Yo, Carroll critics: Coach’s decisions have not led to the losses

Logo -- BaltimoreLed by the new generation of stat geeks, people have been ripping Pete Carroll’s coaching decisions all season — win or lose. They had a few more to nitpick in the 30-16 loss to the Ravens on Sunday — even though his decisions were nowhere near as costly as the turnovers and Lamar Jackson.

The call most fans were lamenting was Carroll’s choice to try a 53-yard kick in the rain (which failed) instead of going for it on fourth-and-3 from the Baltimore 35 in the third quarter. Jason Myers is now 0 for 2 from 50ish this season and also missed a 48-yarder against the Rams — a kick a lot of fans hated as well as it came on fourth-and-1.

The Ravens flipped the 53-yard miss into a 62-yard drive for a touchdown, which they scored when Jackson talked John Harbaugh into going for it on fourth down. Some silly Carroll critics pointed to that as the moment the game was lost, even though the score was just 20-13.

Also questioned by some was Carroll’s call at the end of the half to kick a field goal on third down with six seconds left. Some thought Carroll should have run one more play — throw to the end zone again from the 13. The problem is both of the previous pass plays on that drive took six seconds. It would have had to be a very quick pass to leave a tick for a kick (Seattle had no timeouts left, as usual).

If the Hawks had converted both of those gambles into touchdowns — and that’s a big IF, especially with them needing to go 35 more yards on the first one — they might have led 24-13 at the end of the third quarter. And they still probably would have lost, 27-24.

Baltimore drove to the 4-yard line over nine minutes and settled for a field goal to go up 10. But, if the Ravens had trailed 24-20, they would have eaten up the rest of the clock on the final drive and surely would have gone for the touchdown in the final seconds to win. Could the Hawks have stopped it?

It’s a whole lot of what-iffing, which goes to say: Carroll’s decisions were the least of their problems against Baltimore.

Fans just love to nitpick, though. Some just want to be aggressive all the time — and are misled by a new breed of stats that ignore the cost of failure and do not take into account game conditions.

That’s not to say Carroll has not made his share of real mistakes this season. Against the Saints, he made a couple of gaffes. He went for it from his 28 with about 10 minutes left, down 13 — a really bad decision that basically ended a game the Hawks still had a chance to win. The Saints scored to make it 33-14. After that game, Carroll said, “Should have kicked the ball there and played out the next couple series. … I’ve got to coach better.” He also messed up by not going for two late in that game (though it did not matter at that point).

He also admitted he failed in not taking a safety against Cleveland, which helped the Browns score a quick touchdown off a bad punt from the end zone. Instead of having to go a long way to overcome a 25-22 deficit, they had to go just 26 yards to overtake a 25-20 margin. Fortunately for Carroll, Wilson drove the Hawks to the 32-28 win.

Carroll also has a stubborn predilection for challenging pass interference, something he needs to stop doing now that he knows the refs are not interested in reversing those calls.

As annoying as some of his choices have been, Carroll has not cost his team a game yet, like he did the Dallas playoff game last season. The players and their stupid mistakes have been the ones to blame in both losses this season.

Carroll is a conservative coach, by nature. He likes to run the ball and play basic defense, and he values ball possession more than anything. Everyone knows that. Fans who are asking him to go against his nature are expecting the unlikely.

After he went for it on fourth-and-1 against New Orleans and Chris Carson got stuffed, he said he rued the decision. “I could have kicked the ball and done a couple more conservative things that I like to do often,” Carroll said.

Well, that is what he has gone back to — being conservative on fourth downs. Don’t expect him to change.

And, for the chuckleheads unbelievably calling for the best coach in franchise history to be fired amid a 5-2 start, you’re as dumb as you think Carroll is.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Yo, Carroll critics: Coach’s decisions have not led to the losses”

  1. Alert the media: Pete Carroll is not a brilliant tactician.

    In football, analytics is useful tactically, but is a long ways from being the strategic tool that it is in baseball. (I’ll be more impressed when there is a widely accepted football version of WAR — which took 20+ years to refine). Football is quite simply too conditional and too situational.

    Me, I would have gone for it on the 4th-and-3. But I also understand why a coach might not have wanted to pass on an opportunity to score, and I find it hard to criticize him for that. Plus, I have zero feel for or knowledge of conditions on the field. If the coach is more confident of making the FG than in getting the three yards, what is he supposed to do?

    As you say, the problem was the two turnovers, not to mention a Ravens defense that was downright impenetrable in the second half.

    Like

  2. Look, Carroll seems to go off of feel. It’s painfully obvious he’s losing the feel of a game. The hotheaded challenges, the Bruce Arians like end of half and game clock management, and lack of surprise screams of the in game high leverage moments passing him by. (Why is your only high level receiver returning a kickoff down 17 with 3+ minutes left in garbage time?? If he pulls a hammy the season is over)

    Pete is one of the best CEOs in the league, but don’t try and tell me he’s even average with in game decisions. Could he be transcending enough to realize this and bring on help and relinquish some of the moment to moment in game decisions??

    Like

  3. I’m sorry but the stat nerds have taken all the fun out of baseball do not do the same to football. It’s funny the team won a Super Bowl with an excellent running game, special teams and defense mostly making the offense drive as long a field as possible making it difficult to convert points and flipping the field where the Seahawks offense has a shorter field to drive.

    Now the stat nerds are telling us this is not a winning formula of football. Stay away from the game that we love!

    Like

  4. If you look at these numbers:

    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff/2018

    The Patriots did not win the Super Bowl with a strong run game. Their run game was 2.5% better than average — their passing game was over 33% better than league average.

    If you look at this year’s numbers…

    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff/2019

    The Patriots are a dominant 7-0 with a rush game that’s over 5% below league average, but a strong passing game and of course an elite defense.

    No stats nerds say special teams aren’t important. They just say things like most kickers over the long haul do about the same. Jason Myers is a great example of regression this year after getting a big contact after one outlier year.

    No stats nerds say defense isn’t important. They say that defenses are harder to build around because there’s more moving parts. If Brady is healthy, we know the Pats will be good. Same, for the most part, for other elite QBs. But defenses have more guys that can get injured, defensive production is more volatile year to year, etc.

    As for the article — you realize that the stat nerds factor in possibility of failure for going for it on 4th down, right? The analogy is this: Would you rather flip a coin and if you’re right you get $100 and if you’re wrong you get nothing, or just have me give you $1? Despite the 50% chance of failure, the first option is clearly better. This is how people analyze 4th down decisions. The stat nerds say Harbaugh’s decision to go for it, factoring in all the times they make it and don’t make it, added 5% to his team’s win chances. Carroll’s decision to kick the FG, factoring in chances he makes/misses it, lowered his team’s odds to win by about 5%.

    Yes, of course turnovers are costly, but coaches can’t really control that. You know what they can control? Picking the decisions that raise their team’s chances of winning the most, like making smart 4th down decisions.

    And finally, if you throw all the math out, would you rather play for the HC that says “hell yeah, let’s go for it!” or the coach that says “we kick it because I said so.” Attack success vs fear failure.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s