ChiefsPlanet - Chiefs Reid is a terrible chess player

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)

- -

Reid is a terrible chess player (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=341672)

I was yelling…”Let Them Score“ at the 2:10 mark when the Bungles had the ball on the Chiefs one yard line with 3rd & inches.

A first down guaranteed a Bungles win so just let them score a TD & give Mahomes 2 minutes with 2 timeouts.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

Originally Posted by KChiefs1 (Post 16052403)

I wish our DB would have just let Chase walk in the end zone instead of tackling him at the 4 yard line, but I know that is hard to change your mindset on the fly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by splatbass (Post 16052147)

Analytics show that the odds of the Chiefs winning were close to the same either way. Maybe Andy knows a little more than you think he does. Which is why he is a future Hall of Fame coach and you aren't.

The odds are always close either way, but the odds clearly show you let them score. It cannot even be disputed UNLESS you have a well below offense, which we do not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by davewan (Post 16051075)

Ask me if I give a **** what you think.

Umm, with all due respect, this is really not the kind of stance you should be taking at this point in your tenure here. You should care what the more established members here say to you, if anything some of them may only be trying to protect you from yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wachashi (Post 16051318)

If you don’t count the year we won a Super Bowl, and the year we made it back to the Super Bowl the following year, then Andy’s time with the Chiefs starts to look somewhat lackluster

If you take away half of Pat’s TD passes in 2020, then he had a totally mediocre season. Do you see how stupid your logic is?

"Freeway" is the Chiefs letting them score defensive play call...

Link: https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2022/...te-nfl-week-17

Quote:

But according to Hitchens, the Chiefs did ultimately decide to just let Cincinnati score; defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo called, “Freeway” over the radio headset installed in Hitchens’ helmet.

“Actually, right before they took a knee, we were going to let them score,” revealed Hitchens. “We call [the play] ‘Freeway.’ So we were trying to stop them — obviously — then once they got the penalty and got first-and-goal from the one, we were going ‘Freeway’ to let them score and try and get the ball back to our offense and Pat (Mahomes). But they did the smart thing and just kneeled it out — and then ended up kicking the field goal.”

But even without the final Cincinnati kneel-down, it probably would have been too late for it to make much difference. In the end, the Chiefs missed multiple opportunities to make the call — and even with less than a minute remaining, the Bengals were willing to do almost anything to keep the ball from getting back into Mahomes’ hands.

Asked about the sequence of plays on Tuesday, head coach Andy Reid was only willing to say that he and the team have moved past it, choosing instead to focus on the upcoming game against the Broncos.

But if the Chiefs once again face that set of circumstances, ‘Freeway’ is likely to be called much sooner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88 (Post 16052677)

"Freeway" is the Chiefs letting them score defensive play call...

Link: https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2022/...te-nfl-week-17

Again, Spags with the right call at wrong time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kccrow (Post 16051092)

Have you even thought about how ****ing stupid you sound right now? Or how stupid the "let them score" crowd sounds as a whole?

Let's work through this because derp...

The Bengals received the ball with 6:01 left in regulation. At this point, the thought of getting the ball back should have been extremely high.

At the point of the 3rd and 27 conversion, there was 3:19 remaining. With the 2-minute warning, there was absolutely no reason to be concerned that the Chiefs couldn't get the ball back.

Fast-forward to the 2:00 minute warning and its 1st and Goal for Cincinnati. This is where the derp's really begin to kick in with "let them score" despite KC having two timeouts.

So the logic here is:
1) Let them score, putting KC down 7 (presumably) with about 1:50 left to play and 2 timeouts
2) Try to stop them, possibly putting KC down 3 instead of 7 (and even potentially remain tied), with about 0;50 left to play and 0 timeouts.

Option 2 affords the opportunity for CIN to make mistakes that end up costing them points, the game, or both while option 1 does not. It also affords KC the opportunity to win the game so long as CIN doesn't score a TD. Let's also face the fact Reid would not go for 2 if he were down 7, he'd play to tie, which makes your "let them score" mantra sound even more ridiculous.

Had KC not committed a penalty on the first 4th and goal from the 1, they force CIN to replay 4th and goal from the 11, where they undoubtedly kick a FG with 0:58 (this is under the assumption that Mixon got the ball across the goal line, which it certainly looked like, else KC declines the penalty and gets 1st down from the 1/2 yard line or so).

Had KC not committed a penalty on the second 4th and goal, they would have held CIN scoreless and had the ball with 0:50 left and a 1st down from their own 1.

Both circumstances here, that happened under option 2, should have resulted in KC getting the ball back with nearly a minute left and only down 3 or remaining tied. CIN executed the series exactly how should have been expected. Run and force KC to use timeouts, then run it again and milk as much clock as possible. The Chiefs knew exactly how much time they'd end up with if that process happened.

Reid should not have let them score at any point unless the first play got CIN first and goal from the 1. Two extremely timely penalties are the reason the Chiefs lost, not Reid's decision matrix. Following the second KC penalty, there was no option to "let them score."

And that's how I know you're a ****ing idiot. Not a ****ing sane person would let them score when they are almost assured to get the ball back with a minute left in that situation.

/thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by splatbass (Post 16052147)

Do the analytics take into account the Chiefs have Mahomes & everybody else doesn’t?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

Originally Posted by penguinz (Post 16051169)

Yet everyone is blaming the refs. If the Chiefs put one decent TD drive together in the second half and score 10 vs 3 we most likely win.

If KC even attempts to stop Chase vs letting him score two TDs over 60yds without being touched we win.

Maybe they shouldn't have been able to tackle Tyreek on his route on the 2nd drive or call Whylie for a BS hold on another.

Reid is a terrible chess player

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88 (Post 16052054)

Or if the Chiefs get called for a defensive penalty... which is exactly what happened and was not exactly a surprising outcome given how tightly the refs were calling defensive penalties.

That needed to be part of the decision making calculus.

Also according to analytics, if the Bengals had scored a TD when it was first and goal after the two minute warning, their win probability would have dropped slightly.

Did it at that point in time? Ancient Alien Astronaut Theorists say No.

Let's look at the big picture.

The Chiefs have committed 43 defensive penalties in 1,006 defensive snaps through the Bengals game. Of those, 4 have been offsetting, 13 have been declined, and 26 have been accepted. So, through the season you have a 4.3% chance (rounding up) of getting called for a defensive penalty) on any given play during the game. That's a rate of about 23 plays per penalty.

I don't have total snap data by quarter and phase but let's assume that, at this point, those numbers are relatively evenly distributed. The Chiefs have committed 16 penalties on defense in the 4th quarter in what we'll call 252 plays, which means that the likelihood of being penalized at some point in the 4th quarter is 6.3%. That's a rate of about 16 plays per penalty. This is being generous to your cause and saying KC is more likely to commit a defensive penalty in the 4th quarter than in any other quarter (they are, to date).

If we're being real about it, the squalor over the "let them score" mantra truly started at the 3:14 mark with the 1st and 10 at the 11, where the Bengals went on to run 11 plays. I'll be overly generous at this point and discount the fact that KC had already been flagged for their 4th quarter penalty per game when Jones got flagged for encroachment. If we discount the kneel, spike, and field goal, that's 8 actual plays. So it should be a coin flip on whether or not KC would commit 1 penalty defensively at that point.

The Chiefs were called for 2 penalties with one having less than 1% chance of happening (the offsetting penalty). You can't reasonably assume that your team will get called for 2 penalties in the final 8 plays when it's doubtful they'd even get one after the Jones' call.

And the funny thing? Cincinnati has committed 14 offensive penalties in the 4th quarter. They've played 995 snaps on offense this year, so roughly 249 snaps in the 4th. So the likelihood they get a penalty? 5.6% or 1 in 18 plays. They had the same likelihood, for the most part, and committed 1 penalty.

In either case, I'd much rather take a chance a penalty could be called on my defense and the 55% chance the Bengals score a TD from the 11 than hope I can get the game to overtime. The most OTs in a season, ever, was 25 which means over a season only 4.9% of games go to overtime (and usually less). I don't have the numbers readily findable, but I have to imagine the chance of a game going to overtime with one team down 7 with 2 minutes or so to go is really, really low. Almost assuredly it's far less than 1%. The likelihood of winning in overtime is a 50/50 proposition that compounds your already insanely narrow odds of coming back to begin with. The odds, most definitely, are far higher if only down 3 (even if they remain low overall).

I can't find anything fallible in the decision metric.

.

Even if you just let them score, how does anyone know the refs weren't going to just flag the Offense into the ground?

Quote:

Originally Posted by kccrow (Post 16052806)

Let's look at the big picture.

The big picture is that even the Chiefs have admitted they should have let the Bengals score earlier.

So you can stop wasting your time writing another incoherent 10,000 word thesis trying to prove otherwise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88 (Post 16052934)

Ah yes, black swan theory at its finest... Don't be so naive.

There are about 3 people here that truly believe letting them score was even remotely a good idea. I've provided you with a relatively good approximation of the statistics that prove it was not just a bad idea, but a truly terrible idea.

BTW, reading comprehension does go a long way. This is a forum, not Twitter.