Chapow":22cqhgv5 said:
austinslater25":22cqhgv5 said:
It continues to be an area that Pete gets wrong. It had a surrender index of 85% which is ridiculous. Everyone keeps defending Pete and says it's not a big deal which so far has been true. Except it's not a big deal until it is and it costs us a game. It's an easy fix though so maybe in higher leverage instances he gets it right.
Let me know when punting on 4th down from our own side of the field with 57 minutes remaining in the game costs us a game. Thanks :2thumbs:
Also, in regards to the "surrender index",
This project contains a Twitter bot that automatically tweets every time there is a punt in an NFL game. It tweets each punt's "Surrender Index" - a completely arbitrary metric created by SB Nation's Jon Bois to quantify how cowardly a punt is.
https://github.com/andrew-shackelford/Surrender-Index
You guys are literally using a completely arbitrary metric to try to legitimize your opinion that Pete is wrong, continues to be wrong, and is apparently a coward. Which is far more ridiculous than punting on 4th down from our own side of the field 3 minutes into the 1st quarter.
Well when almost every other coach in the league goes for it there because the numbers say you should then its a bad decision.
Do you have anything to support your assertion that almost every other coach in the league goes for it on 4th down on their own side of the field 3 minutes into the first quarter? You don't have to answer that. We both know you don't. I doubt half the coaches in the league go for it there, but I also doubt there's any way to prove it one way or the other.
I love Pete as much as anyone but this weird allegiance to every single decision he makes like he's infallible is strange.
It's also strange that some here immediately resort to comments like this when someone disagrees with a criticism of Pete. I seriously doubt there are more than a tiny handful of people that think Pete is infallible, and I'm sure as hell not one of them.
There are many other metrics that should its smarter to just go for it instead of gaining the potential 30 yards in field position. Points matter and you have a better chance of scoring more if you go for it. The risk outweighs the reward. Harbaugh in Baltimore talked about this in a recent interview and moving forward it will continue to be a situation where more and more teams do go for it.
That's great, and I get that things are changing in regards to the conventional wisdom on whether or not to go for it on 4th down. However, coaches are constantly faced with "damned if you do, damned if you don't" decisions. Pete chooses to punt it there, he gets criticized. Pete chooses to go for it there, he gets criticized. Even if the team converts the 4th down some would criticize taking the unnecessary risk of possibly giving the Vikings great field position for seemingly no reason on their very first drive of the game.
You said let you know when it costs us a game but that's not really true. if Pete does do this and it does costs us a game you won't admit and neither will every other Pete apologist on this subject.
No. It really is true. You let me know when punting on 4th down on our own side of the field with 57 minutes remaining in the game costs us a game and I'll eat the biggest plate of crow you've ever seen. And again, I'm not a Pete apologist. I simply disagree with you, Fade, and Baldwin on this particular criticism of this particular 4th down decision.
We get it Pete is perfect and if you don't agree you're not a true fan. This take is tiring.
I'd argue that the melodramatic fallacy you just resorted too is far more tiring.
Any thoughts on the "surrender index" and your citing of it to support your argument? Thought I'd ask since you ignored that part of my post and instead tried to create the fallacy that I'm some sort of blind Pete loyalist that believes everything he does is perfect and that he never makes any mistakes.