Dissecting a coach’s decision

By Os Davis  |   Thursday, November 16, 2006  |  Comments( 0 )

Detroit Lions
Got something to say?

Sign Up and be the first to comment on this article!
This column really should be about the Detroit Lions' upcoming games against the Arizona Cardinals, along the lines of "Finally! A team they can beat!" or "Hey, they might cover the spread!" or "It's the 2006 Toilet Bowl!" However, having watched the entire Lions-San Francisco 49ers game (finally, a team the Kitty Cats can beat - wait a minute...), coach Rod Marinelli's infamous fourth-quarter call just won't stop replaying in my mind à la PTSD.

Consider the following two scenarios and tell me something: "Is it me or is it him?"

Scenario 1. Fourth quarter, tie game, 3:20 remaining. The momentum in your team's favor, it's fourth-and-4 on the opponent's 37, meaning your placekicker has to attempt a 54-yarder. Do you go for the first down, attempt the field goal or punt?

Scenario 2. Fourth quarter, your guys down by six, 2:41 remaining. Though down, the momentum can be imagined in your favor, going on a 10-3 run. It's fourth-and-13 at the opponents' 19, translating out to a 36-yard field goal attempt. Do you go for the first down or attempt the field goal.

The first situation took place on opening day against the Seattle Seahawks. Marinelli chose to punt, Nick Harris kicked it just short of out of the stadium, and the 'Hawks put together a drive to get into field goal range. Lions lose, 9-6.

The second was from last Sunday. Apparently pushing the panic button, Marinelli had Mike Martz call a pass play. The 49ers go into a quarter defense, Kitna telegraphs one into quadruple coverage. Interception, game over. Lions lose, 19-13.

Now what in the name of Potsy Clark is going on here? Marinelli justified his decision after Sunday No. 1 with "We were playing dominating defense at the point and I was hoping to back them up again and get another shot."

Fair enough, but this doesn't explain the coach's apparent flip-flop decision making in Week 10. So Marinelli et al aren't comfortable with letting Jason Hanson take a 54-yarder, but a chip shot from 35? And, with the Lions playing some of their best 'D' this year in the second half of the San Francisco game (the concussion to Frank Gore didn't exactly hurt. Detroit, that is), why didn't Marinelli take the easy three and then have his "dominating defense" just "back them up and get another shot"? Wouldn't that have been the higher percentage play?

With a franchise like the Lions, you have to give the coach - even a rookie with zero games in the position on any level - the benefit of the doubt for a little while. (After all, Marinelli's the one who insisted on drafting Ernie Sims and cutting Charles Rogers, right?) After the game-sealing interception, the Marine stomped angrily up and down the sideline, clearly wanting someone to blame. Sure, he could have taken things out on Kitna, but why leave the game in the hands of a dude turning in probably his worst showing of the year? With two timeouts remaining, the Lions and their "dominating defense" had plenty of time to get into power kicker Hanson's range.

Now at 2-7, one trademark of the 2006 Detroit Lions has been the team's willingness to roll over in the second half. Despite the Lions' vast improvement in second half play since the win against the Buffalo Bills, Detroit has been repeatedly outcoached in the close ones all year. Several questions come to mind, like "Where's the consistency?" and "Isn't Marinelli aware that his team is under .250?" and "Is he just making it up as he goes along?"

(At this point, perhaps Marinelli should attempt the potentially revolutionary theory first crafted by David Romer of University of California Berkeley back in 2003 and revised in 2005, which shows that "going for it" on fourth down is a heck of a lot more mathematically sound than you'd think. The theory is slowly gaining popularity among the sportswriting cognoscenti and makes for interesting reading. Romer even relates NFL decision making to microeconomics. It's worth a read.)

After the Week 1 loss, Marinelli stated that the loss "wasn't good enough," and that "I'm not interested in just playing hard and well." Maybe after being on the losing end six more times has convinced that "playing hard and well" or even merely "playing hard" is enough.

Meanwhile, rather than confidently approaching what should be a win against the pitiful Cardinals (How unbelievable is the line "Arizona -2½"?), Detroit fans will no doubt be expecting the worst. Lions backers would be better off spared another close-game scenario and may well be cheering on Matt Leinart's fourth TD pass by game's end.

PS - Fire Millen. And then maybe Marinelli.


Can the Detroit Lions ever get it together? Find out at RealFootball365.com
Got something to say?

Sign Up and be the first to comment on this article! (0)

About Os Davis

Os Davis has taken a twisted route to get to RealFootball365.com in his nearly 17 years in professional writing, working in any number of capacities in the sportswriting, news reporting and film criticism worlds. In print media, Os has served as editor at a few publications, including Albuquerque's...
read more
Article Tools Share!   |  RSS  |  Bleacher Report About Bleacher Report