Pretty much everyone in this thread had already concluded it was a 50/50 pick
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Two point conversion decisions
Collapse
X
-
DSG wisdom here. intuitively, going up by 6 made more sense, as the falcons needed a TD whether we were up by 4, 5, or 6.
i don't think that's new school analytics. i think it's what the chart always said. worst-case scenario was that we failed to convert, the falcons got the ball back with 2:19 left, then scored while giving us enough time to get in FG range - realistically that's like a 90 second TD drive. then we manage to get to ATL's 40 in about 45 seconds to kick a game-tying FG with 5 seconds left. then ATL has to win the coin toss and score a TD or stop us and kick an FG for a missed 2PC to bite us in the ass.
odds of getting the 2 points are 50%. especially when you consider how both offenses struggled all night, i think the odds of the above scenario playing out were below 50%.
Comment
-
did doug's decisions backfire in any games besides @ NYG in 2016? he took points off the board to go for 2 in a couple of early games and it worked out. we did fail to get 2 at the end of the baltimore game, but i think that more about doug giving his young QB a chance to win and avoiding injuries in OT since we were already out of the playoffs.
what i like about doug's approach is that he is consistently aggressive instead of picking and choosing where to get aggressive. if you play the odds, you have to do it every time.
i also think he's making some common sense decisions that coaches historically don't make because they don't want to deal with the backlash or possibly get fired.
Comment
-
Originally posted by art vandelay View Posti don't think that's new school analytics. i think it's what the chart always said.
http://www.theredzone.org/Features/T...onversionChartBlue Chip College Football - Coach Your College to the National Championship
Comment
-
Originally posted by art vandelay View PostDSG wisdom here. intuitively, going up by 6 made more sense, as the falcons needed a TD whether we were up by 4, 5, or 6.
i don't think that's new school analytics. i think it's what the chart always said. worst-case scenario was that we failed to convert, the falcons got the ball back with 2:19 left, then scored while giving us enough time to get in FG range - realistically that's like a 90 second TD drive. then we manage to get to ATL's 40 in about 45 seconds to kick a game-tying FG with 5 seconds left. then ATL has to win the coin toss and score a TD or stop us and kick an FG for a missed 2PC to bite us in the ass.
odds of getting the 2 points are 50%. especially when you consider how both offenses struggled all night, i think the odds of the above scenario playing out were below 50%.
KICK THE POINT, MAKE IT 5 POINT GAME, INSTEAD OF GETTING THE TWO, FALCS GET THAT TD AT THE END OF REGULATION, DON'T NEED THE EXTRA POINT, IT'S OVER.Last edited by DEERSPINE GUY; 09-08-2018, 02:51 PM."LIFE IS FULL OF 4TH AND 1 DECISIONS, CHOOSE YOUR NEXT CROSSROADS WISELY.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DEERSPINE GUY View PostUP BY 6 MAKES THEM MAKE THE EXTRA POINT TO WIN, WHICH ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN WITH THE LONGER EXTRA POINT. BEING UP BY 5 DOES NOT, EXTRA POINT IS THEN, WELL, EXTRA AND NOT NEEDED.
KICK THE POINT, MAKE IT 5 POINT GAME, INSTEAD OF GETTING THE TWO, FALCS GET THAT TD AT THE END OF REGULATION, DON'T NEED THE EXTRA POINT, IT'S OVER.Blue Chip College Football - Coach Your College to the National Championship
Comment
-
HAHA YEAH. MY ANAL-LYSTICS ON PAGE 67 OF THE ANALBOOK SAID IT WAS TO LATE FOR THAT. BESIDES BORED WATCHING CHUMP KELLY LOSING. POOH IS LIKE A CAR WRECK. YA DON'T WANT TO LOOK BUT YA DO ANYWAY.Last edited by DEERSPINE GUY; 09-08-2018, 03:05 PM."LIFE IS FULL OF 4TH AND 1 DECISIONS, CHOOSE YOUR NEXT CROSSROADS WISELY.
Comment
-
I'm my opinion, and I thought this long before Pederson or even Kelly came to town, is that NFL coaches are far to conservative.
Statistics and analytics have shown for a long time that teams punt and kick far too often when it comes to how those decisions affect their chances to win.
There is always a chance that being aggressive comes back to bite you in the ass, but over the long term it's the smarter way to play. And Pederson has shown that it's a winning way to play.
That being said, I don't think going for 2 on Thursday should even be considered an "aggressive" call. I think most coaches would have made that call because if they convert, the other team needs to score twice to take the lead. If they don't or if they kick it, the other team just needs to score once.Last edited by TerpEagle; 09-08-2018, 06:24 PM.--
Your Retarded
Comment
-
Originally posted by TerpEagle View PostThat being said, I don't think going for 2 on Thursday should even be considered an "aggressive" call. I think most coaches would have made that call because if they convert, the other team needs to score twice to take the lead. If they don't or if they kick it, the other team just needs to score once.
I accept the analysis that two points was marginally advantageous. And I believe thats what the Eagles analytics guy told Doug.
Apologies for continuing this thread.Last edited by Maniac; 09-08-2018, 06:42 PM.Blue Chip College Football - Coach Your College to the National Championship
Comment
-
Originally posted by Maniac View PostSince "go for two" is on Vermeil's venerable chart at +4, I agree its not an aggressive call. But the two score angle is irrelevant because realistically Atlanta needed a TD considering the time left. Score/Onsides kick/score is not a reasonable assumption.
I accept the analysis that two points was marginally advantageous. And I believe thats what the Eagles analytics guy told Doug.
Apologies for continuing this thread.
We came to the conclusion that you had to go for two there b/c that gave you the best advantage overall. But that was just our analysis in the stands at the time. The one thing neither of us considered was the possibility that Atlanta could score quickly.
I'd like to see the analytics on how situations like that work in college.
Gonna watch the game from the televised perspective and see if it's different from the view in the stands.--------
"We choose to go to the moon."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Maniac View PostSince "go for two" is on Vermeil's venerable chart at +4, I agree its not an aggressive call. But the two score angle is irrelevant because realistically Atlanta needed a TD considering the time left. Score/Onsides kick/score is not a reasonable assumption.
I accept the analysis that two points was marginally advantageous. And I believe thats what the Eagles analytics guy told Doug.
Apologies for continuing this thread.--
Your Retarded
Comment
-
Originally posted by TerpEagle View Post
Score 1 is the TD. Score 2 is the XP or conversion.Blue Chip College Football - Coach Your College to the National Championship
Comment
Comment