Dan Campbell cost the Lions SB appearance

[LionelRichie]

2 hours ago, #27TheDominator said:

Because his kicker can make a 20 yard FG? 

Seriously.   It’s like everyone assumes the kicker was automatic from 48 when he’s historically been one of the worst.  
 

I remember when herm thought 45 was automatic and didn’t try to advance the ball vs the Steelers and ended up with the L.  The lions were like 80% or some crazy number on the 4th and 3 or less but let’s forget all of that because playoffs or something and the shaky kicker is now somehow automatic because not even lions fans decided. 

[Skeet Ulrich]

2 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It looks terrible when you take a chance and it doesn't work out, but when you do and it works out you get all the credit, too.

How many people today lament how, already down 4 points, it was a dumb thing to open the 2nd half with an onside kick in the super bowl and risk giving the Colts a short field to maybe break it open to an 11-point lead? It worked, and as a result Sean Payton got credit for having big balls not big stupidity. 

Even with those calls, if the team didn't leave a bunch of yards & points on the field (never mind that preposterously lucky result on the deflected Aiyuk catch) they should have still won anyway.

Yeah I really don't have a huge issue with Campbell going for it in any of his spots, it's his logical inconsistency that I have an issue with - makes him feel like a riverboat gambler. If you have a process that you follow and just say this is how we do business, no problem. To me it just makes no sense to kick at 21-7 and not kick at 24-10. If you don't trust your kicker to make a 45 yarder in calm conditions outdoors, that's on you, get a better kicker.

 

[dbatesman]

34 minutes ago, neckdemon said:

this is nonsense statistics though.....

oh wow

[slimjasi]

39 minutes ago, neckdemon said:

this is nonsense statistics though.....

I'm sure there is nothing wrong with the statistics. The issue is that statistics don't capture the intricacies of the moment. Not getting that first 4th down conversion attempt was a huge momentum shift in the game. The Lions had a chance to erase the FG from SF's opening drive to start the 3rd quarter by simply kicking their own FG. That missed conversion gave SF the ball back in a 2 score game knowing that one TD drive was all they needed to put all the pressure back on Detroit. Going for it there started the fire. 

[neckdemon]

5 minutes ago, dbatesman said:

oh wow

i should rephrase that. its not total nonsense. but you have to know when a situations calls for statistics and when it doesn't. it's like having pocket aces in the beginnign of a big tournament. stats say you can call all in preflop even against 3 other players, but its still maybe not the best idea. not trying to tie the game was monumentally stupid. as a coach you know that playus are gonna happen and turn overs are gonna happen. thats part of the game. but you don't compound the problem by making un-needed bone-headed decisions for all your chips when its gonna put you out of the tournament. he f*cked up

[slimjasi]

23 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It looks terrible when you take a chance and it doesn't work out, but when you do and it works out you get all the credit, too.

How many people today lament how, already down 4 points, it was a dumb thing to open the 2nd half with an onside kick in the super bowl and risk giving the Colts a short field to maybe break it open to an 11-point lead? It worked, and as a result Sean Payton got credit for having big balls not big stupidity. 

Even with those calls, if the team didn't leave a bunch of yards & points on the field (never mind that preposterously lucky result on the deflected Aiyuk catch) they should have still won anyway.

True. 

The Gibbs fumble was HUGE. I expected SF to win after that play. 

[neckdemon]

3 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

I'm sure there is nothing wrong with the statistics. The issue is that statistics don't capture the intricacies of the moment. Not getting that first 4th down conversion attempt was a huge momentum shift in the game. The Lions had a chance to erase the FG from SF's opening drive to start the 3rd quarter by simply kicking their own FG. That missed conversion gave SF the ball back in a 2 score game knowing that one TD drive was all they needed to put all the pressure back on Detroit. Going for it there started the fire. 

yeah thats kinda literally what i just wrote as a follow up, lol

theres a big difference between a fumble in the 3rd quarter while you are still leading by a td as opposed to going for it on 4th when you are 3 points down and don't have any room for error. in this situation the "expected points" stat is nonsense and you have to play the situation. that's what i meant

[Skeet Ulrich]

10 minutes ago, neckdemon said:

i should rephrase that. its not total nonsense. but you have to know when a situations calls for statistics and when it doesn't. it's like having pocket aces in the beginnign of a big tournament. stats say you can call all in preflop even against 3 other players, but its still maybe not the best idea. not trying to tie the game was monumentally stupid. as a coach you know that playus are gonna happen and turn overs are gonna happen. thats part of the game. but you don't compound the problem by making un-needed bone-headed decisions for all your chips when its gonna put you out of the tournament. he f*cked up

I don't have an issue with analytics but you're 100% right. I have a PFF sub and listen to their podcasts, the problem is they're very dogmatic and have no idea how to gauge and quantify the esoteric parts of the game(momentum, being the biggest).

[slimjasi]

15 minutes ago, neckdemon said:

yeah thats kinda literally what i just wrote as a follow up, lol

theres a big difference between a fumble in the 3rd quarter while you are still leading by a td as opposed to going for it on 4th when you are 3 points down and don't have any room for error. in this situation the "expected points" stat is nonsense and you have to play the situation. that's what i meant

The question for me is - how is "expected points lost" calculated?  It would be possible to take into account the context of the game to a larger degree (how much is SF leading by? How much time is left? Which players have gotten injured? etc.), but I honestly don't know what is accounted for and what isn't. Hence, it's hard to know how useful something like expected points lost is. 

What I do know is that two different models I saw had somewhere between a 0.3 to 2% difference in Detroit's win probability based on whether they went for it. I'm just skeptical that these models are precise enough to be blindly relied on to that degree. In my line of work, models are wrong all the time. Football is a complicated game with 22 players on the field at any one time. I suspect like something like win probability is inherently limited by trying to boil the game down to a single number. There are a LOT of confounding variables. 

 

 

[neckdemon]

2 minutes ago, Skeet Ulrich said:

I don't have an issue with analytics but you're 100% right. I have a PFF sub and listen to their podcasts, the problem is they're very dogmatic and have no idea how to gauge and quantify the esoteric parts of the game(momentum, being the biggest).

part of using things like analytics successfully is knowing WHEN to use them. what's the "expected win" difference between tying the game up with 6 minutes or whatever in the 4th quarter over turning it over on downs? i bet its pretty high

[neckdemon]

4 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

The question for me is - how is "expected points lost" calculated?  It would be possible to take into account the context of the game to a larger degree (how much is SF leading by? How much time is left? Which players have gotten injured? etc.), but I honestly don't know what is accounted for and what isn't. Hence, it's hard to know how useful something like expected points lost is. 

What I do know is that two different models I saw had somewhere between a 0.3 to 2% difference in Detroit's win probability based on whether they went for it. I'm just skeptical that these models are precise enough to be blindly relied on to that degree. In my line of work, models are wrong all the time. Football is a complicated game with 22 players on the field at any one time. I suspect like something like win probability is inherently limited by trying to boil the game down to a single number. There are a LOT of confounding variables. 

 

 

idk but its just another way to predict the future using data sets. sometimes you just gotta tie the game up and give your team a chance to keep going.....

[THE BARON]

On 1/29/2024 at 1:32 PM, Jet2020 said:

Last night was a terrible example of how to be aggressive. Up 24-7, you don’t need to be aggressive. Not in a playoff. You just need to ensure you get home safely. 

MISTAKE 1: Up 24-10, he chooses to give up a 35 yard FG to make it a 3 possession game and instead goes for it in 4th and 2 from the 28. Take the 3, make it a 3 possession game. Mental advantage. You gave a FG and the crowd started getting back into the game. Kick the FG, shut them up again.

MISTAKE 2: 27-24 49ers. Crowd really really pumped now. Lions on a massive slide with several mistakes. But are driving, 8 mins left, 4th and 3 at the 30. 47-48 yard FG attempt to tie the game. Campbell decides this is an easy call. Boneheaded call, boneheaded play. Take the FG and tie the game. Math is simple. It’s too deep into the game to be going for it. 

MISTAKE 3: Keep your timeouts. 1 min left, 3rd and goal at the 1, calling a run play. Loses 2 yards. That forces you to call a timeout. 3rd down call was terrible. Even then, you should have had a play ready for 4th down and should’ve lined up right away within 15 seconds and throw it. If you get it, you still have 3 timeouts and maybe about 40 seconds. Gives you an outside shot of forcing 3 and out, and maybe 15-20 seconds left to go about 40 yards to kick a long FG (that you passed on twice already). If you fail on 4th, you lose. If you use a timeout instead and score a TD, you still lose cuz onside kicks are near impossible these days (3%). 

Yep.  Playing to win the game does not always mean being aggressive when it makes ideal sense to economize. 

[faba]

The reason they made it to the game   was him being daring so it comes back to bite him but he stayed true to his philosophy

[rex-n-effect]

The Lions were taken down by the thing that got them to the playoffs. Hopefully Campbell walked away from that game understanding that he can't run playoff games like regular season games. It's sudden death and not the right time to make high risk/high reward calls. 

I didn't hate the call to go for it at 24-10 but the 27-24 decision was terrible. The end of the game was bad and seemed like the Lions thought they could be tricky to win the game instead of managing the clock. 

 

[Jet2020]

9 hours ago, faba said:

The reason they made it to the game   was him being daring so it comes back to bite him but he stayed true to his philosophy

Daring doesn’t mean taking unnecessary risk (stupidity). Daring would be going for it on 4th and 1 from your own 35. Stupidity is bypassing a makeable FG to tie the game mid way through the 4th quarter. Not a single critic would have called him out had he tried the FG there and missed. It’s the most sensible thing to do if it was 4th n inches, yes, go for it and pound that DL hard or QB sneak it. Pass on a 4th down is extremely high risk and not as high reward potential. 

[Jet2020]

10 hours ago, LionelRichie said:

Seriously.   It’s like everyone assumes the kicker was automatic from 48 when he’s historically been one of the worst.  
 

I remember when herm thought 45 was automatic and didn’t try to advance the ball vs the Steelers and ended up with the L.  The lions were like 80% or some crazy number on the 4th and 3 or less but let’s forget all of that because playoffs or something and the shaky kicker is now somehow automatic because not even lions fans decided. 

Badgley is 82% on kicks between 40-49 and has missed 4 kicks in that range in the last 3 years. He kicked a 54 yarder the week before I think. Not the best but certainly nothing like I’d bet the farm he’d miss. I agree Campbell went 17 of 20 on 4th and 3 or less out of the 24 opportunities but how many times was it mid way through the 4th and needed 3 to tie? Situational awareness. Not just bravado. 

FYI some of those are 4th and 1 or inches bet where a QB sneak would result in a relatively easy FD call. 

Here’s a scenario. Campbell is down 7, and just scored a TD. But only 20 seconds left in the game, no TO. Success rate on 2 point there is 60%.

Does he go for it? It’s the SB. 

[Fantasy Island]

I like how Ben Johnson  is playing it smart and waiting for the Jets job to open up in January of 2025.  He will get this offense going!!!

[Sperm Edwards]

9 hours ago, Jet2020 said:

Badgley is 82% on kicks between 40-49 and has missed 4 kicks in that range in the last 3 years. He kicked a 54 yarder the week before I think. Not the best but certainly nothing like I’d bet the farm he’d miss. I agree Campbell went 17 of 20 on 4th and 3 or less out of the 24 opportunities but how many times was it mid way through the 4th and needed 3 to tie? Situational awareness. Not just bravado. 

FYI some of those are 4th and 1 or inches bet where a QB sneak would result in a relatively easy FD call. 

Here’s a scenario. Campbell is down 7, and just scored a TD. But only 20 seconds left in the game, no TO. Success rate on 2 point there is 60%.

Does he go for it? It’s the SB. 

So…statistically his chance of kicking a FG is the same as Detroit converting that 4th down. 

[section314]

7 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

So…statistically his chance of kicking a FG is the same as Detroit converting that 4th down. 

Put the blame where it belongs . On the bum who dropped the pass. 

[Jet2020]

24 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

So…statistically his chance of kicking a FG is the same as Detroit converting that 4th down. 

Not really. There are massive differences between 4th and 3, 4th and 2, 4th and 1 and 4th and inches. When you lump them in one group, chances sound better. Another way of saying is, Lions went 30% on 4th and 3 or more. See what I did? 

Overall 4th down conversion percentage for Lions in 2023 was 52% while overall FG % for their kicker in 2023 was 100%. Stats are easy to manipulate. Situational awareness/consideration can’t be quantified in stats. 

[Jet_Engine1]

Anyone arguing that it was "Smart" or "What the Lions Did all year" going for it on 4th and 3 UP 14 on the road in the NFCCG is just silly. 

 

Going back up 17 and kicking off after shutting up the crowd again and the Lions collapse probably doesn't happen. 

 

Whatever. Go 9'ers

[LionelRichie]

11 hours ago, Jet2020 said:

Here’s a scenario. Campbell is down 7, and just scored a TD. But only 20 seconds left in the game, no TO. Success rate on 2 point there is 60%.

Does he go for it? It’s the SB. 

He absolutely goes for 2.   How many times do you see teams play for the tie/OT only to watch the other team march down the field for a TD.   If I am the lions I'd take the Offense for 2pts over a coinflip and the defense making a stop.   

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, Jet2020 said:

Not really. There are massive differences between 4th and 3, 4th and 2, 4th and 1 and 4th and inches. When you lump them in one group, chances sound better. Another way of saying is, Lions went 30% on 4th and 3 or more. See what I did? 

Overall 4th down conversion percentage for Lions in 2023 was 52% while overall FG % for their kicker in 2023 was 100%. Stats are easy to manipulate. Situational awareness/consideration can’t be quantified in stats. 

But you're ok with lumping success rates for 40 yard FGs and 45 (or 49) yard FGs together. Same thing.  

[Jet2020]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

But you're ok with lumping success rates for 40 yard FGs and 45 (or 49) yard FGs together. Same thing.  

Precisely my point. 

[Skeet Ulrich]

On 1/30/2024 at 1:00 PM, LionelRichie said:

Seriously.   It’s like everyone assumes the kicker was automatic from 48 when he’s historically been one of the worst.  

I stated I had no issue with him eschewing a 48 yarder outdoors. A 43-44 yarder, that's one you should be kicking, especially since you kicked at the end of the first half.

If you don't trust your K to make a sub 45 yard kick in calm conditions outdoors, that's on you.

[Sperm Edwards]

14 minutes ago, Jet2020 said:

Precisely my point. 

Well my point - based on the numbers you posted - is I think in the end the odds of success weren't all that far apart; plus missing a FG would further give SF better field position than missing a 4th down conversion; plus there was additional upside in terms of being able to score more than 3 points; plus had they converted and still didn't score a TD they'd be in position for a higher-percentage FG attempt; and ultimately it only seems so ultra-dumbass to some in retrospect because it didn't work out.

Also your #s on Patterson's kicking prowess from 40+ not only doesn't factor in the two he made in the 40s this season were from 41 and 44, and missed half his 40+ attempts this year outside of home games in Detroit's dome. Further all 4 that he made from 40+ in his prior stint with Detroit were also all home games kicked inside a dome. In between with Jacksonville they were mostly no-pressure kicks from 40+ (save one game-tying 48 yarder to force OT against Dallas). Despite his nearly 90% career average, it doesn't paint the picture of a kicker known for making long clutch kicks on the road in pressure situations. 

Even still I doubt I'd have gone for it myself, but it's also fair to note that doing so was, in good part, what got the Lions that far and I admittedly wouldn't have done that as often as Campbell did all season either (being honest with myself). 

I'd lay far more blame for the loss at the players whose hands seemed to have developed a sudden allergy for pigskin.

[Jet2020]

6 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Well my point - based on the numbers you posted - is I think in the end the odds of success weren't all that far apart; plus missing a FG would further give SF better field position than missing a 4th down conversion; plus there was additional upside in terms of being able to score more than 3 points; plus had they converted and still didn't score a TD they'd be in position for a higher-percentage FG attempt; and ultimately it only seems so ultra-dumbass to some in retrospect because it didn't work out.

Also your #s on Patterson's kicking prowess from 40+ not only doesn't factor in the two he made in the 40s this season were from 41 and 44, and missed half his 40+ attempts this year outside of home games in Detroit's dome. Further all 4 that he made from 40+ in his prior stint with Detroit were also all home games kicked inside a dome. In between with Jacksonville they were mostly no-pressure kicks from 40+ (save one game-tying 48 yarder to force OT against Dallas). Despite his nearly 90% career average, it doesn't paint the picture of a kicker known for making long clutch kicks on the road in pressure situations. 

Even still I doubt I'd have gone for it myself, but it's also fair to note that doing so was, in good part, what got the Lions that far and I admittedly wouldn't have done that as often as Campbell did all season either (being honest with myself). 

I'd lay far more blame for the loss at the players whose hands seemed to have developed a sudden allergy for pigskin.

Bro, who is K Patterson? You might be mixing him up with someone else. It was Michael Badgley. He was 7/7 on FGs this year. Honestly my OP doesn’t even mention stats. It’s all scenario based. The aggressive mindset doesn’t mean going for it on 4th down every time. 

First 4th down play should’ve been a FG because you had to keep the crowd quiet that showed a pulse after a 49ers FG. Scoring a TD there would still have kept it a 3 possession game. You don’t gain any significant mental advantage by scoring a TD vs a FG. 

Second 4th down was about tying the game where your offense had completely shut down in the half. You still had a chance to tie the game after all those boneheaded mistakes by the players, which happen to the best of them. 

Final mistake was the nonsense run play at the end wasting a TO and even then, TO should’ve been preserved by going no huddle for 15 seconds. Plenty of time to lineup and zero in on the D for a few seconds. 

I keep saying this. Players job is execution. Execution has lot of dependencies to work out including factors not in your control. Coaches’ job is to make decisions and manage the game. Majority of these decisions are made to put to team in the best spot to win. Bypassing a FG try, running play when you don’t have time, bypassing another ‘makeable’ FG etc. we can debate how makeable the FG is but if a HC can’t trust his kicker for a 45 yarder and a 48 yarder, then kicker isn’t the issue  issue is the CS and FO for not finding a kicker that can make these relatively easy kicks  if it was a 52 yard attempt, I could see why someone would bypass  but 45? C’mon  

 

[Be_a_Jet]

I hope Saleh costs us the Super Bowl bc that will at least mean we made the damn playoffs 

[jamesr]

Kicking the FG puts points on the board. Getting a 1st down gives you 4 more downs.

Yes, the chances may be equal, or similar, but the outcome is not.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[Sperm Edwards]

10 hours ago, Jet2020 said:

Bro, who is K Patterson? You might be mixing him up with someone else. It was Michael Badgley. He was 7/7 on FGs this year. Honestly my OP doesn’t even mention stats. It’s all scenario based. The aggressive mindset doesn’t mean going for it on 4th down every time. 

First 4th down play should’ve been a FG because you had to keep the crowd quiet that showed a pulse after a 49ers FG. Scoring a TD there would still have kept it a 3 possession game. You don’t gain any significant mental advantage by scoring a TD vs a FG. 

Second 4th down was about tying the game where your offense had completely shut down in the half. You still had a chance to tie the game after all those boneheaded mistakes by the players, which happen to the best of them. 

Final mistake was the nonsense run play at the end wasting a TO and even then, TO should’ve been preserved by going no huddle for 15 seconds. Plenty of time to lineup and zero in on the D for a few seconds. 

I keep saying this. Players job is execution. Execution has lot of dependencies to work out including factors not in your control. Coaches’ job is to make decisions and manage the game. Majority of these decisions are made to put to team in the best spot to win. Bypassing a FG try, running play when you don’t have time, bypassing another ‘makeable’ FG etc. we can debate how makeable the FG is but if a HC can’t trust his kicker for a 45 yarder and a 48 yarder, then kicker isn’t the issue  issue is the CS and FO for not finding a kicker that can make these relatively easy kicks  if it was a 52 yard attempt, I could see why someone would bypass  but 45? C’mon  

 

Damn, that ruins my whole argument.  Well, most of it anyway. After being the team's kicker for most of the season, he'd only cut Patterson in December (admittedly I don't keep track of Detroit's kickers).

I think it's fair that factored into it, too: this wasn't a kicker he'd grown to trust over time. So (looking it up now) Badgley was barely with the team a month, and before that had been signed & released from team after team (including previously with Detroit), mostly as camp competition. He'd made 1 FG of 40+ this season, and failed to convert 2 of just 15 XPs (one blocked and one just missed). He hadn't kicked 1 FG from 40+ this season outside a dome. There can be more to those, too: some that converted - including XPs - may have been barely good, which can be enough to give a HC pause. That I can't say, as I hardly overanalyze every kick attempt he's made (like I said, I didn't even realize they switched kickers late in the season). 

Put it this way -- after going for it on 4th so often all season, there'd still be the same second-guessing if he suddenly went into his shell and went for FGs had either - or both - been attempted and missed.

The running play at the end, agree when playing against the clock as much as the opponent, yeah if you go that route to run it you'd better get in or it's a lot to second-guess. Who knows if they'd have still gotten in anyway? After running it once, there was a threat of running it again on 4th down & that may have aided in converting that last TD. But even still, barring a miracle finish - a TD pass followed by a perfect drag-kick followed by a lucky bounce that Detroit doesn't bobble away followed by moving the ball into FG range - even if played right, really if you want to talk odds at all, the game was over by then anyway. As it turned out they didn't recover the onside kick and the overwhelming likelihood is they wouldn't have on a would-be prior attempt either. 

I still place far more blame for the loss on all of this happening -- almost all of it between the close of the 2nd Q to the close of the 3rd Q:

1. Goff missing a wide open TD pass just before halftime ended up taking 4 points off the board (would be 31-7 instead of 27-7) heading into the 2nd half. 
2. Goff overthrowing an open Laporta for a would-be TD (assuming he didn't drop it) halfway through the 3rd Q. Would've taken a nice throw but Laporta was open enough for an NFL QB. Would've been 31-10 Detroit.
3. Going for it on 4th down right after that still would've been a perfect decision if Reynolds doesn't drop a pass that hit him in the hands, giving SF ball instead of 1st down for Detroit on SF's 20.
4. Then Vildor (?) dropping an interception on a desperation heave from Purdy that went right through his hands, then off his own facemask ffs, bouncing up into the air enough for Aiyuk to grab it before it hit the turf, scoring a TD a few plays later.
5. Then right after that TD converted for SF, Gibbs fumbling literally the next play on offense to give SF a free possession starting on Detroit's 24.  Huge momentum swing leading to another quick San Fran TD, and suddenly it's a tie game. 
6. Then on Detroit's next possession after that, Reynolds dropping yet another pass thrown right on him, on 3rd down leading to a punt instead of 1st down between the 40s.
7. Then on the ensuing punt, instead of letting the first guy (#30) easily down it on the 1, the second guy in (#27, Chase Lewis; I had to look him up) instead puts his hands on it, with all his momentum from sprinting in late taking him into the EZ so it's a touchback instead of pinning them (SF went down the field for a FG on that drive). 
8. Then in the 4th, a great timed call on the flea flicker was thrown right on the money for a TD and Jameson Williams just lets it go right through his hands. They would've taken the lead back 31-27 in the mid-4th quarter, with a huge momentum shift, instead of still trailing 27-24 (leading to the second time Campbell bypassed a FG to go for it. That last FG I can't see going for it, no matter what the analytics say, because missing it would give an already running-hot SF offense the opportunity to go up by 2 scores late in the game, and that's what happened.)

Even with those Campbell calls going otherwise, none would have even sealed a Detroit win at any juncture.

On balance Detroit's coaches on both offense & defense put their players in position to win the game against a superior & very seasoned playoff team, and on far too many plays - 8 of them listed above - their players just choked & screwed it up. Coaches don't gameplan with the idea their players will choke on that many plays in such a short span. 

[Adoni Beast]

If they convert one or both of those 4th downs then Dan Campbell would be universally praised for having the "moxie" to go for the win and trust in his team....he would received the lion's share of the praise and rightfully so.

If you are subject to received the credit for a success you should be equally subject for receiving the blame for a failure. He is rightfully being blamed, even though the players in my view also deserve a lot of blame.

I think in all of sports coaches get too much credit and/or too much blame.

[jamesr]

If they convert one or both of those 4th downs then Dan Campbell would be universally praised for having the "moxie" to go for the win and trust in his team....he would received the lion's share of the praise and rightfully so.
If you are subject to received the credit for a success you should be equally subject for receiving the blame for a failure. He is rightfully being blamed, even though the players in my view also deserve a lot of blame.
I think in all of sports coaches get too much credit and/or too much blame.

Only if they turn either 4th down conversion into a TD. Either could have done so, but similarly they may have ended up as FGs, turnovers on downs, or turnovers.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk