Game day coaching decisions...why so difficult?

[G-Daddy]

What nosaint said above, if u know you're in four down situation, have plans gain some every down, not four throws to end zone, poor game management, perhaps lack of planning during game week.

[BADOLBILZ]

I really think it comes down to passing blame and keeping a job. Again, not my thesis, but Eaterbrook's, and i have come around to his way of thinking.

 

I posted in another thread from Marones Press conference on Friday. In essence he said of the punt on 4th" i did not want to take the game away from the players"

 

In other words, i made the right decision, the players just could not execute.

 

He followed it up with" i believe all of my colleagues that are head NFL coaches would make the same decision"

 

IN other words, don't fire me for something everyone else would do...again not my fault..

 

BTW, pervasive at every level. I was at the Richmond game yesterday vs JMU in what amounted ta an elimination game for the FCS playoffs.

 

Richmond down 48-20, 4th and 6 from their 43, 2 minutes left in 3rd quarter. Boom goes the punt as Easterbrook would say, game over, I left right there, Richmond lost game 55-20

 

Since the moment Ralph died the goal of the entire organization has simply become to get into a wildcard position so they wouldn't all get fired by new ownership.

 

Last year, Marrone came in knowing that the way to play winning offensive football in the NFL when you don't have a great QB is to play an aggressive, up-tempo attack that keeps the defense on it's heels and thus creates lots of open looks and space for that QB to make easy plays.

 

They made a critical organizational mistake by not retaining Levitre and/or Reinhardt and that derailed a plan that might otherwise have worked.

 

This season they got away from that because they were criticized for the perception that they exhausted their defense trying to play no-huddle but the truth was that the up-tempo style was masking EJ Manuel's deficiences and trying to play time of posession offense exposed Manuel as the shaky, green QB that he is.

 

In the end, you are exactly right, it's turned into a self preservation game with Marrone.

Edited November 16, 2014 by BADOLBEELZ

[Prickly Pete]

Since the moment Ralph died the goal of the entire organization has simply become to get into a wildcard position so they wouldn't all get fired by new ownership.

 

Last year, Marrone came in knowing that the way to play winning offensive football in the NFL when you don't have a great QB is to play an aggressive, up-tempo attack that keeps the defense on it's heels and thus creates lots of open looks and space for that QB to make easy plays.

 

They made a critical organizational mistake by not retaining Levitre and/or Reinhardt and that derailed a plan that might otherwise have worked.

 

This season they got away from that because they were criticized for the perception that they exhausted their defense trying to play no-huddle but the truth was that the up-tempo style was masking EJ Manuel's deficiences and trying to play time of posession offense exposed Manuel as the shaky, green QB that he is.

 

In the end, you are exactly right, it's turned into a self preservation game with Marrone.

 

This is a point that I've raised before, but haven't seen discussed. Reading defenses is EJM's glaring weakness, and when they changed to a ball control offense, he was doomed.

Edited November 16, 2014 by HoF Watkins

[BADOLBILZ]

This is a point that I've raised before, but haven't seen discussed. Reading defenses is EJM's glaring weakness, and when they changed to a ball control offense, he was doomed.

 

And such is the problem with strictly statistical analysis.

 

When you look at time of posession stats it's easy to draw the conclusion that playing up-tempo exposed the Bills 2013 run defense.......but because EJ's(and Thad and Tuel's) numbers were so modest it was assumed that they would translate to traditional NFL offense. That does not appear to have been the case at all.

 

The problem with statistical analysis of 4th down plays in this thread is that the numbers are based on a league full of coaches that play conservative football like Marrone is doing this year. That's not to say it is wrong but in truth, defenses aren't used to playing 4th down football and that is more than likely the reason for the relatively good numbers seen when teams go for it. But if you take a lot of chances on 4th down and teams know that then perhaps they attack you accordingly. In the end, if you can't convert consistently on 3rd down you probably wouldn't convert on 4th down when an opponent knows you are a risk taking team. I do support the statistical analysis but I think good 4th down teams are either going to be teams with good QB's or teams that have defenses on their heels all game and the Bills are neither.

[plenzmd1]

So, i was watching tons of games today...Sean Payton...yes the guy we all like to think of as so aggressive, punted on 4th and 8 or so....DOWN 17 friggen points and less than 10 minutes to go.

 

He went on 4th and 1 earlier, got stuffed, and i am convinced he was worried about criticism if he went 0-2 on 4th downs

[BuffOrange]

You're 1,000% right. I actually get angry watching games I don't care about because I'm certain I could do better. Two instances yesterday.

1) Ron Rivera running twice from the 30 with 1:40 left, down 2, when ATL has 2 time outs left. I don't even care that they missed a FG. What is your win expectancy when you make that FG - 52%? It's like 92% if you get a 1st down. Idiot. Marrone did the same thing in the same situation @Miami last year and got bailed out by FJax breaking 100 tackles on a 3rd down run.

2) Chuck Pagano calls time out with 1:00 left in half after completion gets them to the NE 10. Why? Are you trying to give Brady a chance to score before half (even the normally conservative/brain-dead Dungy mentioned this...the fact that NE mysteriously took a knee & dominated the 2nd half is besides the point).

 

Coaches love talking about slim margins and the little things and constantly butcher this simple stuff. It's maddening. The only defense for Marrone is that most others are just as bad at it. But when you're Buffalo that's not good enough for me - it's one of the few areas in 2014 where there's an obvious edge to be had in this department and we never use it.

Edited November 17, 2014 by BuffOrange

[CodeMonkey]

It still chaps my ass that Marrone said is his opening press conference that the Billd were going to be innovative. Be at the forefront. Have a robust analytics department.

 

Well the analytics say a QB sneak on 4th and inches is 80% successful. Why would you stand up in a press conference after a game and saying going for it in that situation "didn't even cross your mind." An innovator would go for it. They would be thinking on 3rd down that not matter the outcome we have a play ready for 4th down. Not try to draw the other team offsides which is like 20% successful.

There is a difference between having a robust analytics department and using the data it generates. Besides, I suspect the analytics dept. referred to is for the draft, FA acquisitions etc., not in game decisions. You don't need anyone in house to generate the in game decision stats, they already exist. You just have to be smart enough as a HC to use them.

[Bill from NYC]

 

 

Since the moment Ralph died the goal of the entire organization has simply become to get into a wildcard position so they wouldn't all get fired by new ownership.

 

Last year, Marrone came in knowing that the way to play winning offensive football in the NFL when you don't have a great QB is to play an aggressive, up-tempo attack that keeps the defense on it's heels and thus creates lots of open looks and space for that QB to make easy plays.

 

They made a critical organizational mistake by not retaining Levitre and/or Reinhardt and that derailed a plan that might otherwise have worked.

 

This season they got away from that because they were criticized for the perception that they exhausted their defense trying to play no-huddle but the truth was that the up-tempo style was masking EJ Manuel's deficiences and trying to play time of posession offense exposed Manuel as the shaky, green QB that he is.

 

In the end, you are exactly right, it's turned into a self preservation game with Marrone.

I agree with this entire post, but I think that the job saving mentality started from the top (Brandon). I think that the assertion that the Marrone hire was due to his being a Brandon Syracuse crony is a foregone conclusion.

Whaley is another story. I have gone back and forth wrt the Watkins trade. I thought he would be very good but the fact is, he is actually great. This kid wins football games but YOU always say that the draft is a process.

 

I think that our DL is great. That said, KW is aging and imo ailing. Hughes is going to be a UFA. Mario is great and vastly underrated imo, but he is not young. Dareus is playing his ass off but he is going to cost 15 million per season sooner than later, and has a sketchy off field history.

 

The OL needs at least 1 guard, probably 2, and I'm not loving Wood at OC this year. And sadly, Cordy Glenn isn't getting better from where I sit. Oh, and we certainly need a running back.

 

Given the above, I really am going to question giving up the 2015 first round pick. I can't help it. So, I put Whaley right in there with the rest of them in terms of acting to save his job. Oh and I forgot, we have SERIOUS QB issues.

 

Imo, if this team doesn't somehow make the playoffs the entire lot should be fired from Brandon on down.

Edited November 18, 2014 by Bill from NYC

[PolishDave]

 

Imo, if this team doesn't somehow make the playoffs the entire lot should be fired from Brandon on down.

Let me ask you this....

 

If everyone is fired, what is the likelihood that the new staff will get all of the pieces of the puzzle right?

 

If you already have a couple pieces of the puzzle in place, wouldn't it be wiser to try to keep those pieces in place while trying to replace the ones that need to be replaced?

 

The most likely scenario to happen if everyone is fired again, is that the new staff will have one or two different pieces in place than we have now, but the good people who are in place right now like Whaley for instance, will be replaced with inferior men.

[Manther]

This is not a "fire Marrone" thread (it could be) but really just an effort to stimulate discussion about the issues so many of us are constantly frustrated by when we're watching the NFL -- in-game management and coaching decisions. I watch game after game and wonder to myself, "why didn't they do this or that?" It seems so simple, yet time after time these guys get it wrong and fall into the old school, traditional pattern of only doing what has done before, even if easily obtainable data suggests otherwise.

 

Some examples:

 

1. Punting when on the opponent's side of the 50 and it's 4th and <10.

 

It has been empirically shown that the expected success of going for it in these situations outweighs the expected risk, yet almost every coach ignores the data and "plays it safe." Early in games these decisions are less scrutinized, but examples such as Marrone calling for punts the last two weeks are glaringly bad decisions that may have directly impacted the results.

 

2. Not understanding basic risk strategy.

 

A week ago the Bills faced a 4th and 10 from the KC 15, trailing by only four points with over 3:00 on the clock and all three timeouts. Their defense had played lights out the entire game. Clearly, the best strategic play at that point was kicking a FG to get the Bills within a point and allowing their defense to get the ball back. Some will say Marrone was being "aggressive" with the play calling but I think it was desperation. The risk of not scoring at all and giving KC the ball far outweighed an extremely high-risk 4th down play, given the lack of success Orton was having at that point.

 

3. Not preparing a 4th down play in advance when it's 3rd-and-manageable.

 

How many times have we seen something like a 3rd and five on the opponent's side of the field, the team runs one play that doesn't get the first down, and then uses up the whole play clock on 4th down before either calling time out or punting? Why not actually plan to make the first down by calling two plays on 3rd, having the team no-huddle on 4th and perhaps preventing the defense an opportunity to prepare for the play? This lack of foresight and creativity annoys the hell out of me.

 

I know there are countless other examples of decisions like these, but does it really just come down to coaches being "afraid" to be wrong? If I were a head coach in the NFL I would hire a guy who specifically drilled down all of these data points on a weekly basis and had a direct feed to my headset on game days. I would have multiple play packages for 3rd and 4th down ready during the week that my team practiced. Why is this stuff so hard?

 

I wouldn't worry about being "wrong" because I could stand up at any post game press conference and confidently state that my decisions are backed up by statistics -- and not simply a gut "feel."

 

Anyone have thoughts on this? Am I off base? Please try to keep it reasonably intellectual and don't use it as an opportunity to just trash the Bills' staff.

I agree with all except the 2 nd point. By going for it I believe we essentially lost nothing. By kicking the FG we were saying we needed to score twice. By failing to score a TD with our D we still had two chances to score and a better chance to win. However, I think it is fifty fifty or 60/40. But I liked going for it. I think the problem was we went for the end zone 4 times instead of getting a first down and another set of downs. However, it could have been Orton selecting the end zone as there were other options. I don't blame Orton but wish it turned out better.

 

Secondly, I disagree with Marrone and Hackett most of the time.

 

Thirdly, we have punted 17 times from the oppositions side of the field this year! Oh my God it makes me cringe. Reminds me of Jauron and punting from the 32 for gains of net 12 and loss of the ball.

 

Also, am I the only one who thinks Brandon hired the analytics guy to once again sell hope and advancement?

 

Lastly, I totally agree with you and your point on the press conferences. Are we trying to protect our job or win games? Jauron?

 

Go Bills!

 

 

Let me ask you this....

 

If everyone is fired, what is the likelihood that the new staff will get all of the pieces of the puzzle right?

 

If you already have a couple pieces of the puzzle in place, wouldn't it be wiser to try to keep those pieces in place while trying to replace the ones that need to be replaced?

 

The most likely scenario to happen if everyone is fired again, is that the new staff will have one or two different pieces in place than we have now, but the good people who are in place right now like Whaley for instance, will be replaced with inferior men.

My hope would be keep Whaley. Schwartz is fine too and I don't think he will get a HC gig based on this one year with the talent he is working with. But yes, please replace Marrone and Hackett. At very least replace Hackett.

 

 

One more thing...when it is 4 th and one I don't understand why it would not be automatic to line up and see what is available. Like a QB sneak or an easy quick one yard play when the other team is not ready. At very worst they have to call a timeout. Especially if we are punting anyways what is a 5 yard penalty? The Pats used to do this all the time. It always worked. At least take a T0 from them!

Edited November 19, 2014 by Manther

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

Head coaches seem to make terrible game-day tacticians, on a whole. I don't know if it is because they are overwhelmed with all the other stuff going on on game day or what. Or maybe it's their instinct to go the normal, non-analytical way of making decisions.

 

That is why I have been an advocate of having an assistant coach/analytics guy whose sole job on Sundays is to make all these tactical calls-- i.e., when to go for it on 4th downs, when to challenge calls, when to call TO's, etc.

[Manther]

Probably because there are so many things going on they are managing in realtime, plus the fact being raised in the environment they have been raised in makes it more difficult to step back and think outside of it.

 

It's like trying to figure out how to get out of a forest while being in the middle of it while we as fans are sitting up in a helicopter looking down saying how easy it is to get out. It might be, but we also might not see the fallen trees blocking the path, impassable areas, and rocks in the way that might need to change your plan.

 

Basically we sit on the outside looking over everything without knowing any of the details involved with being on the ground

Well if real time is too fast for Marrone and he has not thought about most to every situation for 365 days a year then maybe he is in over his head?!

Marrone gets paid millions he should be better at coaching than we are on the sidelines regarding decisions.

Edited November 19, 2014 by Manther

[PolishDave]

Head coaches seem to make terrible game-day tacticians, on a whole. I don't know if it is because they are overwhelmed with all the other stuff going on on game day or what. Or maybe it's their instinct to go the normal, non-analytical way of making decisions.

 

That is why I have been an advocate of having an assistant coach/analytics guy whose sole job on Sundays is to make all these tactical calls-- i.e., when to go for it on 4th downs, when to challenge calls, when to call TO's, etc.

I agree that head coaches often make terrible decision makers in certain situations. I think it is a completely independent skill that many of them just lack. One great example was Dick Jauron. The guy would have the team very well prepared for the game. Then during the game he would take wins away from his team simply because he would deny them the opportunity to make a play when it mattered. He just loved to punt the football.

 

Having an assistant call the plays is an excellent idea. Unfortunately I think it runs counter to the natural big ego alpha male type of persona that all head coaches possess.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

I agree that head coaches often make terrible decision makers in certain situations. I think it is a completely independent skill that many of them just lack. One great example was Dick Jauron. The guy would have the team very well prepared for the game. Then during the game he would take wins away from his team simply because he would deny them the opportunity to make a play when it mattered. He just loved to punt the football.

 

Having an assistant call the plays is an excellent idea. Unfortunately I think it runs counter to the natural big ego alpha male type of persona that all head coaches possess.

 

Jauron is a great example. The guy was brilliant too-- just a really smart guy. But would just make the plainly wrong decisions on game day.

 

I also agree that my idea would never work. You would need a head coach who is so confident in what he does well and doesn't, and isn't threatened at all by anyone-- someone like that would cede over gameday tactics. Or, perhaps a dictatorial GM or owner who basically orders someone else to do the gameday tactics.

[simpleman]

That is why I have been an advocate of having an assistant coach/analytics guy whose sole job on Sundays is to make all these tactical calls-- i.e., when to go for it on 4th downs, when to challenge calls, when to call TO's, etc.

 

I have always wondered why there are not more specialists/consultants in the coaching staffs of NFL teams. With investments in player contracts of millions a year for even mid level players, short term consultants that work with exclusively with an individual player to attempt to maximize his performance and attempt to overcome his weaknesses would make sense. And specialists that assist the coaches at game time like you suggest make so much sense. Considering how much money there is in the NFL, I can't believe their salaries would hurt the bottom line. I don't think they would make big bucks. There is no cap on coaching costs. And just getting the team into the wild-cards would cover the cost of the additional salaries. Is it the egos of the HCs that are being protected?

Edited November 19, 2014 by simpleman

[voodoo poonani]

To your third point: I thought Marrone learned from Coach Payton? Doesn't he have entire series scripted? I have heard his first ten plays are to figure out their opponents defense so they can take advantage of it for the rest of the game. It doesn't ever look like we know how to script anything.

 

One thing I've noticed is how so many teams waste time in the first half. Like kneeling when there's a minute left. Belicheck has his team march down the field for at least a FG. That's like free points. The other team is ready to go to the locker rooms and get their hotdogs. Teams throw that chance away, and can't get that time back. It can also be a huge points swing if you get the ball back first in the second half.

[section122]

This is not a "fire Marrone" thread (it could be)

 

Please try to keep it reasonably intellectual and don't use it as an opportunity to just trash the Bills' staff.

 

Alright lets have a conversation!

 

 

And for those reasons, I don't want him as the Bills head coach.

 

Oh nevermind....

 

 

As many have pointed out through the thread many coaches make these same decisions. Why is that? Even though statistics say you have a better than 50% chance of making it? Simply because if you don't make it, it is a huge blow to your team. You are putting your defense at a disadvantage, you are giving the offense a short field, it is deflating to the team and that is just in game. Then you have to listen to bunch of media and fan question why you made the choice. Every decision a coach makes is the right one or the wrong one purely on results. People wouldn't care about the punt in the Miami game with 9:55 on the clock if the defense forced a 3 and out. They gave up a long scoring drive and Marrone is an idiot. The team goes for it on 4th and 10 against the Chiefs, if they score a td Marrone is a genius, they didn't and he is an idiot.

 

The reason it is so frustrating to many is they get the benefit of hindsight and no consequences to their decision. If you disagree and want the coach to go for it and he punts, there is no way to know whether it was the right call or not. You will never know if they would have gotten it. If the defense then goes on to give up a long drive it doesn't mean they should have gone for it, it means the decision didn't work out as planned. It doesn't make it the wrong decision. If they go for it and get it, it is the right choice. If they go for it and don't get it, it is the wrong choice. That is how many fans view it and that just isn't true.