NFL Playoffs 2024: How The Hell Are The Lions In The Final Four??? Inconceivable!

[dbunting]

10 hours ago, KingintheNorth4 said:

I would say that it's a sad day for Detroit, but I imagine that everyday is a sad day when you live in Detroit. At least this bullshit cinderella story is over with. 

Don't need to make dumb lazy jokes.  You clearly haven't been near Detroit in a while. 

[Maithanet]

Detroit blew it, there's really no way around it.  Up 17 and they really didn't run the ball much in the second half.  When the defense held SF to 3 on the first drive, that was a win.  When the offense drove down to FG range, take the points.  If they do that, then the first nine minutes of the second half were wasted for SF's comeback attempt, and that's a big deal. 

I feel like when you are an underdog with a big lead, you have to ask "if the other team comes back, what does that look like?"  It's not trading points with them.  Trading points is actually great, because 17 points is a lot at halftime when you're running the ball wall.  It's them winning all the big plays and getting turnovers.  If 4th down stops count as turnovers (they do!), then the Lions turned it over 3 times in the second half.  If, at halftime, you told me that the Lions would turn it over 3 times in the second half, then I would definitely pick SF to win.  Which is exactly what happened. 

The funny thing is that I kinda sorta feel like SF should have lost both those playoff games, but in both cases the opponent just wasn't good enough.  Which, ya know, fair, the Niners are really talented.  But that's not a formula that's going to win against KC, who have a better defense, a better quarterback and probably a better coach. 

Like IF the Niners play to their potential, then they are probably better than KC.  But the last game I saw the Niners firing on all cylinders was...blowing out an underachieving Philly team?  That was almost two months ago.  The AFC has been the better conference all year, and it really showed in these playoffs.  If SF played like they did against Detroit/GB against Buffalo or Baltimore, then they lose.  But they weren't playing those teams.  KC played them, and they won.  KC is without a doubt playing their best football right now.  I'm not feeling optimistic about SF in the Owl. 

[Maithanet]

Also, if I recall correctly, Bill Belichick had the policy that no player is ever allowed to extend the ball towards the end zone, and we got yet another lesson why that is good practice yesterday.  You only do that if a defender is near you (otherwise you just walk/run in).  And yet if a defender is near you, extending the ball is the most dangerous thing you can do. 

If Flowers just dove forward with the ball in his chest, he scores.  Most of his body landed in the end zone, but he no longer had the ball.   He will regret that for the rest of his life. 

[Tywin et al.]

This feels like a really hard Owl to predict. The Niners overall roster is better, but the Chiefs have Jordan and a great defense that dominated the team that dominated everyone else. I could see a close game that goes either way or one where one of the teams smokes the other. Also, prior to the last few weeks I would have said the Niners don't want to be in a close one going into the fourth, but that narrative is over, at least for now. 

[Tywin et al.]

3 hours ago, Rhom said:

Loved this quote from Alex Smith about Brock Purdy:

”As the unofficial president of the game managers club, he’s not allowed in.”

Damn, I tried finding the right clip, but they played this to Smith:
 

And he was laughing his ass off and agreed it was the right move. Dude has a rare and sincere perspective. Seems like a great guy. 

Edited January 29 by Mr. Chatywin et al.

[Rhom]

18 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Damn, I tried finding the right clip, but they played this to Smith:
 

And he was laughing his ass off and agreed it was the right move. Dude has a rare and sincere perspective. Seems like a great guy. 

I always liked Alex.  I really think that if he had more consistent coaching in his first few years and hadn't dealt with so many injuries early, it could have been entirely different for him.  If the Niners had taken A-A-Ron first that year, I'm sure he would have done better than Alex... but he wouldn't be a hall of famer.

[Tywin et al.]

21 minutes ago, Rhom said:

I always liked Alex.  I really think that if he had more consistent coaching in his first few years and hadn't dealt with so many injuries early, it could have been entirely different for him.  If the Niners had taken A-A-Ron first that year, I'm sure he would have done better than Alex... but he wouldn't be a hall of famer.

It's always hard to know with these sliding doors scenarios. I recall reading a story breaking down how the Packers had to totally reform Rodger's throwing motion so the time sitting behind Favre actually really helped him. And it helped Rodgers watch him be reckless so he worked on being the opposite. Sometimes that's been a determent for him, but sitting him I think helped him overall. Idk what he would have been in the Niners drafted him, but I don't think he would have been nearly as good (he's also the type that takes shit personally, so sliding likely fueled him more).

Smith just had a lot of bad luck. Like you said, he was in a bad situation and got hurt a lot. Also, he was a few years ahead of his time with his style of play. If he had been drafted a decade later into a good situation I think he would have thrived. KC showed he could be excellent in the right system, but by then he was so worn down physically and emotionally. 

We see this all the time with QBs. I never saw him play in college, but I've consistently heard David Carr was fucking amazing. However, the Texans as a new franchise sucked and he got sacked so much his first few seasons and that probably broke him. This is why I think Young is screwed. The Panthers don't know what they're doing, have a bad roster and are likely going to ruin him early. I wasn't that high on his as a prospect, but if he went to the right place, didn't have to start for a year or two so he could develop himself more physically he would likely have a better shot. 

Edited January 29 by Mr. Chatywin et al.

[Prince of the North]

On 1/29/2024 at 8:58 AM, Maithanet said:

If Flowers just dove forward with the ball in his chest, he scores.  Most of his body landed in the end zone, but he no longer had the ball.   He will regret that for the rest of his life. 

Agreed.  Or, even if Flowers was stopped just short of the goal line there, it would have been a new set of downs.  Situational awareness for the win.

[Maithanet]

34 minutes ago, Prince of the North said:

Agreed.  Or, even if Flowers was stopped just short of the goal line there, it would have been a new set of downs.  Situational awareness for the win.

And going further, if he dives in there, then Flowers had an absolutely MONSTER game (and nobody would care about or remember the taunting).  At that point he'd be at 115 yards and two touchdowns in a low scoring championship game.  That is an incredible performance for anybody, let alone a rookie.  Even if the Ravens fell short, Flowers would be basically the one bright spot for Baltimore.  But instead he made the game-losing play that everyone will think about with this game.  Hope he is mentally strong enough to keep going forward and improving his game. 

[grozeng]

We should all take a moment to pause and think about how Sam Darnold is the first QB of the 2018 draft class to make a Super Bowl.

[Prince of the North]

2 hours ago, Maithanet said:

And going further, if he dives in there, then Flowers had an absolutely MONSTER game (and nobody would care about or remember the taunting).  At that point he'd be at 115 yards and two touchdowns in a low scoring championship game.  That is an incredible performance for anybody, let alone a rookie.  Even if the Ravens fell short, Flowers would be basically the one bright spot for Baltimore.  But instead he made the game-losing play that everyone will think about with this game.  Hope he is mentally strong enough to keep going forward and improving his game. 

Oh, agreed here, too.  This is all with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, of course.  If they had won, Baltimore not running the ball would have been seen as genius as would the Lions going for it on those 4th downs, if they had succeeded.

I was mostly agreeing with the idea that Flowers didn't need to extend the ball there.  Why take that risk when it would have been a 1st down anyway even if he was stopped just short of scoring?  I agree with Belichick's banning of extending the ball.  But I get it.  You play to win the game, winning is the best deodorant, all's well that ends well, and all that    

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, Prince of the North said:

I was mostly agreeing with the idea that Flowers didn't need to extend the ball there.  Why take that risk when it would have been a 1st down anyway even if he was stopped just short of scoring?  I agree with Belichick's banning of extending the ball.  But I get it.  You play to win the game, winning is the best deodorant, all's well that ends well, and all that    

Sure, most of the time extending the ball results in a touchdown, and on some of those plays they would be short otherwise.  It certainly has its upside.  But the risk of a fumble is very real.  We're not talking about a 1 in 100 chance or anything.  If I had to guess just based on the number of times I've seen it happen, I'd say something like 1 in 5.  And when there is a fumble, it is usually a turnover, because other defenders are always super close by.

[Tywin et al.]

48 minutes ago, grozeng said:

We should all take a moment to pause and think about how Sam Darnold is the first QB of the 2018 draft class to make a Super Bowl.

You're pure evil.

As to the strategy in both games for the losing teams, I only saw part of Chiefs-Ravens and none of Lions-Niners, but overall it sounds like the two less experienced teams panicked and broke their tendencies/game plans. Both seemed like they choked based on the postgame coverage. 

Edited January 30 by Mr. Chatywin et al.

[grozeng]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

You're pure evil.

I always thought the Jets should have kept Darnold and drafted Sewell or a WR.  But I really wanted them to take Sewell.  And then they could have signed a WR in FA to give Darnold another weapon.

[Maithanet]

The two games were very different.  The Lions were the better team by a wide margin in the first half, and then looked inexperienced and unsure how to hold onto their lead, and they went away from what was working.  Combine that with the Niners playing better and some unusual bounces, and SF stormed back.

The Ravens defense played fine, but unexceptional.  The Ravens offense was very good overall this season, but like every team, had a couple of really ugly showings like @ Pitt and vs Indy.  This week was a really bad week to have a repeat performance, but it happened.  Receivers couldn't get open, the running game didn't get going and Lamar was indecisive.  The Ravens were able to put together a few good drives, but never really looked comfortable, and in the end only managed 10 points. 

[Cas Stark]

23 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

You're pure evil.

As to the strategy in both games for the losing teams, I only saw part of Chiefs-Ravens and none of Lions-Niners, but overall it sounds like the two less experienced teams panicked and broke their tendencies/game plans. Both seemed like they choked based on the postgame coverage. 

Not really.  The Ravens played pretty poorly from the jump, they did appear to change their general strategy, e.g. abandoned the run, etc..  The Lions played well, then choked, and still almost pulled it out at the end.  You could even say that refusing to abandon their tendency to go for it on 4th was a key reason they ended up losing.   

[Tywin et al.]

21 minutes ago, grozeng said:

I always thought the Jets should have kept Darnold and drafted Sewell or a WR.  But I really wanted them to take Sewell.  And then they could have signed a WR in FA to give Darnold another weapon.

Why? Darnold isn't good. Idk why he had so much hype going into the draft.

10 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Not really.  The Ravens played pretty poorly from the jump, they did appear to change their general strategy, e.g. abandoned the run, etc..  The Lions played well, then choked, and still almost pulled it out at the end.  You could even say that refusing to abandon their tendency to go for it on 4th was a key reason they ended up losing.   

But that's kind of the key for the Ravens, they didn't run the ball in a close game. That doesn't make sense when you're a run first team. I get the Chiefs D was playing really well, however you still have to stick with your best weapon.

As for the Lions, again, I didn't see the game, but the coverage of it I've heard is that they got really tight after having a big lead then did a bunch of dumb shit after they lost it. I don't have a problem with them going for it on the 4th downs, but it seems like they lost their even flow once San Fran was making their comeback. 

[DMC]

The Niners were definitely the beneficiaries of some luck during the comeback in the second half.  However, one thing I was pointing out in real time is even if Aiyuk doesn't come up with that circus catch, in that case the refs almost certainly don't pick up the flag - meaning it'd have the same effect in terms of gaining ~50 yards on the play.

[Ramsay B.]

2 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Why? Darnold isn't good. Idk why he had so much hype going into the draft.

Yeah, it was baffling. He wasn’t even that impressive in college. He’s the main reason I didn’t mind taking Barkley at the 2 spot, even if it is dumb taking a RB second. Giants were mainly linked to Darnold and Rosen at the time I believe.

Of course they should’ve went with Josh Allen, but they probably would’ve completely ruined him so it’s all for the better.

[Tywin et al.]

13 minutes ago, Ramsay B. said:

Yeah, it was baffling. He wasn’t even that impressive in college. He’s the main reason I didn’t mind taking Barkley at the 2 spot, even if it is dumb taking a RB second. Giants were mainly linked to Darnold and Rosen at the time I believe.

Of course they should’ve went with Josh Allen, but they probably would’ve completely ruined him so it’s all for the better.

I was always on team Rosen between the two and that was clearly wrong, but he did outplay Darnold head to head with a much weaker roster in college. I don't think most rational people could have really seen what Allen would become (especially considering his running ability was not highlighted that much in college) and after his rookie year he looked exactly like what was expected. But by all accounts he worked really hard on his accuracy issues and now he's a top five or so QB (though people need to stop saying he's the preseason MVP favorite).