Frank reich is horrible

[apballin]

They were playing madden Lastnight, go for it every time

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by apballin

They were playing madden Lastnight, go for it every time

Which is why NFL coaches dont come from Madden.

Colts v ravens in 06. Dungy had Viniteri kick 5 field goals and won. You Never pass up a scoring opportunity.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by JAFF

Which is why NFL coaches dont come from Madden.

Colts v ravens in 06. Dungy had Viniteri kick 5 field goals and won. You Never pass up a scoring opportunity.

The primary reason they won that game was because they held the Ravens to 6 points - not because they kicked field goals. Kick a lot of field goals against a prolific offense and you’ll often lose. Context of the game matters.

For reference 19 teams currently are at 50% or better 4th down conversion rate. Last year 24 teams finished 50% or better. Considering the point differential between a touchdown (with extra point) and a field goal it’s no wonder the analytics often disagree with you.

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by rm1369

The primary reason they won that game was because they held the Ravens to 6 points - not because they kicked field goals. Kick a lot of field goals against a prolific offense and you’ll often lose. Context of the game matters.

For reference 19 teams currently are at 50% or better 4th down conversion rate. Last year 24 teams finished 50% or better. Considering the point differential between a touchdown (with extra point) and a field goal it’s no wonder the analytics often disagree with you.

They gave up. 9 points for 0. Great strategy.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by JAFF

They gave up. 9 points for 0. Great strategy.

Ahh yes, the hindsight defense. Very popular. More teams should employ it - see what the results are then make your decision. But what if I point out games where the 4th down conversion and scoring TDs instead of FGs were the deciding factor? Would you change your mind? Probably not since the question would be which is more likely to occur. I know! We should analyze how likely each event is to occur and how likely they are to contribute to victory using math and a lot of historical data. We could call it analytics or something!! I think we are on to something. This could be extremely valuable for NFL coaches!! Of course hindsight users will always hate it since hindsight has proven to be a superior analysis tool commonly used by NFL fans.

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Ahh yes, the hindsight defense. Very popular. More teams should employ it - see what the results are then make your decision. But what if I point out games where the 4th down conversion and scoring TDs instead of FGs were the deciding factor? Would you change your mind? Probably not since the question would be which is more likely to occur. I know! We should analyze how likely each event is to occur and how likely they are to contribute to victory using math and a lot of historical data. We could call it analytics or something!! I think we are on to something. This could be extremely valuable for NFL coaches!! Of course hindsight users will always hate it since hindsight has proven to be a superior analysis tool commonly used by NFL fans.

People also often don't take into consideration the butterfly effect.

If you lose by 2pts... People point to that first quarter field goal miss as the reason you lost.

When really, if you made the field goal, all subsequent series of events would be different. You actually could've lost the game by 14pts had you made the field goal. Or you could've won by 10pts. We don't know.

[TheMugwump]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

People also often don't take into consideration the butterfly effect.

If you lose by 2pts... People point to that first quarter field goal miss as the reason you lost.

When really, if you made the field goal, all subsequent series of events would be different. You actually could've lost the game by 14pts had you made the field goal. Or you could've won by 10pts. We don't know.

I find this a particularly compelling argument when made by a poster calling himself "ChaosTheory".

Dr. Ian Malcolm would approve.

[Colts And Orioles]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

People also often don't take into consideration the butterfly effect.

If you lose a game by 2 points ...... people point to that first quarter field-goal miss as the reason why you lost the game.

In reality, if you had made that field goal, all subsequent series of events would be different. You actually might have lost the game by 14 points had you made the field goal ...... or you might have won by 10 points ...... we don't know.

o


Excellent citation of the cause-and-effect phenomenon.

The same is true of baseball (and pretty much almost every other sport.) When a base-runner gets caught stealing and the batter then hits a solo home run immediately afterward, many fans will say that he would have hit a 2-run homer if the base-runner had stayed put ...... but if the base-runner had stayed put, the pitcher would have been pitching from the stretch (as opposed to a full windup) and likely would have thrown a different pitch than the one in which produced the home run. And the batter may have been looking for a different pitch than the one in which he homered off of.

So if the runner had stayed at first base, the batter might have hit a 2-run home run ...... or he might have hit an RBI-triple into the gap ...... or he might have grounded into a double play.

o

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by rm1369

Ahh yes, the hindsight defense. Very popular. More teams should employ it - see what the results are then make your decision. But what if I point out games where the 4th down conversion and scoring TDs instead of FGs were the deciding factor? Would you change your mind? Probably not since the question would be which is more likely to occur. I know! We should analyze how likely each event is to occur and how likely they are to contribute to victory using math and a lot of historical data. We could call it analytics or something!! I think we are on to something. This could be extremely valuable for NFL coaches!! Of course hindsight users will always hate it since hindsight has proven to be a superior analysis tool commonly used by NFL fans.

Its not hindsight.

There are only so many scoring chances. There is a clock. Teams that have more takeaways fewer turnovers have more success than their opponents. When a team turns it over on downs when they were in scoring position, it might as well be a fumble or an interception.

There is a time and place for going for it. SD had several chances to score, and they came away with nothing. KC took the ball with good field position, and scored.

A lot of little things add up to a big thing. There is a time and a place for taking a chance. They failed and gave the ball to a prolific offense, in decent field position. Is the charger defense good enough for that risk?

Apparently not.

[Racehorse]

Originally Posted by JAFF

Its not hindsight.

There are only so many scoring chances. There is a clock. Teams that have more takeaways fewer turnovers have more success than their opponents. When a team turns it over on downs when they were in scoring position, it might as well be a fumble or an interception.

There is a time and place for going for it. SD had several chances to score, and they came away with nothing. KC took the ball with good field position, and scored.

A lot of little things add up to a big thing. There is a time and a place for taking a chance. They failed and gave the ball to a prolific offense, in decent field position. Is the charger defense good enough for that risk?

Apparently not.

SD? Okay, boomer