Breaking Down the Coaching in Chargers-Raiders

I am going to be honest, I had a whole different article planned for today. I was going to wrap up the NFL regular season by handing out some paper plate awards, and it was going to be good if I do say so myself. We were going to talk about who the Ginny Weasley of the NFL was, make fun of Chris Simms’ laughable record picking Sunday Night Games straight up, and marvel at Drew Bress’ hair regeneration. And then, Week 18 happened. We had Big Ben making one last stand. We had James G making his case. We had a QB sneak on 3rd and 9. And most importantly, we had the fight to the tie. After these games finished, there was no other option but to write about the wildest final week in recent memory. So then I started writing about Week 18, and before I knew it I had written over 2,000 words on the end of Chargers-Raiders alone. So, we’re gonna split this into two articles, the Chargers-Raiders part of Week 18 and then everything else.

This was a scenario unlike any we had seen in NFL history. The Colts loss to the Jaguars meant that a winner-take-all game to make the playoffs suddenly became a situation where both teams got in with a tie- and it seemed like it could happen. With two minutes left in overtime, the Raiders and Chargers were knotted at 32, with the possibility of the Raiders just kneeling and both teams making the playoffs. What followed was one of the most unique games of coaching chess we’ve ever seen, yet is predictably already being entirely misconstrued. Let’s analyze that sequence from the perspective of both teams.

The Raiders

If I were the Raiders, I would have kneeled right when they got back from the two-minute warning. At that point, the tie scenario went from “wouldn’t it be fun if no one tried for 60 minutes” to “both teams are currently in the playoffs and they can run the clock out in one series of downs.” With the playoffs secured, there was far greater risk in running a play than there was in kneeling. The Raiders could have guaranteed themselves a spot in the playoffs, by using the same logic that teams do when kneeling when winning- don’t risk fumbling the ball and let the clock run out. However, once they broke a run with Josh Jacobs, it was the correct move to call a timeout and kick the field goal. Remember, while both teams are trying to make the playoffs, that is in service of the greater goal of winning the Super Bowl, and by that point the risk-reward calculus had changed. Unlike the Chargers, there was a difference between a tie and a win for the Raiders in terms of seeding. A tie would have gotten them the seven seed and a matchup with the Chiefs, while a win would have gotten them the five and a matchup with the Bengals. That is a massive difference in potential outlook once they get into the playoffs, something that had to be considered. By the time of the field goal on the last play, this difference was worth it in my opinion in attempting the field goal. Blocked field goals are rarer than fumbles to start with and with no time left on the clock the Chargers, with returns for touchdowns being even rarer. This makes the risk factor much smaller, and the more immediate chance to improve their playoff standing makes the decision worth it in my opinion.

The Raiders essentially had two moments where not letting the clock run out could result in multiple outcomes:

With Two Minutes (Kneel or no Kneel):

1. Gain Yardage, kick Field Goal, play Bengals

2. Don’t Gain Yardage, clock runs, play Chiefs

3. Fumble, giving the Chargers the chance to recover and go win the game

With Two seconds (Field Goal or let time run out)

1. Made Field Goal, make playoffs, play Bengals

2. Miss Field Goal/Block without TD, make playoffs, play Chiefs

3. Block kicked plus return TD, miss playoffs

In my opinion, with two minutes left the risk of option 3 occurring plus the smaller chance of option 1 actually occurring means that you kneel and simply go to the playoffs. However, once you decide to go ahead and move the ball, the calculus becomes different. By that point you are guaranteed at least an attempt at Option 1 occurring because you are well within Field Goal range, while Option 3 is extremely less likely to occur. Ultimately, if I were the Raiders I would have kneeled with two minutes left. But once they didn’t do so, actually going for the win was the right move, and it paid off.

Chargers

Over the course of the football season, I have expressed many opinions on many matters. However, there are few things in which I have stronger belief than in my defense of Brandon Staley’s game management this season. Part of it may be because I have gotten so defensive over those criticizing his failed fourth-down decisions without mentioning that the Chargers’ success on fourth down is the only reason they’re here that my level of support has gone up a whole other level. Part of it may be because I love watching Justin Herbert, and I get upset when people try to break up one of the most fun young QB/young coach combos in recent memory. All I know is that I am a Brandon Staley stan- and there was absolutely nothing wrong with his timeout. Let’s start off with the facts of what happened:

1. Staley’s timeout did not change the calculus of the clock- the Raiders had five seconds on the play clock with 38 seconds left, meaning they were going to have to snap it once more

2. The Raiders had run a play on the previous two downs, giving little intention of ever kneeling the ball

3. The Raiders were lined up in shotgun with three receivers on the field and Hunter Renfrow in motion, meaning that there was zero chance that they were kneeling the ball in that situation

All of this means that his timeout did not have an effect on whether or not the Raiders ran out the clock, because they were going to run at the very least one more play, and with the game already under 40 seconds the five-second play clock did not make any difference. And the Raiders have said as such. While Derek Carr said that the timeout changed their strategy (more on that later), he said that they were playing to win, which is very clear because they were about to run a third straight play that was not a kneel down.

After the game, Raiders coach Rich Bisaccia had this to say when asked if they were considering letting the clock run out: “We were certainly talking about it on the sideline. We wanted to see if they were going to call a timeout or not on that run. They didn’t, so we thought they were thinking the same thing. And then we popped the run in there, gave us a chance to kick the field goal to win it.”

Bisaccia specifically says that the Chargers not calling a timeout immediately after the second down run, which they would have done for time reasons, indicated that they were willing to run the clock out and the Raiders were simply going to run one more play to see what happened and if they broke something they would kick a field goal. In other words, the clock was not a factor with 38 seconds on the game clock and five seconds on the play clock, so the Chargers’ best chance at stopping the Raiders from winning would be to stop their incoming third-down run. As Head Coach and defensive play-caller, the clock not being a factor means that Staley’s sole job at that is to maximize his defense's ability to make a stop on that play. Staley explained this as his reasoning after the game, and while I thought initially it was just to give his team a rest, he said he didn’t like the look, and when you go back and look at the formation directly before the timeout it becomes clear that the decision was not only defensible but correct.

When looking at this screenshot, I want you to look at a couple of things. First, once again confirm the game and play clock to see that the Raiders were going to have to run one more play and were in a formation that has never once indicated a kneel down, meaning Staley did not give them an extra down. Then I want you to look at the formation. The Chargers are in a nickel defense, meaning that they have five defensive backs, and six linebackers/lineman on the field- a formation that is typically used when teams put faster lineups on the field, which the Raiders initially looked like they were doing. However, a couple of things pop out at this formation from the Chargers' standpoint. First off, their safeties are playing deep rather than in the box, meaning that they are defending a pass that is never going to come. On top of that, Kenneth Murray, a coverage linebacker who has been a horrible tackler against the run all year and particularly in this game, was on the field. This means that the Chargers have a package on the field designed to stop a team from spreading out receivers, which was the case until Hunter Renfrow motioned in, which we see him doing here. Renfrow is one of the best run-blocking receivers in the game, and he is essentially being used as an extra tight end here. The man following Renfrow, Derwin James, is not creeping up in the box but staying deep meaning he is still trying to stop something over the top, which is not very useful when all the Raiders need is a few yards.

What the Raiders are trying to do from their look is make it look like they are spreading the field and then motion into a power run play to try to get a numbers advantage, which was a great schematic idea. With the knowledge that the Raiders were going to run a play, this is a horrible look for a Chargers run defense that is already very bad. Because the safeties were back the Chargers were going to have seven blockers on seven defenders, something which even base running games aren’t designed to do. Every single running scheme is based on the idea that the defense will have one more defender in the box than the offense will have to block, and the idea of the scheme is either to figure out a way to manipulate space to make that defender obsolete or create to the most advantageous one-on-one matchup for your running back. Any NFL defensive head coach will tell you that a look where every single guy has someone blocking him is absolutely disastrous. When you add in the fact that the middle linebacker responsible for plugging the middle is one of their worst tacklers, it would have been foolish for Staley to not maximize the Chargers' chances at succeeding on the most important play of the game. He needed to change that personnel grouping because he was in a situation where by the admission of the Raiders’ own coach they were guaranteed to run the ball, which was also clear based on both formation and the previous two plays, and the Chargers were in a look that was essentially guaranteed to fail.

The question of course with all of this is what the hell Derek Carr meant when he said the timeout “changed our thinking but we were playing to win,” but when you look at the formation it actually makes sense. My read on it is that Carr is saying they were playing to win and that the timeout changed their thinking in terms of what type of run play to use, which becomes clear when you look at the alignment of both teams before the actual third-down play.

This is a much better look for the Chargers. They now eight men in the box, with the other three defenders hovering nearby rather than playing deep. The Raiders knew the Chargers were going to be going with a heavier personnel grouping coming out of the timeout, so they responded accordingly. Carr is now under center, with Hunter Renfrow starting off by lining up tight as the extra tight end rather than motioning in, with Foster Moreau, a run-blocking specialist, now on the field instead of Darren Waller. There is no pretense of trying to spread the field now, and the motion man is Zay Jones, who rather than being motioned in to block is simply being motioned across the field to draw a defender away from the box. In other words, rather than going from a spread look to a power look to artificially create a numbers advantage against a smaller defense, the Raiders are now running a more traditional straight-up power offense vs power defense run play, a play which is the optimal look against the Chargers' new personnel grouping but has a smaller chance of succeeding than the play that would have been run before the timeout. The problem of course is that they still got a big run because the Chargers have a horrible run defense and have not made a single tackle all year (don’t fact check me on this). The Chargers lost the game because they didn’t stop a play that was going to happen despite being put in the best decision to do so, not because their coach prevented them from facing a horrible look.

Just because the timeout is the right move, doesn’t mean that Brandon Staley shouldn’t have to answer any questions. It is legitimately confounding that the Chargers were even fooled by this initial look from the Raiders considering there was zero chance they were throwing the ball and the Chargers should automatically have had heavier personnel on the field in the first place. There is simply zero excuse for being in nickel with Kenneth Murray on the field in this situation, and if they don’t call a timeout and the Raiders broke a big run, which was more likely based off the pre-snap look, there would still be a massive controversy over Staley's decision-making but it would have been over why the hell they were in that defense in that situation, something which I think would have been a more legitimate criticism. This fits into what in my opinion is the actual question mark with Staley, which is why as a defensive coach the Chargers regressed defensively despite getting healthier versions of both Joey Bosa and Derwin James. However, I am still willing to give him the long-term benefit of the doubt in that area because they did lose some other pieces and he is still only one year removed from instituting an innovative defensive scheme designed around using safeties as collapsing tacklers on short routes, a scheme that has been copied throughout the league this year.

The sequence that knocked the Chargers out of the playoffs was a microcosm of what has been Staley’s biggest shortcoming so far with the Chargers, but not in the way that people think. This has been a defense all year that was undisciplined and poor at tackling, and there is simply no bigger reason for the Chargers missing the playoffs than their inability to stop the run. Brandon Staley’s game management is why they were in a position to make up for it.