Coaching Not to Lose

[flere-imsaho]

Dr. Z's column today on si.com is a good one. You can read it here.

Anyway, in talking about the Jets, he makes a couple of points, one on purpose, and one in passing.

Point #1: NFL coaches who coach not to lose, end up never winning the big one. He cites Herm Edwards' playcalling in the Pittsburgh game as an example, as well as Schottenheimer's decisions at the end of the Wild Card game a week ago. Gregg Easterbrook over at nfl.com often goes on at length about this as well.

Going for the FG instead of taking a shot at the end zone. Trying to tie instead of trying to win. Running obvious run after obvious run instead of the occasional shot down the field, etc....

Question is, is Dr. Z right? I'm inclined to agree.

Point #2: This point he doesn't make, but it occurred to me. Consider the following quote:

One night in San Francisco I was listening to John Brodie, the 49ers' great quarterback, telling old stories about the mentality of coaches -- particularly his own, Dick Nolan. Dick won his share, but never the big one.

"We're ahead by a couple of points," Brodie says, "and Coach Nolan tells me to run the ball and work the clock. Gene Washington comes back to the huddle and says, 'The corner will bite on the hitch and go.' I say, 'Let's do it.'

"So I throw it to Gene, and it's like stealing. Bam, six points. Game's over and everybody goes home. Coach Nolan bawled me out for it."

I'll call this "Smart Players Win You Games". Players who live the game, love the game, and study the game pick stuff like this up. New England, for instance, do this kind of thing almost every week (not that I'm trying to be a fanboi or anything).


Anyway, just some food for thought.

[BigJohn&TheLions]

In Detroit, Milt Plum's interception comes to mind...

[rkmsuf]

Dr. Z my ass.

[QuikSand]

Every time a team loses a game they are in position to win, someone complains that it' poor coaching. This "playing not to lose" stuff gets tossed around like a beach ball.

What we don't hear about are the times that the team in position to win actually shifts to a conservative strategy and accomplishes their goal. The "run out the clock" with a time-consuming drive, they force the opposing offense to complete many plays in a row rather than one big one, and the strategy works -- and they win. As they were supposed to. No headlines.

I don't think there's any way to measure something like this, and I'm not trying to make a specific judgment about the Jets this week or any specific circumstance. But the knee-jerk reaction that "prevent defense just prevents yo from winning" and "play to win, don't play not to lose" is far, far overstated by fans and so-called analysts who probably ought to drink less beer anyway, to save those precious few brain cells thay have remaining. (Dr Z prominently included on that list, incidentally)

[NYFAN]

The only thing I would have done differently from herm is instead of kneeling the ball, I would have at least tried to recenter the ball to give him a dead straight kick. I have no problem with not taking a shot to the endzone. Pitt would be expecting that, our offense has been shaky at best all season, chances are nothing significant is going to happen. There's a lot more room for a negative (turnover, sack, fumble etc...) than there is for significant gain. Brien has to hit that 2nd one, and as a Jets fan I thought he would. Sometimes stuff like that happens. I won't blame Herm for that, I'd blame the kicker. He missed two kicks where he should have made at least one.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Every time a team loses a game they are in position to win, someone complains that it' poor coaching. This "playing not to lose" stuff gets tossed around like a beach ball.

What we don't hear about are the times that the team in position to win actually shifts to a conservative strategy and accomplishes their goal. The "run out the clock" with a time-consuming drive, they force the opposing offense to complete many plays in a row rather than one big one, and the strategy works -- and they win. As they were supposed to. No headlines.

I don't think there's any way to measure something like this, and I'm not trying to make a specific judgment about the Jets this week or any specific circumstance. But the knee-jerk reaction that "prevent defense just prevents yo from winning" and "play to win, don't play not to lose" is far, far overstated by fans and so-called analysts who probably ought to drink less beer anyway, to save those precious few brain cells thay have remaining. (Dr Z prominently included on that list, incidentally)

What he said.

[cthomer5000]

All I have to point to is a 2 yard (literally) out route to Wayne Chrebet on 3rd and 10 in overtime.

I'm a Jets fan, and I've disliked Hackett from day 1. Herm I've grown to deal with, but he seems to have a very slow learning curve.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

All I have to point to is a 2 yard (literally) out route to Wayne Chrebet on 3rd and 10 in overtime.

I'm a Jets fan, and I've disliked Hackett from day 1. Herm I've grown to deal with, but he seems to have a very slow learning curve.

Did Pennington have anyone else to throw to?

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

Did Pennington have anyone else to throw to?

The pass was immediate, leading me to believe it was the designed play with him as the primary receiver.

[Suicane75]

To paraphrase M&TMD yesterday,
If you dont trust your QB, who you paid $60 Million to, to do anything but throw a pick returned for a TD, then get a new QB. The game was tied, the Jets werent going to lose that game on anything they did offensively, and Herm had no desire to get any closer than 43 yards, on grass, in the cold, at 8pm at night. Doug Brien didn't lose that game, Herm Edwards did. The Steelers didn't settle for a 43 yarder, they went out and moved the ball.

[vtbub]

Playing not to win is like defining obscenity, I know it when I see it.

When San Diego failed to try to advance the ball in overtime on first down looking at a 40 yd fg, that's playing not to win. You try on first down to hit the homer. When they failed to put the ball between tthe hash marks on 2nd and 3rd down, same thing. That kick would hve been good if he had hit it from the middle.

Last weekend, same deal. Why settle for a 43 yard attempt when you know your odds are better from 35? Why deviate from what got you here in the first place when it mattes most?

[Maple Leafs]

Buoyed up by this memory, Jets coach Herman Edwards found himself in exactly the same position in Pittsburgh, the situation bearing a spooky resemblance to the Schottenheimer affair. Only this time the kick was from 43 yards. And the kicker, Doug Brien, had already missed a 47-yarder, when, as he described it, "the wind seemed to push the ball down." And this was in a stadium so tricky to kick in that the longest field goal ever accomplished within its confines was 46 yards.

Wow, is that true? I know it's a new stadium, but that's still an interesting stat.

[rkmsuf]

I think that was the longest this season by a visiting kicker

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

The pass was immediate, leading me to believe it was the designed play with him as the primary receiver.

I remember that play as well and I agree with you. It was representative of the very (too) tight play calling in OT by the Jets.

[SirFozzie]

Heinz Field is notorious for its swirling winds.

[kingnebwsu]

Anyone remember Ohio State's championship a few years ago? Tressel relied on a great defense&kicking game, and only scored sometimes. Some people would say Tressel played to not let his QB lose the game, but it got the job done. Some games it would drive me crazy, not trying to blow out the other team...but generally it got results.

Just wanted to throw that out here.

[henry296]

46 yards is the longest visiting field goal in the 4 years the stadium has been open. Jeff Reed has kicked a 48 yarder at Heinz Field. Yes, it is very difficult to make field goals at Heinz Field.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

Wow, is that true? I know it's a new stadium, but that's still an interesting stat.

I believe the stadium also has by far the lowest FG % of the league's stadiums.