Riverman, if you miss it the first time and make it the second time for a tie, doesn't that mean you could just kick it twice for the tie (which every coach would do)?

Ok I get it. That is interesting, and actually a gigantic mistake not to do if your reasoning is correct. If anyone would ever start doing it, it would have to be Belichik. Has ANS or anyone ever talked about this?

Sklansky posted it years ago.

Assuming extra points are made 100% the breakeven conversion rate is 38% and change.

Wow, and it only goes down when you factor the kick at like 98% or w/e.

I still feel like the onside kick is the better option. Also depends on how well they return kicks (not as much anymore given new rules) and how well you return/block punts.

Example...against Giants last year I def onside kick because if I get the 3 and out there's a good chance the WOAT punter does something horrible.

Wouldn't that make you less likely to onside kick?

OBVIOUSLY stupid

Anything being debated shouldmt have been brought up in the first place

Not true, there are mouth-breathing ******s that will debate all sorts of things that are perfectly obvious to people with half a brane.

Lol

Clemson QB just took a 3+ second kneeldown on 2nd down, then they threw the ball super high in the air on 4th down to kill the last few seconds.

A+ end of game management.

Nonsense no QB ever takes a 3 second kneeldown. Did the other team start shanking everyone on offense?

Punting to DeSean Jackson at midfield obviously superior.

Didn't see it but college is a little different than the pros/the unwritten rules mean more at the pro level. It's still very uncommon in college but the dis-incentives aren't near as great (and the game, everything in the game, is slower obviously so it's not as impressive). Also, I never said it wasn't a viable strategy just that there were dis-incentives to using it and that it's not obviously stupid (or even necessarily not the best method...).

Slightly off topic but did anybody else read the Nash Equilibrium Run/Pass article in the new espn magazine?

never thought i'd see the words "nash equilibrium" and "espn magazine" in the same sentence before.

What if the Suns' PG had an inner ear infection

3rd and 9, WV completes a 5 yard pass but gets called for a hold.

Declining would make it 4th and 4 for WV from their own 38.
Les Miles accepts the penalty giving WV 3rd and 19.

WTF Les they're going to punt, why give them a chance.

Of course LSU gets the miracle INT because that is just how Les rolls. He's like the Forrest Gump of coaching, blissfully ignorant yet everything always works out somehow.

At this point I think it's safe to assume Les Miles is in possession of the Delorian.

Probably fine/correct especially given LSU's defense.

They've been going that way for a while. Magazine before this had an article on "Fruit Bowl" expected wins in MLB (I think this is the same section that the Nash Equilibrium Run/Pass article was this issue and that it's a regular feature but could be wrong it's kind of a skim and pitch magazine for me), a few back a lot of the Vick stuff was mathy, etc. Heck, look at their basketball coverage which often times amounts to "Hollinger says so".

I know they had one not long back that used "Game Theory" too. Think it was about the Mavs. It's been pretty obvious they're trying to include that stuff (at the expense of good analysis at times imo).

ETA - It's kind of like the Sklansky math of head butts blog. You get a guy who knows numbers and it's kind of cool but being able to put up some #'s lets the article be very shallow (for example head butts effect the ability to get future fights, it's more complex than simply "he can't win on points math says it's a free-roll" but the math articles often fall very short on quality observation...the Hollinger basketball stuff being one of the biggest culprits imo).

hmmmm. to get 10 yds.

You must not be too familiar with Forrest Gump. The dude chased Jennnay his whole life and she only really gave him the time of day because she had a terminal illness then he got stuck being a single dad. **** just worked out for that ******.

Missouri has 280 yards in the first half on the road at #1 Oklahoma. They have punted twice from midfield, trailing by 10 or less, once 4th and 1, once 4th and 5. Touchback both time.

Texas A&M led Okie State 20-3 at half. OSU goes bananas and leads 27-20 with 11:00 to go, and fumbled another sure TD untouched, total fluke. A&M has 4th and 5 at the OSU 40 and punts. Touchback. OSU has a 4:00 79 yards scoring drive, A&M loses by 1

lol @ comparing College football to NFL.

Posting the results of the decision shouldn't be part of what you help prove that something is stupid. The decision should be enough to be included itt

i generally agree, but given that the frequency of touchbacks on such punts is part of what makes it stupid, I thought it was relevant.

well they changed the rules semi recently. the kicking team cant overload the side as much as before. also, if the recieving team touched the ball prior to 10 yards, it was rekick, no the recieving team can catch it wherever. so those stats may not be applicable. i think 10% given recent environment is considered accurate.

WP