Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb

09-17-2007 , 11:41 PM
Quote:
SF 17 STL 16 4th Quarter: clock stopped at 1:04 after Isaac Bruce ran OB.

4-3-SF 38 (1:04) 14-J.Wilkins 56 yard field goal is No Good, Short, Center-45-C.Massey, Holder-89-D.Looker.

Trying to convert a 4th & 3 has to be a much higher percentage play than kicking a game winning 56 yarder.
Well, you have to deprecate that a bit. Say they are 75% to convert, and only 50% to make the figgie. On that 75% of the time they convert, how many times do they then go on to win? More than half, probably, but maybe not WAY more than half.

Obviously there is some combination of percentages that tips it in favor of going for it, but it is probably pretty close.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-17-2007 , 11:44 PM
Quote:
Quote:
SF 17 STL 16 4th Quarter: clock stopped at 1:04 after Isaac Bruce ran OB.

4-3-SF 38 (1:04) 14-J.Wilkins 56 yard field goal is No Good, Short, Center-45-C.Massey, Holder-89-D.Looker.

Trying to convert a 4th & 3 has to be a much higher percentage play than kicking a game winning 56 yarder.
Well, you have to deprecate that a bit. Say they are 75% to convert, and only 50% to make the figgie. On that 75% of the time they convert, how many times do they then go on to win? More than half, probably, but maybe not WAY more than half.

Obviously there is some combination of percentages that tips it in favor of going for it, but it is probably pretty close.
Yah but a FG doesn't win - it puts you up 2 with a minute left where a FG can beat you.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 12:54 AM
Quote:
Ok, this didn't happen recently but I'm watching the Eagles game and it reminded me of something. When a team is down by 15, and there is, say, 8 or 9 minutes left in the game, and they score a TD. You should ALWAYS go for 2, right? Time after time I see the coaches kick the one, to put themselves down by 8, with the plan (apparently) to go for 2 if and when they score again. Doesn't this seem like totally irrational decision based on the fear of "hopelessness" or whatever if you go for it and fail? It makes no sense. Waiting until the second TD, pinning all your hopes on that, has to be worse than trying, failing, and knowing that you now need to score two more times.
Not quite what you're saying but I think Nebraska waiting to go for it in the 1984 Orange Bowl is one of the biggest coaching mistakes ever.

Here's a description (link)

Quote:
On their first drive of the second half Nebraska was able to tie the score 17-17 on a 34 yard Scott Livingston field goal. But Miami responded with a strong attack. Within a five minute span Miami scored two more touchdowns to regain the lead 31-17.

On the next Husker drive Heisman Trophy winner Mike Rozier left the game with a badly bruised ankle, leaving Nebraska looking for a hero.

Nebraska found their hero in Jeff Smith. Smith took the spotlight in the fourth quarter when he rushed for 99 yards and two touchdowns. The key touchdown came on a 24 yard run with only :24 seconds left in the game making the score Miami 31-Nebraska 30.

Nebraska coach Tom Osborne said later he never debated the decision he made next. A one point PAT and a tie game would have given Nebraska the National Championship, but Osborne went for the win with a two point conversion attempt.

Turner Gill took the snap from center and rolled out five steps to his right. He fired the ball towards Jeff Smith just inside the goal line. Hurricane defender Kenny Calhoun stretched out his arm and tipped the ball away and the Hurricanes claimed their first National Championship.
Osborne gets a lot of credit for going for the win even if it cost him a shot at the national title. I don't have a problem with that, but kicking to make it 24 - 31 with the plan to go for 2 the next time is idiotic.

He should have gone for 2 to make it 25-31. If successful you win the game and national title with a PAT if you score again. If you miss it then you still have the chance to go for 2 and tie the game to get the national championship. This way you're still going for the win, but you cut the chances of losing everything in half basically.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 12:59 AM
Icing the kicker for a chipshot. Oops, now they're going for it. Oops, they scored a touchdown instead.

Nice job Reid.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:00 AM
Quote:
Ok, this didn't happen recently but I'm watching the Eagles game and it reminded me of something. When a team is down by 15, and there is, say, 8 or 9 minutes left in the game, and they score a TD. You should ALWAYS go for 2, right? Time after time I see the coaches kick the one, to put themselves down by 8, with the plan (apparently) to go for 2 if and when they score again. Doesn't this seem like totally irrational decision based on the fear of "hopelessness" or whatever if you go for it and fail? It makes no sense. Waiting until the second TD, pinning all your hopes on that, has to be worse than trying, failing, and knowing that you now need to score two more times.
Agreed. Also, there is the situation where late in the game a team down by 14 scores a touchdown. This should be an easy go for 2 descision, but they never do.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:07 AM
Quote:
Quote:
Ok, this didn't happen recently but I'm watching the Eagles game and it reminded me of something. When a team is down by 15, and there is, say, 8 or 9 minutes left in the game, and they score a TD. You should ALWAYS go for 2, right? Time after time I see the coaches kick the one, to put themselves down by 8, with the plan (apparently) to go for 2 if and when they score again. Doesn't this seem like totally irrational decision based on the fear of "hopelessness" or whatever if you go for it and fail? It makes no sense. Waiting until the second TD, pinning all your hopes on that, has to be worse than trying, failing, and knowing that you now need to score two more times.
Agreed. Also, there is the situation where late in the game a team down by 14 scores a touchdown. This should be an easy go for 2 descision, but they never do.
Well, to pick a nit, it's only correct when p + (1-p)*p*q > q, where p = probability of converting a 2-pointer and q = probability of winning in overtime (assuming extra points are 100%).

If we assume q = 0.5, then going for 2 first is correct when p > 0.382, and I think almost all NFL offenses should be able to convert at this rate from 2 yards out. Dunno about college offenses, since their 2-pointer is from 3 yards out.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:09 AM
Mota
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:11 AM
If you score a touchdown down by 14 in the fourth quarter, you should go for two.

Everyone who plays Madden knows this. NFL coaches either do not know this, or are too afraid of the media to do it.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:14 AM
Quote:
Icing the kicker for a chipshot. Oops, now they're going for it. Oops, they scored a touchdown instead.

Nice job Reid.
how bout calling your 2nd timeout to ice a kicker when up by 3 with 1 min left?
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:16 AM
Quote:
If you score a touchdown down by 14 in the fourth quarter, you should go for two.

Everyone who plays Madden knows this. NFL coaches either do not know this, or are too afraid of the media to do it.
I feel like a dumb [censored] for not realizing this before since the math is so obvious, but how can I have watched like 5 football games a week for years and never have heard anyone point this out before?
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:17 AM
Quote:
Quote:
Icing the kicker for a chipshot. Oops, now they're going for it. Oops, they scored a touchdown instead.

Nice job Reid.
how bout calling your 2nd timeout to ice a kicker when up by 3 with 1 min left?
Yeah, who was that? That was ******ed. I remembered seeing that and was going to post it but I coulden't remember what game it was.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:20 AM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Ok, this didn't happen recently but I'm watching the Eagles game and it reminded me of something. When a team is down by 15, and there is, say, 8 or 9 minutes left in the game, and they score a TD. You should ALWAYS go for 2, right? Time after time I see the coaches kick the one, to put themselves down by 8, with the plan (apparently) to go for 2 if and when they score again. Doesn't this seem like totally irrational decision based on the fear of "hopelessness" or whatever if you go for it and fail? It makes no sense. Waiting until the second TD, pinning all your hopes on that, has to be worse than trying, failing, and knowing that you now need to score two more times.
Agreed. Also, there is the situation where late in the game a team down by 14 scores a touchdown. This should be an easy go for 2 descision, but they never do.
Well, to pick a nit, it's only correct when p + (1-p)*p*q > q, where p = probability of converting a 2-pointer and q = probability of winning in overtime (assuming extra points are 100%).

If we assume q = 0.5, then going for 2 first is correct when p > 0.382, and I think almost all NFL offenses should be able to convert at this rate from 2 yards out. Dunno about college offenses, since their 2-pointer is from 3 yards out.
I'm kind of tired, but is the reason going for two is effective in this situation because of the choice you get to go for one if you make it?
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:20 AM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Icing the kicker for a chipshot. Oops, now they're going for it. Oops, they scored a touchdown instead.

Nice job Reid.
how bout calling your 2nd timeout to ice a kicker when up by 3 with 1 min left?
Yeah, who was that? That was ******ed. I remembered seeing that and was going to post it but I coulden't remember what game it was.
I vaguely remember some college game a while back where a team burned their last *two* timeouts to ice the opposing kicker with about a minute left.

EDIT: I think it might have been Alabama-Auburn 1997. Anybody remember?
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:25 AM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Ok, this didn't happen recently but I'm watching the Eagles game and it reminded me of something. When a team is down by 15, and there is, say, 8 or 9 minutes left in the game, and they score a TD. You should ALWAYS go for 2, right? Time after time I see the coaches kick the one, to put themselves down by 8, with the plan (apparently) to go for 2 if and when they score again. Doesn't this seem like totally irrational decision based on the fear of "hopelessness" or whatever if you go for it and fail? It makes no sense. Waiting until the second TD, pinning all your hopes on that, has to be worse than trying, failing, and knowing that you now need to score two more times.
Agreed. Also, there is the situation where late in the game a team down by 14 scores a touchdown. This should be an easy go for 2 descision, but they never do.
Well, to pick a nit, it's only correct when p + (1-p)*p*q > q, where p = probability of converting a 2-pointer and q = probability of winning in overtime (assuming extra points are 100%).

If we assume q = 0.5, then going for 2 first is correct when p > 0.382, and I think almost all NFL offenses should be able to convert at this rate from 2 yards out. Dunno about college offenses, since their 2-pointer is from 3 yards out.
I'm kind of tired, but is the reason going for two is effective in this situation because of the choice you get to go for one if you make it?
Yeah. Assuming we are capable of getting the ball back and scoring again, we win by

- scoring 2, then scoring 1 = p * 1.00
- missing 2, then scoring 2, then winning in OT = (1-p) * p * 0.5
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:30 AM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Ok, this didn't happen recently but I'm watching the Eagles game and it reminded me of something. When a team is down by 15, and there is, say, 8 or 9 minutes left in the game, and they score a TD. You should ALWAYS go for 2, right? Time after time I see the coaches kick the one, to put themselves down by 8, with the plan (apparently) to go for 2 if and when they score again. Doesn't this seem like totally irrational decision based on the fear of "hopelessness" or whatever if you go for it and fail? It makes no sense. Waiting until the second TD, pinning all your hopes on that, has to be worse than trying, failing, and knowing that you now need to score two more times.
Agreed. Also, there is the situation where late in the game a team down by 14 scores a touchdown. This should be an easy go for 2 descision, but they never do.
Well, to pick a nit, it's only correct when p + (1-p)*p*q > q, where p = probability of converting a 2-pointer and q = probability of winning in overtime (assuming extra points are 100%).

If we assume q = 0.5, then going for 2 first is correct when p > 0.382, and I think almost all NFL offenses should be able to convert at this rate from 2 yards out. Dunno about college offenses, since their 2-pointer is from 3 yards out.
I'm kind of tired, but is the reason going for two is effective in this situation because of the choice you get to go for one if you make it?
It's about maximizing your probability of winning the game.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:44 AM
Quote:
Quote:
If you score a touchdown down by 14 in the fourth quarter, you should go for two.

Everyone who plays Madden knows this. NFL coaches either do not know this, or are too afraid of the media to do it.
I feel like a dumb [censored] for not realizing this before since the math is so obvious, but how can I have watched like 5 football games a week for years and never have heard anyone point this out before?
Help me...you mean down by 14 'after" the uncoverted TD, or down by 8 after unconverted TD?? I'm slow....
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:50 AM
Down by 14 before the touchdown.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:50 AM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If you score a touchdown down by 14 in the fourth quarter, you should go for two.

Everyone who plays Madden knows this. NFL coaches either do not know this, or are too afraid of the media to do it.
I feel like a dumb [censored] for not realizing this before since the math is so obvious, but how can I have watched like 5 football games a week for years and never have heard anyone point this out before?
Help me...you mean down by 14 'after" the uncoverted TD, or down by 8 after unconverted TD?? I'm slow....
8.

Down by 14, then you score and have to decide.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:57 AM
down by 14...and then you score the TD and are down by 8. You should go for 2.
This one really isn't very easy to see which is why pretty much no teams out there do it.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was some high-school team out there who got it though since many of they coaches are also teachers at the school.
So put a fairly sharp math teacher in this position and maybe it happens. Throw in the fact that for many high-school teams the XP isn't going to be anywhere near 100%.
Speaking of which, to be fair I don't think they should be counted as 100% for NFL or NCAA calcs either. Also, it's a 2.5yd play that involves some added pressure for the offense because you only get one shot at it and there ain't a whole lot of field to work with or maneuver around.
I don't know what a team's success rate on 2-pt conversions is usually.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 01:59 AM
Since we are on the topic, I think it would be sick if the Colts just went the rest of the season going for 2 after every touchdown unless they are in certain situations.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 02:01 AM
sooner or later there has to be SOME team out there that figures it out.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 02:04 AM
Quote:
sooner or later there has to be SOME team out there that figures it out.
Have you ever brought math into a conversation with a run of the mill sports fan? I mentioned statistical variance to some of my brighter friends during a football game and they were like no way there is no place for math in this. Hell, it's surprising how many people don't get the concept of results oriented thinking.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 02:05 AM
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Icing the kicker for a chipshot. Oops, now they're going for it. Oops, they scored a touchdown instead.

Nice job Reid.
how bout calling your 2nd timeout to ice a kicker when up by 3 with 1 min left?
Yeah, who was that? That was ******ed. I remembered seeing that and was going to post it but I coulden't remember what game it was.
bengals mlewis vs the steelers last year.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 02:08 AM
Doubt it's been mentioned but I was screaming at the screen (slight brag: watched the game on a movie theater screen in HD for free) watching the Packers-Giants game because AJ Hawk/other d-back refused to bump Shockey coming off the line while in man coverage. They just let him run his routes at full speed. It wouldn't take many of the dropped/overthrown balls to Shockey for the Pack to have lost. Linebacker coach needs to get his head out of his ass.
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote
09-18-2007 , 02:18 AM
Quote:
I don't know what a team's success rate on 2-pt conversions is usually.
1998: 98 Attempts, 41%
1999: 77, 39%
2000: 78, 45%
2001: 84, 48%
2002: 93, 51%
2003: 62, 47%
2004: 77, 50%
2005: 50, 54%
2006: 35, 60%

From Pro Football Prospectus 2007, Page 452
Kyle Shanahan don't need to know no stinking OT rules. Mario CRYSTALBALL is still unreal dumb Quote

      
m