Cardinals coach ended the game with 3 timeouts. They could’ve called timeout with 40 seconds left prior to the game-winning field goal. To make it worse it was a tie game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LOL When did SE turn into a gaggle of sopping pussies?

Colts arent winning **** this year, the tie is meaningless. They have the youngest team in the NFL and a new coach. Show them you're going to try and win.

The "try and draw them offsides and burn a TO then actually go for it" thing was lolbad, but the actually going for it was solid.

Hue Jackson is of course supposed to just go for it after the spot debacle. Sneak is 95% to end the game right there.

Brady and Gidgers have been using this for free plays successfully for yeats

[

NW had been moving the ball very well had scored easily multiple times and just mind blowing that instead of trying to even get into FG range with 1min n 2 TOs he decided to ice the punter twice.

Nah - NU scored (I think) on their first three possessions, then did dick for the rest of the game - the second half they never gave the appearance that they had even a slight chance of scoring. I agree with the horrendous TO management, though - even if you don't think you can score you should try.

What drives me more crazy is that they have been running Thorsen out there and he's lousy. They had a good record last year despite their QB play, and he's been a **** sandwich this year - he's Hackenburg II - 6'4'', white and can throw the ball 60 yards. Of course, he has no idea where it's going, and he's got that great quality of throwing everything, including a 3-yard swing pass at a gazillion miles an hour. But he LOOKS like a QB. Supposedly, we had a guy transfer in who is actually capable, so wait til next year.....

Add - he started 8/8 in the first quarter. Rest of the way he was 8/19. NU had a total of 97 yards of offense in the last 3 quarters. After the first two minutes of the second quarter they were shut out.

MM MD

The Colts coach (Frank Reich) makes a neutral, perhaps slightly - EV aggressive decision and gets blasted for it because it didnt work out. Hue Jackson throws away 1/4 of a win by punting the ball on 4th and ONE INCH with the other team having no timeouts and 1:40 on the clock - nobody gives a ****. Everything is ****ing stupid.

Colts coach mismanaged the time leading up to the go for it attempt. He shouldn't have left himself so little and it suggests he wasn't thinking ahead. Wasting the timeout with the attempt to get Houston to jump off sides was awful and again it suggests he wasn't thinking ahead.

Good job being aggressive. Bad job, poor effort at time management.

The people harping on about how hard-count, get the instant 5 yards etc... have absolutely not given any thought to the negatives that occur (such as false starts), particularly given that it actually happened at the death of one of the close games yesterday

cmon it was not neutral. it was a pretty terrible "we're just not into that (tying over losing)" mentality combined with awful execution. given that they wasted a timeout trying to get them offsides then threw the fourth down pass in the middle of the field there was close to no chance of them actually winning the game so it was all downside

of course the hue jackson decision was also terrible. didnt know about it since i have no desire to watch a browns/raiders late game

Actually the browns/raiders game was quite awesome. I just didn't like the Colts play call, going for it was fine.

I don't think anyone who is saying it was fine or slighty -EV has done the numbers. They were 30 yards away from long FG range! The Colts needed to gain 16 yards on that play to put themselves in the same situation as the Texans would be in had the try failed.

When they go for it and make it the game is still likely going to end in a tie an awful lot. It wasn't guaranteed tie vs. win/loss, it was guaranteed tie vs. extremely likely tie but with win and loss chances increased with loss increased by more than win.

Colts win % is 0 if they punt. Pro Football Reference win % calculator gives the Colts a 55% chance of winning by going for it on 4th and 4 from their own 43 with 0:24 left in OT. Going for it is an increase in win % of 55. Easy go for it.

Titans went for it in a very similar spot against the Eagles instead of being in a spot where they could go for the tie and hope they didn't lose, got it, and won. Their decision was correct as well.

Don't be results oriented.

I recognize the post is trolling, but is that seriously what the win% calculator spits out? 55% is a generous number for converting the first down let alone parlaying it with another 30 yards in 20 seconds then making a long field goal

Current search:
Overtime0:24 remaining, tie game, ball at team 43, 4th down & 4 to go

Win Probability: 55.19%



Not trolling. Why would "here is the math the calculator spits out and it says it's huge increase in win % to go for it. Also, another team was in a similar spot when they passed on "hope we can hold on for a tie", got it, won, and everyone is recognizing that it was also a good decision so it seems like people are just being results oriented just because the Colts ended up losing" be trolling?

I went to the calculator because it seemed like a +ev decision to go for it to me but I wanted to see. It spit out 55% and I was surprised it was that high so I did it again and it spit out the same. Thought it was interesting so I posted. It's possible that their calculator struggles to properly account for tie scenarios though which could alter how much of a good decision it is? I'm perfectly willing to change my tune if it turns out I'm misunderstanding the data or the calculator doesn't handle this situation well.

thought it was some type of trolling which ignored that a tie is an outcome that is better than a loss.

55% to win just doesnt pass the common sense test. like I said, it seems like that is at best the chance of simply converting a 4th and 4 let alone gaining another 30 yards and kicking a long FG in 25 seconds

What's the probability that Reich wasn't considering any of that at all and just figured ties are a pain in the ass and didn't want to do any extra math for the rest of the season?

Ah, na a tie is certainly better than a loss. I agree that it's way higher than I thought it would be and the more I think on it the more I think it likely that I'm misunderstanding the output or it doesn't handle this particular scenario well?

Luck drew the Texans offside at least three times yesterday.

This is probably right lol. Some form of "WE PLAY TO WIN THE GAME NOT TO NOT LOSE!"

yeah that calculator is glitching. changed the score to colts down by 1 and it says 16% of winning if you go for it

https://www.pro-football-reference.c...=4&yds_to_go=4

also given game flow, colts offense is going to be better than what the calc spits out. (also vinatieri). so say 20% win.

https://www.pro-football-reference.c...1&yds_to_go=10

says tie is 58% here. I'll call it 56% cause of game flow

so .20*1 + .56*.5 = ev of .48 going for it vs. .5*.96 (houston has to have some small equity).

might even be +EV. Also have to take into account wins are worth more than twice as much as a tie. I like the call.

edit: worth noting that Colts had a timeout and the Texans didn't. another slight skew in favor of going for it

Thanks GBP

It's just a more complicated situation because the tie figures in so prominently (a lot of the time with that calculator you'd be dealing with very binary W/L situations, or situations in regulation where even if OT is a possibility, the tie is a distant and still unlikely outcome).

I mean even if you ignore the loss chances, you're talking about going from an almost assured 1/2 win (the tie) to 55% of a win (the EV of making it) by going for it. Once you figure in the odds of losing once you get stopped, it makes zero sense. Of course at this point in the season you still have variance-embracing meta considerations like "our team sucks and either this daring move might inspire them and start an unlikely winning streak, or just earn us a better draft pick" that might make some sense.

I don't think ties behave like .5 wins with the playoff format (one obvious example: the classic 9-7 or 10-6 three way tie. 8-7-1 and 9-6-1 are real ugly in those spots). with the wildcard it's important to hit 9, 10, (and rarely, 11) win totals

no, the 16% win probability the calc gives is a win probability. The conversion probability isn't known (I'm guessing it's like 45%?)

also that makes no sense. How can you have an EV of only .2 if you convert 100%. You'd be basically* freerolling (.5 + freeroll)


*watt

**** I honestly never even thought about that...