Reid is a terrible chess player

[kccrow]

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.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by kccrow

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.

Correct. Long version of my same post, but this is correct.

[FloridaMan88]

Originally Posted by kccrow

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.

You have to consider the current dynamics in the game though... the Chiefs defense was getting shredded by the Bengals, having just given up a 3rd and 27 conversion AND the refs were calling a ridiculously tight game in terms of defensive penalties.

Given those two dynamics, the probability of the Chiefs holding the Bengals to 3 and still leaving enough time for Mahomes to respond was not good.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88

You have to consider the current dynamics in the game though... the Chiefs defense was getting shredded by the Bengals, having just given up a 3rd and 27 conversion AND the refs were calling a ridiculously tight game in terms of defensive penalties.

Given those two dynamics, the probability of the Chiefs holding the Bengals to 3 and still leaving enough time for Mahomes to respond was not good.

The current dynamics? No, it's simple mathematics. The only way KC doesn't get the ball back with 50 seconds left is if the Bengals get a 1st and goal from the 1 after the 2-minute warning when playing from the 11. A team is going to try to operate for the TD there 10/10 times and has nearly the same scoring probability as if they were operating from the 10. The likelihood that they get a 1st and goal from the 1 is relatively low because of the situation and yards to goal.

Here's an article that literally talks about it from a similar perspective with better data than I want to regurgitate:
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/st...downs-red-zone

Granted, if the Bengals did get a 1st and goal relatively quickly after the 2-minute warning, then there is a ton of credence to letting them score so you at least have time to try and tie because you'll otherwise lose anyhow. That simply wasn't the case at any point the way things went down, and they couldn't have went any better for Reid's decision sans the back-to-back penalties that completely ****ed the Chiefs.

[FloridaMan88]

Originally Posted by kccrow

The current dynamics? No, it's simple mathematics. The only way KC doesn't get the ball back with 50 seconds left is if the Bengals get a 1st and goal from the 1 after the 2-minute warning when playing from the 11.

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.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88

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.



.

[FloridaMan88]

Originally Posted by kccrow

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.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88

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.

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.

[IowaHawkeyeChief]

Originally Posted by kccrow

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