So Many Putting This Lost On Frank is Hallarious!!!

[Myles]

4 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I did think when then commentary said the Colts didn’t have a power back “yes we do.. he’s called Andrew Luck”...

 

 

Great point.    I don't recall ever seeing him fail to gain a half yard on a QB sneak or run.

[Four2itus]

Laughing at the blame game. I watched the Titans board after we beat them and not ONE fan gave us credit for the win, they all blamed their own team for the loss. 

 

Curious, how many of you that are now pointing fingers at our team for this loss....felt that the win over the Titans was because of the Titans play?

[Smoke317]

5 hours ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

No, it's not. He shouldn't. Dungy coached in the 2000's, and this is a new era. Analytics (used in a proper way) never were more important part of the game than nowadays. If you look around the league, everyone's doing it. Because it works. Ten years ago it didn't work, but now, it works, because the game (and the rules) changed a lot since. 

 

That call, for example at the goal line at 4th and goal was a high percent success rate call there. That was a well designed play, the offense knew it, they practiced it countless times, and they prepared it for exactly these situations. This is why that play was in the playbook. The offense failed to execute it, but it does not change the fact, that it was the right call there. Vina could've missed the FG there as well. You EXPECT that those high percentage plays be executed, and you can't judge the call by the result. If Wilkins only reached 3-4 inches further, it would've been a TD and we would not talk about that call at all, despite, it would've been the same exact call.

 

I'm not saying Reich was perfect yesterday. I think he has issues with clock management, which showed yesterday as well as in some previous games. He has to improve in that area. But regarding those 4th down calls, all 3 of them was a well designed play, which the team failed to execute yesterday. So they lost. The right answer is go back and practice these plays more, so you execute it better next time. (A better RB, a better WR would've helped. In the future, I am sure an improved, more talented, more experienced personnel will help. As it will help to reduce the number of drops too. But Reich has to trust his current team, otherwise he'll end up calling bad plays eventually. He can't throw away a well designed play, because he doesn't trust our WR's to catch the ball. For the exact same reason, he can't throw away a goal line opportunity because he does not trust our offense.)

In your last paragraph you gave all the reasons why Frank should not be a slave to analytics...  We don't have the supreme talent all around Luck to blindly go for it on every 4th down.  So save that for when we're loaded up with talent.  Not when we're going up against a MONSTER defense.  It was clear from the very first possession that the Jags were highly motivated.  Frank coached like he had the mindset that if we got up early on them that they would fade.  He should have adjusted to a mindset that the game was going to be a grind, our defense would hold them in check, and any and all points we could get were good points.  We've got the greatest kicker of all time...  Until the kicker is removed from the game of football use him.

 

Like I said, had he taken a page from Dungy, he'd have taken those field goals and we'd be discussing pulling out a nail biter on the road rather than getting shut out and seriously damaging our playoff chances.  So in conclusion, I don't want Frank to be a slave to analytics.  I want him to be a coach who makes adjustments & decisions based off of game flow rather than what some book is telling him.  Because as of right now, analytics have failed us in 2 crucial division games.  Games that may likely cost us a shot at the playoffs... 

 

And for the record, I like Frank as a coach.  I'm glad he's an offensive minded coach who's actually played QB in the league.  It's been great for Luck.  But I want him to recognize that despite the way the league is trending, there are still 3 phases to the game and he's the HEAD COACH now not just the OC.  So use all the tools available not just become a slave to analytics and our offense.  Remember the team goal is/was to make this team more than just being about Andrew.  Yesterday's game was supposed to be for the Defense and Vinny to win.  Hopefully, Frank realizes that there's more than 1 way to skin a CAT (Jaguar pun intended)...

[jet1968]

20 hours ago, VaAllDay757 said:

It's Frank's fault we had 0 points today so try again

Actually it's the players fault they had 0 points today. Poor play execution thru the whole game is why they didnt score.

[Myles]

Maybe he should use analytics more.

 

The Analytics love this premise because … it works. In fact, it works exceedingly well. Every study of quarterback sneaks that’s been conducted has proved they are significantly more successful than other short-yardage plays. ESPN research from 2017 showed that every NFL team had a higher conversion rate on quarterback sneaks than on other short-yardage plays. Pro Football Focus research from February showed that quarterback sneaks are 13 percent more successful than other types of runs from the opposing 1-yard line, and 20 percent more successful than other third-and-1 or fourth-and-1 plays. Football Outsiders research from 2016 showed that quarterback sneaks are more successful than every other type of play on third down and fourth down. Advanced Football Analytics research from 2011 showed that a QB sneak on third-and-2 is more likely to be successful than a running back carry on third-and-1. The Wall Street Journal reported in October that every quarterback in the league with at least 10 career sneak attempts has a success rate of 75 percent or better. A 2015 Yale research paper stated that QB sneak attempts are worth nearly twice as much as non-sneaks by a metric called estimated points added.

Universally, these studies give QB sneaks a success rate between 70 and 90 percent. Nothing else in football has a 70 to 90 percent success rate! In this sport, that’s as close to a sure thing as you can get.

 

https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2018/11/15/18096707/quarterback-sneak-short-yardage-play-calling-analysis

[Myles]

4 minutes ago, jet1968 said:

Actually it's the players fault they had 0 points today. Poor play execution thru the whole game is why they didnt score.

Frank has his share of blame as well.    Not his best coached game.     

[VaAllDay757]

1 hour ago, jet1968 said:

Actually it's the players fault they had 0 points today. Poor play execution thru the whole game is why they didnt score.

We didn't kick those 2 field goals that's 6 points alone.....that's on coach

[crazycolt1]

I didn't like either 4 th down plays.  Take the points.

With that said there was a couple of good looking drives stalled by penalties too.

[Tombstone]

I would agree this was not Frank better game coaching and I concede to that but, it appeared his mindset and mine also if we score a TD game, set, and match.  The Jags defense knew the had to play lights out because what they had for offense, nothing much....  The Colts defensive performance was lost in the outcome.  They gave the offense many opportunities to get that done.

[masters1]

It didn't take long to figure out that yards and points were going to be hard to come by yesterday. You could see right away that the Jags were dominating the line of scrimmage. And that's after shutting us out in the second half of the first game. On the first 4th down from the one I knew we were going to get stuffed and sure enough that's what happened. Do the analytics account for who your opponent is? The NFL is a week to week league. You have to adjust each week. 

 

Frank not recognizing the reality of what was happening was disappointing. 

[Four2itus]

2 hours ago, VaAllDay757 said:

We didn't kick those 2 field goals that's 6 points alone.....that's on coach

Curious, if Adam misses one of those, is that on coach too?

[ricker182]

I've always been a firm believer that you take the points that are there in close games.  

  

I'm not surprised Frank kept trying to score TD's because that's who he is.  

  

I don't agree, but that's the guy we hired.   

  

I still like him. It's just that one thing we don't agree on.

[VaAllDay757]

8 hours ago, Four2itus said:

Curious, if Adam misses one of those, is that on coach too?

Uh it would be on the kicker....point is don't intentionally leave points on the boards.....if adam makes the kick he would take the credit also

[John Waylon]

I’m a little put off by his failure to acknowledge mistakes right now, honestly. Despite the overwhelming arguments against his reasoning, he’s digging in and claiming he’s right. 

 

Maybe he’s just playing the cards close to his chest and doesn’t want to admit he made a mistake, who knows. 

 

It it kind of reminds me of Pagano and his late game timeouts. Despite the evidence against the decisions he still defended them and made them on multiple occasions. 

[teganslaw]

Frank Reich used analytics when he was with the Eagles, so I would think he uses them now. Either they were wrong, or Reich dismissed analytic readings this time. I like him, but don't always agree with his playcalling. When the offense is struggling, try the field goal instead of going for it. Not difficult. 

[NagelHausForge]

17 hours ago, Myles said:

Maybe he should use analytics more.

 

The Analytics love this premise because … it works. In fact, it works exceedingly well. Every study of quarterback sneaks that’s been conducted has proved they are significantly more successful than other short-yardage plays. ESPN research from 2017 showed that every NFL team had a higher conversion rate on quarterback sneaks than on other short-yardage plays. Pro Football Focus research from February showed that quarterback sneaks are 13 percent more successful than other types of runs from the opposing 1-yard line, and 20 percent more successful than other third-and-1 or fourth-and-1 plays. Football Outsiders research from 2016 showed that quarterback sneaks are more successful than every other type of play on third down and fourth down. Advanced Football Analytics research from 2011 showed that a QB sneak on third-and-2 is more likely to be successful than a running back carry on third-and-1. The Wall Street Journal reported in October that every quarterback in the league with at least 10 career sneak attempts has a success rate of 75 percent or better. A 2015 Yale research paper stated that QB sneak attempts are worth nearly twice as much as non-sneaks by a metric called estimated points added.

Universally, these studies give QB sneaks a success rate between 70 and 90 percent. Nothing else in football has a 70 to 90 percent success rate! In this sport, that’s as close to a sure thing as you can get.

 

https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2018/11/15/18096707/quarterback-sneak-short-yardage-play-calling-analysis

 

This is a very good point.  But playing Devil's advocate here... I would be curious to see the analytics on the percentage of QBs that get injured during a QB sneak.  Maybe that's the driving fear.  (Although doubt it given that Luck has gone out for 2 passes the last 2 games...)

[John Waylon]

1 hour ago, NagelHausForge said:

 

This is a very good point.  But playing Devil's advocate here... I would be curious to see the analytics on the percentage of QBs that get injured during a QB sneak.  Maybe that's the driving fear.  (Although doubt it given that Luck has gone out for 2 passes the last 2 games...)

 

Very little. I can’t even remember the last time a QB was hurt on a sneak. 

[Valpo2004]

3 hours ago, NagelHausForge said:

 

This is a very good point.  But playing Devil's advocate here... I would be curious to see the analytics on the percentage of QBs that get injured during a QB sneak.  Maybe that's the driving fear.  (Although doubt it given that Luck has gone out for 2 passes the last 2 games...)

 

To go along with John Waylon.  I don't remember ever seeing a QB hurt on a sneak in the NFL or in college.

 

The big thing about the QB sneak is it's a very low momentum play.  No one really gets a running start or anything which is why you don't see guys hurt too often on them.  

[aaron11]

21 hours ago, Four2itus said:

 I watched the Titans board after we beat them and not ONE fan gave us credit for the win, they all blamed their own team for the loss. 

you will see a lot of that on internet forums, i guess its just human nature or maybe internet nature is a better way to put it.  hell it happens in online gaming too, random team mates hardly ever credit the other team for winning, its usually "you all suck" or something like that when you lose

 

i did check out the jags forum, and a lot of them are mad they won because it messed up their tank job for a QB lol

[cbear]

He gets blamed because it didn't work.  If it worked, he'd be the hero, aggressive, gutsy, not like play it safe Pagano, blah, blah, blah.  

 

I loved the decisions. I hated that they didn't work. 

[Hooksalot]

On 12/3/2018 at 9:22 AM, Peterk2011 said:

 

No, it's not. He shouldn't. Dungy coached in the 2000's, and this is a new era. Analytics (used in a proper way) never were more important part of the game than nowadays. If you look around the league, everyone's doing it. Because it works. Ten years ago it didn't work, but now, it works, because the game (and the rules) changed a lot since. 

 

That call, for example at the goal line at 4th and goal was a high percent success rate call there. That was a well designed play, the offense knew it, they practiced it countless times, and they prepared it for exactly these situations. This is why that play was in the playbook. The offense failed to execute it, but it does not change the fact, that it was the right call there. Vina could've missed the FG there as well. You EXPECT that those high percentage plays be executed, and you can't judge the call by the result. If Wilkins only reached 3-4 inches further, it would've been a TD and we would not talk about that call at all, despite, it would've been the same exact call.

 

I'm not saying Reich was perfect yesterday. I think he has issues with clock management, which showed yesterday as well as in some previous games. He has to improve in that area. But regarding those 4th down calls, all 3 of them was a well designed play, which the team failed to execute yesterday. So they lost. The right answer is go back and practice these plays more, so you execute it better next time. (A better RB, a better WR would've helped. In the future, I am sure an improved, more talented, more experienced personnel will help. As it will help to reduce the number of drops too. But Reich has to trust his current team, otherwise he'll end up calling bad plays eventually. He can't throw away a well designed play, because he doesn't trust our WR's to catch the ball. For the exact same reason, he can't throw away a goal line opportunity because he does not trust our offense.)

Analytics has cost us two games this year when the division was ripe for the taking.  Do I need to tell you what you and Frank can do with your analytics.  Guess what?  Analytics don't win games.  Smart football and play calling and scoring.  Of yea.  How many points did analytics score Sunday.  0.  That's how many.  What a load of nonsense!!