OT - Lions vs. 49ers

I’m a bit late on this, so we’ll just pretend we don’t know the outcome of the game yet.

Q: What do you call a 49er player with a Superbowl ring?

A: A senior citizen

Q: What do you call a Lions player with a Superbowl ring?

A: A thief.

I’ll be here all week. Don’t forget to tip your server.



I need the table in the kitchen.

I’m sure the local Detroit media is torn: whether to spend every breath, for the next week, rehashing this game, or hyping the Superbowl.

After the Superbowl, they will rehash that game, daily, for a couple weeks.

Then, we might get a couple weeks of quiet.

Then the daily hype for next football season will start: chatter about football, every day, from early March, until a couple weeks after the next Superbowl, next February.


What do you call a Buffalo Bills player with a Super Bowl ring?

No one knows. :frowning:


You call him “Von.” Or “Mr. Miller,” if you don’t know him well.


My reaction watching the second half:


Technically, or rather mathematically speaking his calls were right. But just barely.


In truth, the Lions’ aggressive fourth-down calls are more a reflection of the modern NFL than they are a brazen anomaly. These types of calls are increasingly common because they’re supported by analytics, and in both instances on Sunday, statistical models aligned with Campbell’s calls. That type of forward thinking is one of the reasons for Detroit’s turnaround under him—until it backfired in spectacular fashion.
Despite the outcome, Campbell’s decision was backed by something better than his gut. It’s called data. [One popular model] said the Lions had an 85% chance of winning by going for it, and 82% if they kicked the field goal.

Later on, with less than 10 minutes left in the fourth quarter and the Lions now trailing by three, Campbell faced another critical decision on a fourth-and-3. Again, the model recommended going for it. This time, it boosted Detroit’s win probability to 28% versus 26% kicking the field goal.

I have zero problem with the 4th down calls. Even without advanced analytics it has been well known for decades that NFL coaches are way too conservative on 4th down. And the reason for this is if they go for it and fail they get roundly criticized, just like we’re seeing with Campbell.

The part that puzzled me was Detroit’s meltdown in the 2nd half, especially the offense. Suddenly Goff was flinging balls where there were no receivers to catch them and if he didn’t, the receivers couldn’t hold onto the ball. Specifically, the first 4th and short pass hit Josh Reynolds in the hands. Campbell had a play in his back pocket he thought would work, and should have worked, but his player didn’t execute. Reynolds had another key drop too on 3rd and 9.

Then there was Purdy’s bomb to Aiyuk that 100% should have been intercepted (hit Vildor in the face mask!) but somehow Aiyuk made a miracle catch. Even if Vildor had just managed to break it up it would made a big difference because SF was back on their on 40 or something. Instead it became an easy touchdown.

In the other game, Lamar Jackson was playing lights out until he inexplicably threw an interception in triple coverage. Huge mental error in what otherwise was a masterful performance.


The vital thing for us out here in NorCal was that in the end the Niners got their act together in that 2nd half, tied it up in, what, 10 minutes? And then the miraculous catch didn’t hurt either… Back at the Half we were all fearing the worst, but in the end, they all pulled it off…


Screenshot 2024-01-28 at 6.53.53 PM

1 Like

I don’t think that the analytics takes into account enough data to make up for the 2-3% gains for those calls. They certainly don’t take “momentum” into account (according to other articles I’ve read) which also helps amplify a home field advantage, crowd noise, etc.
It is unclear if the analytics also takes into account if a loss means the end of the season vs just the missed points late in any game.
But I applaud the Lions (and others) taking more risks on 4th and short all season.


I don’t believe analytics is sensitive enough that that 2-3% is in any way meaningful. It doesn’t account for the center playing through an injury or if the OC spots a vulnerability in the secondary.

But I think you have to play to win. Campbell was sending a message that they are there to win it and they came pretty close.

@wecoguy I hate the 49’ers (Seahawks fan, here) but I’m picking them to win. That team is stacked from top to bottom with savages.

1 Like

It was amazing to watch a team go from asleep to awake, exactly at the same time their opponents went from awake to asleep. It’s like there were 4 different teams out there or something.

I don’t think a 2, 3% difference is meaningful in any respect, except perhaps after a thousand bets at the roulette wheel. I am surprised someone would even bother to mention it.

I hope the trend continues. 3 down and kick football is excruciating.

Good to see it out on the West Coast, Seahawks gave the Niners some tough games, would be rooting for them if the Niners hadn’t made it happen and they had…

We drove up, stayed by the Space Needle last October, parked the truck in the basement, Ubered or walked everywhere… lots to do & see, some great restaurants, but a bit of a drive from Sonoma County, CA… Used to have close friends out in Bridgeport, on the Columbia, so many trips over the years…

1 Like

I am hoping, praying for Kansas City to win. I figure it will cause at least 1,000 red hats to have a heart attack.


What are red hats? And why would you not mind if 1,000 of them had heart attacks? Give this dummy some context here!

→ Pats fan (HA!)

1 Like
  1. Do the math.

  2. It was a joke.

Trust me. I’m a professional. Do NOT try this at home.

1 Like