.

When SF didn't go for the TD I knew the game was likely over and was screaming at my TV. It's all or nothing at that point. Have some ****ing balls. I also would have gone for 2 if they scored a TD because you know KC will.

This is just an example of coaches playing it safe to keep their jobs. If they didn't score a TD on 4th, every idiot on ESPN would be critiquing the decision like the talking seals that they are.

It is absolutely a foregone conclusion that teams go for 2 there

edit: after scoring the 2nd TD in OT

the fact that Campbell's aggressive decisions got criticized more than Shanahan's pussy play calling last night shows why the NFL media is so dumb. I'd much rather live with losing a SB by not converting on a 4th a 4 than i would by praying that our defense can stop one of the top 2 QB's of all time with a FG lead and two minutes on the clock.

Going for 2 when scoring TD first seems bad.

If you miss, you almost always lose on matching TD. If you convert, you win half the time, and get ball in sudden death half the time. (total equity under 50%)
If you go for 1, then you win half the time, lose half the time. (total equity around 50%)

Agree wholeheartedly with this

If I’m going to pick one thing to slam Kyle for it’s settling for the FG

Edit: debatable on the score td and go for 2 but definitely play for the td at that point

I'll just say that as a Chiefs fan, trailing, with our secondary, Spags' blitzes, and the way our offense was sputtering, I was hoping to see Bork trying to make explosive plays with time running out in the half.

I felt like we needed to maximize variance in that spot.

Now with the benefit of hindsight knowing Brock played really well the whole game, it might be a different call. But at the time I was still hoping to see the first-half Lions, or Ravens Brock make an appearance.

Yeah, I agree, I was talking about regulation, too. The overtime decision was close. My instinct was the FG was fine.

The great thing is that it's at least an argument now, whereas before it was a gigantic benefit to go first.

You're welcome btw for the :13 second game changing the rules, even though no one had a problem when Bardy did it to Mahomes 3 years earlier.

SF's 3rd and 4 after the two minute warning was basically for the game. If they convert and stay in bounds they get 2 downs where the Chiefs can't stop the clock.

So they kick a FG with like 20-25 seconds left. This version of the Chiefs aren't driving down for a FG with that much time and no TOs.

It sucks for SF settling for a long FG. But I think it's the right play if they can't get a first down running the ball.

I don't think Reid would have gone for two on the second TD if SF had scored a TD. It's just not in his DNA.

But man if he did, what an exciting finish either way.

Nah going for it on 4th and 4 was correct. Even making the field goal, which was not close to a guarantee, doesn’t put them in a great spot when Mahomes has four downs, two timeouts, and two minutes. Reminded me of the Bills spot against the Chiefs in the playoffs. Thought they should have gone for that, too. But that was a closer decision because they were trailing by 3.