Mike Tomlin: “We should win it all”

[zulater]

Nope...it’s not about the context...you’re missing the point. Noll made the call because of exactly what you said...balls move. Tomlin made the call because of a very similar unsuccessful situation. Bortles dominated the Steelers all day. There wasn’t even a little sign that the defense could do anything to stop the Jags. He made an aggressive call. I don’t necessarily agree with it but if you can’t understand why he made the call, there’s no helping you...you can’t win being conservative. Cowher made an aggressive call and was praised for it...it was successful. Tomlin made an aggressive call...you don’t know that if that’s executed correctly that it isn’t successful. Boswell and Danny Smiths special teams screwed the pooch...but since it was unsuccessful, Tomlin is an idiot...lol.

No one was calling him an idiot when he beat the Chargers on an aggressive call...lol.

People on this board complain non-stop that when the Steelers have a lead, they go conservative...everyone wants them to be aggressive...lol.

Aggressive coaches win. Conservative coaches lose.

ie) Doug Pederson. Super Bowl LII Champion.

The Steelers did in fact force 4 punts against the Jags. Twice the Jaguars were held to very brief series with the Steelers breathing down their neck in the 3rd quarter. So yeah there was more than ample evidence that the had the Jaguars been forced to win the game by getting 2 first downs they would have come up short. Hell the Steelers defense might not have even had to make a play. A Jaguars penalty, or Bortles short arms a pass to a open receiver etc...bad offenses have good games, but tend to reveal themselves in the most critical moments. Give them a chance to beat themselves good chance they would have.

Again not hindsight. Every factor to consider going in weighed heavily in kicking it away and trying to get the ball back with time on the clock.

And again Cowher's onside's kick doesn't even belong in the conversation. It was either to open the 2nd half or early in the 3rd quarter and the Cowboys had no clue it was coming and were aligned for the Steelers to kick deep.

And if you're dismissing the Steelers decade long inability to successfully field their own onsides kick into the equation then big lol at you! Ridiculous!

There's a huge difference between aggressive and stupid.



Doug Perderson was aggressive and I commend him. I also commend
Tomlin when he goes for it on 4th down ( more often than not)as long as the play call isn't some dumb ass play where the running back gets the ball 8 yards behind the line and
runs wide on 4th and an inch. I also commend Tomlin when he doesn't turtle with the lead. I'm not a Tomlin basher. I'm not asking for him to be fired. I just think that was a terrible decision. Same with running the clock to the last second on the final drive. It's past and we live with it. But never will I knuckle unde to the bullshit that the call wasn't dumb as hell.

[Mojouw]

The Steelers did in fact force 4 punts against the Jags. Twice the Jaguars were held to very brief series with the Steelers breathing down their neck in the 3rd quarter. So yeah there was more than ample evidence that the had the Jaguars been forced to win the game by getting 2 first downs they would have come up short. Hell the Steelers defense might not have even had to make a play. A Jaguars penalty, or Bortles short arms a pass to a open receiver etc...bad offenses have good games, but tend to reveal themselves in the most critical moments. Give them a chance to beat themselves good chance they would have.

Again not hindsight. Every factor to consider going in weighed heavily in kicking it away and trying to get the ball back with time on the clock.

And again Cowher's onside's kick doesn't even belong in the conversation. It was either to open the 2nd half or early in the 3rd quarter and the Cowboys had no clue it was coming and were aligned for the Steelers to kick deep.

And if you're dismissing the Steelers decade long inability to successfully field their own onsides kick into the equation then big lol at you! Ridiculous!

There's a huge difference between aggressive and stupid.



Doug Perderson was aggressive and I commend him. I also commend
Tomlin when he goes for it on 4th down ( more often than not)as long as the play call isn't some dumb ass play where the running back gets the ball 8 yards behind the line and
runs wide on 4th and an inch. I also commend Tomlin when he doesn't turtle with the lead. I'm not a Tomlin basher. I'm not asking for him to be fired. I just think that was a terrible decision. Same with running the clock to the last second on the final drive. It's past and we live with it. But never will I knuckle unde to the bullshit that the call wasn't dumb as hell.

Don't you kinda want to have it both ways? An aggressive coach that goes for it on 4th down, makes gutsy calls to get game-clinching 1st downs in the 4th quarter, etc but then want to retain the ability to determine after the fact where the line between aggressive and stupid is? I mean I figure that line is a moving target based on the outcome of the play/game.

WR pass to Brady doesn't work and it kinda looks dumb (offense was moving the ball with relative ease). TE end around pass to Foles works and it looks like the idea of an aggressive play-calling genius.

THe decade long stat for onsides kicks doesn't do much for me either. Boswell wasn't the guy kicking the ball for almost all of that time. Almost every single person on the special teams "hands" unit wasn't even on the roster for most of that period of time either. Lost in the entire discussion is Boswell just botched the kick. I remain convinced that if Boswell puts that kick where it was intended to go, Matakevich is the best positioned player on the field to get the thing, followed up by Chickillo. But we will never know, because Boswell failed to execute.

Bottom line, if the kick worked (BIG IF) the Steelers have the ball in the hands of the ONLY unit on the field that Sunday that had executed well for most of the game. Deciding my teams season, I would rather try and place the ball in the hands of Ben R and the offense than a defense that hasn't reliably stopped anyone since the middle of the regular season.

I also totally acknowledge that it is entirely possible the scenario yourself and others for kicking away could have played out. For me, I would rather have a HC that consistently makes the big time hyper aggressive call. Sure, it is gonna cost you a game but it is going to win you a few as well. But to be totally fair, I also don't think you should ever punt once you cross your own 40 yard line. I would almost always go for 2. And I would deploy the onside kick as a consistent weapon in my team's arsenal. These are several of the reasons why I am never going to be asked to coach a football team!

[BlackAndGold]

It's always been pretty simple for me...

Being aggressive and it works=genius.

Being aggressive and it doesn't work=fucking idiot.

[teegre]

Lost in the entire discussion is Boswell just botched the kick. I remain convinced that if Boswell puts that kick where it was intended to go, Matakevich is the best positioned player on the field to get the thing, followed up by Chickillo. But we will never know, because Boswell failed to execute.

As I sad earlier...

A good kick, even if not recovered, does not put the Jaguars in FG range. (They’d still have to get a first down.)

Alas, the botched kick gave the Jaguars to ball already in FG range. (They didn’t even need to get a first down.)

[Born2Steel]

If that play is executed correctly and we recover the onside kick, we win this game, IMO. That tired Jags defense has to come back out there with no rest. I can see why some would rather kick it deep and make them punt, I get that POV as well. I think it was a good aggressive call. That said, I thought running Bell on a toss sweep on a 4th and 1 play was over the top stupid. But there are probably some that see that play as a good call. We're not ever all going to agree on this. We should have won that game and there are a few moments of regret in it for all of us.

[st33lersguy]

Why do some question the onside? It was the right call. Tomlin couldn't trust the defense to get the ball back if they had kicked off. If he did kick deep and J'ville ran the clock out, people would be criticizing him for not going for the onside

[Psycho Ward 86]

If that play is executed correctly and we recover the onside kick, we win this game, IMO. That tired Jags defense has to come back out there with no rest. I can see why some would rather kick it deep and make them punt, I get that POV as well. I think it was a good aggressive call. That said, I thought running Bell on a toss sweep on a 4th and 1 play was over the top stupid. But there are probably some that see that play as a good call. We're not ever all going to agree on this. We should have won that game and there are a few moments of regret in it for all of us.

Even though were all beating a dead horse here, onside kicks in the NFL are recovered about a quarter of the time. With as bad as this defense was playing, it definitely still had a better chance of shorting 1 offensive jaguars drive than it did of recovering an onside kick: http://archive.advancedfootballanaly...ide-kicks.html

[Mojouw]

Even though were all beating a dead horse here, onside kicks in the NFL are recovered about a quarter of the time. With as bad as this defense was playing, it definitely still had a better chance of shorting 1 offensive jaguars drive than it did of recovering an onside kick: http://archive.advancedfootballanaly...ide-kicks.html

I don't know about that. The Steelers would have needed the following:

1. Force a 3 and out.
2. Jags can't run much clock. Figure the Jags would've got the ball with under 3 minutes to play.

Looking at these summary drive charts (https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/gametr...80114_JAC@PIT/) - the Steelers held the Jags to a 3 and out just once. And to under a 2 minute non scoring drive just once. So on 9 possessions (I'm not counting the one prior to the half or the one that resulted from the on sides) the Steelers accomplished the goals one time. So 1/9 * 100 = 11%. If you add in the 6 play 2 minute and 18 second drive and argue it fills the goals above that is still 22%.

Long story short, we can pull some reasonable math together that argues the onside kick )(@25%) was somewhere between slightly more than 2 times more likely to about 3% more likely than kicking away and banking on a 3 down defensive stop.

Does everyone feel any better now?

[Craic]

I don't know about that. The Steelers would have needed the following:

1. Force a 3 and out.
2. Jags can't run much clock. Figure the Jags would've got the ball with under 3 minutes to play.

Looking at these summary drive charts (https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/gametr...80114_JAC@PIT/) - the Steelers held the Jags to a 3 and out just once. And to under a 2 minute non scoring drive just once. So on 9 possessions (I'm not counting the one prior to the half or the one that resulted from the on sides) the Steelers accomplished the goals one time. So 1/9 * 100 = 11%. If you add in the 6 play 2 minute and 18 second drive and argue it fills the goals above that is still 22%.

Long story short, we can pull some reasonable math together that argues the onside kick )(@25%) was somewhere between slightly more than 2 times more likely to about 3% more likely than kicking away and banking on a 3 down defensive stop.

Does everyone feel any better now?

I remember doing some research on onside kicks right after the game, and the stats were more like 12-15 percent of onside kicks work. That being said, The Steelers had something like zero percent chance based on past performance in the second half (or something along those lines) of stopping the Jags. Thus, the smart money was the onside kick, because, no matter what, the greatest odds were that the Jags were getting the ball and driving to score. So, might as well contest the kick as it a 85-88 percent chance we'd lose the onside kick and get scored on, but it was a 100 percent (or close to it) that we would get scored on if we kicked it away.

[Mojouw]

I remember doing some research on onside kicks right after the game, and the stats were more like 12-15 percent of onside kicks work. That being said, The Steelers had something like zero percent chance based on past performance in the second half (or something along those lines) of stopping the Jags. Thus, the smart money was the onside kick, because, no matter what, the greatest odds were that the Jags were getting the ball and driving to score. So, might as well contest the kick as it a 85-88 percent chance we'd lose the onside kick and get scored on, but it was a 100 percent (or close to it) that we would get scored on if we kicked it away.

I can agree with that as well. Even with the lower figures your research uncovered, and take 11% chance (at best I would argue - because I think your zero percent is the more likely #) the Steelers had of stopping the Jags and it is still lower than the 12-15% odds on recovering the kick.

They had no margin for error either way and I will always side with the more aggressive call.

To me, kicking away in that scenario is like when you have an amazing right handed relief pitcher in the game just mowing the other team down. Then a left handed slugger steps to the plate and the manager calls in the left hander from the pen and he serves up the homer. Sure. Sure. The lefty was the traditional (maybe) higher percentage play, but I'm rolling with what has been working. In my tortured analogy, the righty and the Steelers offense.

[Born2Steel]

Whatever the odds of recovering the kick, I still have zero issue with calling it THERE. Upon recovery, the Jags defense would have to come back out there, with no rest, having just given up a score. We had them on the ropes and ready for the knock out punch, just simply did not make the play. That kick wins the game if we get the ball. I refuse to fault the coach for seeing that opportunity and going for it.

We can quote stats, percentage chances, special teams woes, all that, all we want. Bottom line is that was a dog fight of a game at the end. If we kick off, make the stop, get the ball back, and score it, we win. If we recovery the kick, score it, we win. Don't make the stop, or don't recover the kick, we lose. Both choices are a gamble.

[zulater]

I don't know about that. The Steelers would have needed the following:

1. Force a 3 and out.
2. Jags can't run much clock. Figure the Jags would've got the ball with under 3 minutes to play.

Looking at these summary drive charts (https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/gametr...80114_JAC@PIT/) - the Steelers held the Jags to a 3 and out just once. And to under a 2 minute non scoring drive just once. So on 9 possessions (I'm not counting the one prior to the half or the one that resulted from the on sides) the Steelers accomplished the goals one time. So 1/9 * 100 = 11%. If you add in the 6 play 2 minute and 18 second drive and argue it fills the goals above that is still 22%.

Long story short, we can pull some reasonable math together that argues the onside kick )(@25%) was somewhere between slightly more than 2 times more likely to about 3% more likely than kicking away and banking on a 3 down defensive stop.

Does everyone feel any better now?

Garbage numbers! Sorry again, the Patriots didn't force the Steelers into a 3 and out all game. That is until they kicked away after kicking a fg to get to within 5 points of the Steelers with just over 3.40 to go. By your logic Bellichick no choice but to go for the onsides kick.

Again it's a different game dynamic than the rest of the game. I'm done with the fucking arguemtn though. Tomlin's a fucking genius. Hopefully he onnsides kicks every time we score next season!

[Mojouw]

Garbage numbers! Sorry again, the Patriots didn't force the Steelers into a 3 and out all game. That is until they kicked away after kicking a fg to get to within 5 points of the Steelers with just over 3.40 to go. By your logic Bellichick no choice but to go for the onsides kick.

Again it's a different game dynamic than the rest of the game. I'm done with the fucking arguemtn though. Tomlin's a fucking genius. Hopefully he onnsides kicks every time we score next season!

Feel free to make it an either or if you wish. I have not said that anyone had to kick away or kick onside. I have consistently attempted to point out that there is as many stats and chains of logic on one side as the other. The issue is far from cut and dry. However, if you want to make it a stark distinction with no room for debate and be the sole arbiter of what numbers are and are not garbage - fine. Far be it from me to stop you. Notice, I never said you were wrong. I simply attempted (perhaps badly) to open a discussion that like most things, the issue is far from crystal clear.

Personally, if I was NE I would have kicked onside when I scored to pull within 5. Again, I have repeatedly stated that am totally biased in my stance on this. I wholeheartedly believe that NFL teams punt far too often, fail to kick onside frequently enough, and generally play to not lose rather than aggressively win.

For instance after I have thought about it some more, if I was Tomlin I would've put Haley through a wall for the play sequence he called after the Patriots scored to pull within 5. It was far too conservative and predictable on 1st down. Allowed the Pats to make a straightforward run stop and then put the Steelers behind the down and distance for the rest of the series.

[ALLD]

It's always been pretty simple for me...

Being aggressive and it works=genius.

Being aggressive and it doesn't work=fucking idiot.

A little more team discipline and fine tuning ensures a greater chance of success rather than the circus that the Steelers team has become.

[Edman]

Doug Pederson is everything Mike Tomlin wishes he could be.

[hawaiiansteeler]

Doug Pederson is everything Mike Tomlin wishes he could be.

Doug Pederson does not live in his fears...