Detroit Lions head coach Dan Campbell’s decision to try an early onside kick was met with plenty of confusion. But was it a good move? Vote now in our poll:
Dan Campbell has been nicknamed “Dan Gamble” by many in the national media for his bold decision making, but he might have made his boldest decision against the Buffalo Bills on Sunday.
The Detroit Lions, trailing 38-28, had 12:00 remaining in the fourth quarter. Campbell opted for an onside kick to the shock of many. The Lions were, due to some early punts, losing the shootout against Buffalo, and Josh Allen and his offense were nearly unstoppable all game long. Instead of hoping for a defensive stop or two, Campbell put faith in Jake Bates and the football gods to see if they could recover a favorable bounce. The kick, per Campbell, was spot on, but the ball bounced into the arms of Bills receiver Mack Hollins, who took the ball all the way down to the Detroit 5-yard line, which immediately resulted in a touchdown for Buffalo. The score was 45-28, and despite a great comeback effort from the offense, Detroit fell short.
Many were quick to pin this as the reason for Detroit losing, but is that justified? In a game where the Lions scored 42 points but allowed 48, was one failed onside kick the turning point? If Detroit plays it safe and does a normal kickoff, does the game turn out differently, if at all?
Today’s Question of the Day is:
Was the Detroit Lions’ onside kick a good decision?
My answer: It was a good decision.
We have to examine the state of the game before the moment in question. The Lions, trailing 38-28, had 12:00 remaining in the fourth quarter. Buffalo’s previous drives were the following:
- 7 plays, 73 yards, 3:06, touchdown
- 9 plays, 78 yards, 5:43, touchdown
- 9 plays, 70 yards, 5:21, touchdown
- 5 plays, 64 yards, 1:18, missed 21-yard field goal
- 5 plays, 17 yards, 0:36, end of first half
- 4 plays, 70 yards, 1:49, touchdown
- 8 plays, 37 yards, 4:13, punt
- 5 plays, 26 yards, 1:37, touchdown
- 7 plays, 38 yards, 2:39, 50-yard field goal
There are multiple recurring trends here. Firstly, Buffalo was carving up the Lions defense in terms of points (five touchdowns), yardage (473 yards), and time (over 26 minutes). Additionally, Buffalo was demonstrating multiple ways to score. They had slower, methodical touchdown drives, but also some quick-strike scores. There was no guarantee to how Buffalo would respond to the Lions’ recent touchdown drive, but all the evidence pointed towards points being scored and/or the clock being used up, neither of which Detroit could very well afford.
Trailing by two scores, Detroit needed to steal possession from Buffalo—trading offensive scores was not enough. A punt, a turnover, an onside kick, any of these would have worked to turn the tide in Detroit’s favor and give the offense a chance to close the gap—to take the lead outright, they had to stop Buffalo twice. Each of these options had downsides, however.
The first two center around a normal kickoff. Even if you exclude a potential kickoff return, playing for a punt or turnover means giving Josh Allen more opportunities. Forcing a punt means stopping the Bills offense, which had been a near impossible task for the defense—this was also a defense without Carlton Davis and Alim McNeill. Turnovers can change the makeup of a game, but they are also unpredictable. Additionally, with Buffalo holding onto that two-score lead, they were far more likely to play it safe—Allen was unlikely to throw an interception-worthy pass.
Playing defense also risks running out the clock that Detroit desperately needs. Speaking of a safe mindset, the Bills did exactly that on their final full drive of the game. They drained nearly six minutes from the clock on their 10-play, 47-yard field goal drive. Aside from the 23-yard pass to Dawson Knox, most of their yardage came from their running game. Detroit was left with around two minutes to score 10 points, and they ultimately ran out of time.
This is why going for their first onside kick was a good decision. The Lions needed a way to not only steal a possession, but also minimize how much time was lost.
The worst case scenario of an onside kick would have been Buffalo recovering the ball around midfield then putting together a five-minute or so scoring drive. Yet given the new kickoff rules, a touchback puts the ball at the 30-yard line, so the difference between a typical kickoff and an onside kick is around 20 yards—an easy task for the Bills offense against this Detroit defense. Buffalo returning the onside kick to the 5-yard line was almost a positive, because while it (almost) guaranteed points, it also meant that very little time was run off the clock.
It all comes down to your preference: try to stop a red-hot Bills offense with an injured defense while running low on time, or attempt a low-percentage onside kick to give yourself a shot at a one-score game. Neither were great options. Many would argue to put faith in your defense to get a stop, but Detroit was doing that for the entire game to almost no success. The onside kick was a good ratio of risk-reward: the odds of converting are low, but if you make it, you eliminate a Bills possession and set yourself up with great field position—that is more than worth the risk.
The other thing worth considering is that if you kickoff normally to the Bills, you need to stop them twice. The first stop would have to come immediately after the kickoff. Even if Detroit scored a follow-up touchdown to draw within one score, they still needed to hold Buffalo again to take the lead. You are suddenly asking a defense, gutted in terms of points and personnel, to stop the Bills offense twice within 12 minutes. If the onside kick is converted, the Lions have a bit more wiggle room to give up yards and time—again, that is the difference a stolen possession makes.
The onside kick was certainly a risk, but it was also a justifiable risk given the state of the game. There were not many viable win conditions for the Lions, and the onside kick was one of the few that they themselves controlled. In my discussion last week about how to stop Josh Allen, I mentioned that Detroit would win by taking the ball out of his hands. The onside kick was, at that point, the best way to do it. Detroit did not lose this game because of this onside kick—it might have been their best way to win it.
Do you agree with Campbell’s decision to try the early onside kick? Vote and let us know in the comments below.
