Fuel to the fire.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Of course it saved 40 seconds so ARod had more time with 1 less TO. Also, we scored a TD in the leftovers the Jags left us.

Yup. True. So you think that was McCarthy's strategy? Or do you think he anticipated stopping the Jags for a three and out, using the Two Minute Warning?

[red]

Don't take it too hard, Red. We think you are an ignorant asshole for a lot more reasons than just that!

At least year honest, even if you are wrong about everything most of the time

[ThunderDan]

Yup. True. So you think that was McCarthy's strategy? Or do you think he anticipated stopping the Jags for a three and out, using the Two Minute Warning?

No, I don't. I think he was hoping to force the Jags to punt.

[Pugger]

So McCarthy was counting on winning the game offensively in OT with three WR's, one of whom had a bad back?

If Janis couldn't play right after that big TD catch why would MM go for 2? If we went for 2 and failed everyone would be screaming for Mike's head on a platter.

[pbmax]

I think "defending the approach on the field without rationale" is exactly what press conferences are for. I don't see it even remotely as an indictment that his approach is anything less than informed or thoughtful. Why would his approach necessarily change in the playoffs? Most of the time I've heard "We're nobody's underdog" its been in January. The opponents might be better, but if he still heavily favors his Packers then the dynamic informing his decisions is the same. As for the research he has, I can't say for sure but I'd be surprised if the Packer analytics were heavily dependent on historical data in order to come up with models for win prob. or expected points. The issue with football analytics like that is that the game changes so fast you're virtually always breaking new ground and historical models are biased against just that. Informing decisions on that style of model in the NFL is a bit like me telling you "If you want to stay alive just do what you usually do" while you're in the middle of a gunfight. I'd guess McCarthy is thinking about specific modes of success and failure rather than percentages like we might as spectators.

There's also to consider that when we play an opponent that appears more aggressive than MM that this is causal. MM is rarely going for an upset whereas most of his opponents are. They should rightfully be more aggressive and sometimes they'll beat MM because of that aggression. Then we as fans wrongly assume that coach is an aggressive coach all the time.

My entire criticism is that he's incredulous to his teams disadvantage until its often too late. But as I said, there may be some benefit to the culture. The implicit premise to approaching each game as a favorite is that the Packers biggest rival is the Packers and they control their own destiny each and every week. To make a winning tradition I think you might need to believe that even if its not true.

I take the public comments lightly, but while McCarthy might believe in boring by design, he is not as close mouthed as Belichick and he has given clues to much of his thinking over the years. But he has never betrayed his understanding of late game situations and his run game beyond bleeding time. Normal game situations he seems to value winning in the trenches and reducing pressure on his pass game. But none of that speak to specific game situations. What we have are increasing tempo on offense (more plays for O), deferring choice to 2nd half, TOs to get a possession before halftime, and his comments about the 4 minute offense. And those are worrisome.

But not as worrisome as his performance. You mention that McCarthy operates from a better team/low variance perspective most of the time for game planning (often wise) and seems to continue to believe that in crucial situations. Understandable. Except, as you post, he has wildly underestimated his team's deficiencies during games. How many times has he trotted his bleeding defense back out to defend a less than TD lead when he could have been more aggressive on offense? Until last year, from 2011-2014, his D let him down multiple times. And that doesn't get into 2006-2008, when it was worse.

We know he sees these things. He has twice asked Capers to change the defensive focus. He came to realize there were shortcomings in his offense when they struggled (relatively speaking, they aren't the Rams) versus San Fran and Seattle. He changed that offense.

But his game management is stuck in Schottenheimer mode. Willing to take a big risk during the game, but in close quarters unwilling to buck conventional wisdom even when the numbers back you up. And despite a lack of direct evidence, I thoroughly believe there is a disconnect between his pretty advanced game planning and his late game situations. Because he routinely takes his best advantage (passing) out of the mix too early. Low variance writ large is wise. Its not a wise play calling rubric.

And the admission that he had one perfect 2 point play for the Cardinals game but he was out of receivers is a blunder. How can you have one play, how can you count on your most beat up unit to man that play? And why the hell are you making a decision in a highly leveraged situation based on how much you like the one play? That is the cart before the horse. You have a 50% chance to win in a game you have mostly trailed in, on the road, with no offense to speak of. The odds of a better chance coming along were vanishing. And your defense had saved your bacon. McCarthy's answer was to ask them to do it again. Because he had prepared only ONE play.

Now, one of the best things in the Jax game was the play action pass when he went to the 4 minute offense. That's very good. Doubly so because it was on the road against a team he could rightly consider a poorer unit than his own. He pressed his advantage late. I hope it continues.

[denverYooper]

I am not saying he isn't a quality coach, I think he is. But he doesn't do well in close games when game management really comes into play. Its a trend that has been playing out for quite a long time now.

Within the last week, Bill Barnwell noted multiple coaches who were good HCs despite the fact that they were poor game managers: M3, Mike Tomlin, Andy Reid, and Pete Carroll were all on that list.

I thought the Carroll callout was interesting but the other 2 along with M3 get a lot of attention for their game management mishaps.

[Upnorth]

Within the last week, Bill Barnwell noted multiple coaches who were good HCs despite the fact that they were poor game managers: M3, Mike Tomlin, Andy Reid, and Pete Carroll were all on that list.

I thought the Carroll callout was interesting but the other 2 along with M3 get a lot of attention for their game management mishaps.

The stupidest coaching mistake I saw this weekend in the end of a close game was when BB waited 25 seconds to call the timeout prior to the Arizona fg attempt. if ari made the 47 yarder NE would have desperately needed the 25 seconds. I have not seen anyone criticize his mistake yet.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The stupidest coaching mistake I saw this weekend in the end of a close game was when BB waited 25 seconds to call the timeout prior to the Arizona fg attempt. if ari made the 47 yarder NE would have desperately needed the 25 seconds. I have not seen anyone criticize his mistake yet.

True

[pbmax]

The stupidest coaching mistake I saw this weekend in the end of a close game was when BB waited 25 seconds to call the timeout prior to the Arizona fg attempt. if ari made the 47 yarder NE would have desperately needed the 25 seconds. I have not seen anyone criticize his mistake yet.

Everyone is deferential, but its been covered.

http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/belichick-explains-why-he-waited-call-timeout-final-minute-vs-cardinals

http://blog.masslive.com/patriots/2016/09/bill_belichick_explains_curiou.html

http://www.espn.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4795697/bill-belichick-probably-should-have-called-timeout-quicker-at-end-of-game

Here is Billy explaining why he waited:

http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports/newengland/football/patriots/2016/09/12/bill-belichick-on-dh-admits-to-2-mistakes-he-made-in-win-over-cardinals/

But even if you buy the logic, why give the Cardinals extra time to get their ducks in a row for a 4th and 5 offensive play? Once the FG hits the field you should call it. Though at that point the Cardinals can change their mind.

[Maxie the Taxi]

It could have been worse. Belichick could have waited another 19 seconds and called one of those bush league "icing" time-outs.

[Pugger]

The stupidest coaching mistake I saw this weekend in the end of a close game was when BB waited 25 seconds to call the timeout prior to the Arizona fg attempt. if ari made the 47 yarder NE would have desperately needed the 25 seconds. I have not seen anyone criticize his mistake yet.

Probably because AZ's kicker missed the FG.