If he was the play caller on plays that cost them the lead then he should deserve it.
Now, I’m not sure that’s actually the case.
If he was the play caller on plays that cost them the lead then he should deserve it.
Now, I’m not sure that’s actually the case.
Sure, you want your own team to keep scoring, but it seems like letting the other team score so much is more on the DC.
That’s why I’m not sure that he should be blamed.
I mean, in theory if you let them get 25 points or more without scoring any yourself, at least part of the blame should be on the offense. If you let them score 200 points but you score 201 then you still win.
But yeah, it’s a stretch to say he lost the game. But you could still say he was involved in losing the game.
Yeah, almost like football is played by a team
It was not Kyle Shanahan’s fault that Devonta Freeman whiffed on his block. The falcons did what they did, with success, all year, but the RB missed his assaignment.
If we’re going to blame playcallers for not being aggressive enough, we cant blame them when they are, but the players dont execute.
Sure, but as the saying goes, ‘The best defense is a good offense.’ When the team is owning a lead, the DC needs the OC to do two things: Drain the clock and keep the opposing offense off the field.
The OC does that by putting together long, sustained, methodical clock-chewing drives that also ideally come away with at least a field goal each time. That means lots of running of the ball, and a few clutch 3rd-down conversions.
If the OC does the DC those two big favors, then the DC has a well-rested defense and only needs to hold the fort for a relatively short time. If the OC doesn’t (like Shanahan,) then the DC has a fatigued defense and must defend a lead for a much longer time.
All of that contributed to the Falcons losing in overtime as well. The Patriots won the toss and Brady just marched them downfield with the totally-gassed Falcons D unable to put up meaningful resistance.
True that. All of that. What’s missing is the Head Coach saying, OC WTF ARE YOU THINKING??!! No effing way are we going to do that!
Dan Quinn, where are you?
In Washington now.
Hello, Mister Twenty Eight To Three.
His wiki page does not mention he was the losing (choking) head coach for 28-3.
Interesting omission there.
Daniel Patrick Quinn (born September 11, 1970) is an American football coach who is the head coach of the Washington Commanders of the National Football League (NFL). Born in New Jersey, he attended Salisbury University and competed in the hammer throw and as a defensive lineman for their football team in the early 1990s. Quinn later coached defensive lines in college prior to joining the NFL in 2001. He was the defensive coordinator of the Legion of Boom-era Seattle Seahawks that appeared in t...
His wiki page does not mention he was the losing (choking) head coach for 28-3.
Hmm… History shows it used to but someone named DPQ70 removed it…
(Just kidding but back in my Wikipedia administrator days that kind of stuff used to happen all the time.)
Daniel Patrick Quinn, born 1970. Yeah he definitely erased it, LOL!
Out of curiosity, what was the previous rule about the end of overtime? Would the game have ended with the Chiefs driving if the clock had run out? If the score had been tied when the clock ran out would play have continued from the situation at the end of the 1st OT, or would a brand new OT have started?
Out of curiosity, what was the previous rule about the end of overtime? Would the game have ended with the Chiefs driving if the clock had run out?
Yeah, this has caused some confusion (even among some of the players themselves)
If the first 15 min period ended and the Chiefs were still driving, they would simply go onto the next 15 min period. They get to keep going until they score or lose possession.
Had the Chiefs’ then been held to a field goal, it would have gone to a sudden death where the next team to score would win the game. But they’d still play 15 minute periods until then, with 3 timeouts allowed per team per every 2 such periods played.
Part of the confusion was with regular-season OT.
In regular-season OT, there’s just one quarter, and if it ends without you scoring, too bad.
But in the playoffs, OT goes on indefinitely until there’s a winner.
Yeah, this has caused some confusion (even among some of the players themselves)
If the first 15 min period ended and the Chiefs were still driving, they would simply go onto the next 15 min period. They get to keep going until they score or lose possession.
Had the Chiefs’ then been held to a field goal, it would have gone to a sudden death where the next team to score would win the game. But they’d still play 15 minute periods until then, with 3 timeouts allowed per team per every 2 such periods played.
Isn’t that the current rule? I’m wondering about what would have happened under the old system. Is the game just over if one team is behind? If it’s still tied did they keep playing from the current game situation or do they have another coin toss and kickoff, or maybe just a kickoff? As is they came pretty close to making it to the sixth quarter, so surely there must have been plans for that under the old system as well.
The old rules would have let the Chiefs continue their drive into the 6th period, and would go onto a sudden death scenario if they had tied it with a field goal. The “it’s like a whole new game has begun” was also part of the previous rules.
The main difference between this and the previous playoff OT rules would only happened if SF had scored a touchdown. That didn’t happen, so we were effectively in the same situation as the playoff OT rules used over the last 10 years or so
With a SF TD, the game would have been over after the opening possession. The difference is that with the current rules, had SF scored a touchdown, KC would have also had the opportunity to score. But that didn’t happen.
And under the even older rules, it would have been sudden death the entire time, first team to score wins, touchdown or field goal or whatever. So winning the toss would have been critical and SF would have won with just the kick.
To summarize:
Current regular-season OT rules: If the team that receives the kickoff (Team A) scores a touchdown, the game is over. If Team A instead kicks a field goal, the other team (Team B) gets an opportunity to possess the ball. If Team B fails to score, Team A wins. If Team B scores a touchdown, they win. If Team B kicks a field goal, the game continues and the next score wins. But the extra quarter is only 10 minutes long, so if the score is tied at the when the clock runs out, the game ends in a tie. Note that if Team A fails to score on its first possession, Team B will win with a score of any kind. Note also that if Team B scores a defensive touchdown or safety on Team A’s first possession, the game is over and Team B wins.
Current playoff OT rules: Each team gets one possession. If one team leads after these initial possessions, that team wins. If the score is tied after these initial possessions, play continues until one team scores, and that team wins. Extra periods are 15 minutes (like a ‘normal’ quarter); when the clock runs out, the teams switch sides and play continues. Again, note that if the initial team on defense scores a defensive touchdown or safety, the game is over.
(I think I have this right…)
(I think I have this right…)
Completely correct, except I think that after the 6th period, there is an intermission and kickoff (same for the 8th, 10th, 12th, etc.).