Welcome to PatsFans.com

Denver again helped by refs....

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by FloridaPatsFan, Dec 25, 2006.

  1. FloridaPatsFan

    FloridaPatsFan Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2005
    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Did anyone else notice how the calls were absolutely ridiculous in last nights game with the Bengals?

    What is it with the league and thier blatant support of the Bronco's?

    I feel bad for the Bengals. They had to overcome the Bronco's in Denver and the Refs and lost because of a pitiful snap.

    And the Bronco's who have long been noted to be a dirty team by everyone else in this league had a game earlier this year that went to overtime and the Bronco's had ZERO penalties the whole game which is the 1st time a team has not been penalized an entire game plus overtime in the history of the NFL.

    Bengal fans, we feel your pain today.
     
  2. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    42,390
    Likes Received:
    545
    Ratings:
    +1,751 / 78 / -77

    Disable Jersey



    It's Christmas. Could you kindly give us a break from the stupidity? There's only about a 43% success rate with 2 point conversions. There's well over a 90% success rate with PAT's. That Coin toss you're pointing to is 50/50. Statistically, the Bengals did the right thing.
     
  3. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    I thought the Colts got all the calls from the refs.
     
  4. PatsFaninAZ

    PatsFaninAZ In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4,097
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    Well, I think a great coach will do things by the numbers. Most coaches think there are only two numbers that matter here. A = Chance that you'll score on a two point conversion. B = Chance that you'll win in overtime.

    The tendency is to think that if A is greater than B, you should go for two. That would be a serious mistake, and the difference between a good coach and a great coach.

    There are at least two other variables here.

    C = The chance you'll miss the extra point.

    D = The chance that Denver will try to score with their remaining 40 seconds.

    E = The chance of recovering an onside kick after a failed after touchdown conversion (whether 1 or 2 point try) and scoring.

    D is a bit esoteric. A team at home will play differently depending on whether or not it is losing or tied. It's not accurate to say that by going for 2 Cinci would have been going for the "win." They would have been going for the lead. There was still time left in the game. There was still a kick off, defense to played, and I think Denver had timeouts. If the game had been tied there, Denver actually would have been more conservative on their last drive, depending on the result of the kick off.

    Anyway, as said, D is esoteric. But going back to A, B, and C, the proper way to judge that call is to ask not whether A is greater than B, but to ask whether A plus E is greater than B minus C

    If you think you have a 40 percent chance of making a two point conversion and a 40 percent chance of winning in overtime, you go for 2 every time, because C is always a number greater than zero and so is E.

    (Note, though, that E is a constant in some equations, because the chance of recovering an onside kick and scoring is the same whether or not you miss a one or a two.)

    Bottom line for me is that if I thought I had above a 40 percent chance of making the 2 points, I would have gone for it.
     
  5. SoCal Bong

    SoCal Bong Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,325
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Well said DI! Merry Christmas to you! and everyone here!
     
  6. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    42,390
    Likes Received:
    545
    Ratings:
    +1,751 / 78 / -77

    Disable Jersey


    Apology? You mean you expect to issue one for your asinine post, right? Shall we run the numbers for you, one more time, since reading seems to be a problem with you?

    PAT's are converted at a rate higher than 90%. Two point conversions are converted at a rate around 43%. Now, in the real word of general mathematics, 90% (and that's actually lower than the rate, which is 94%) is more than twice as much as 43%.

    Going for the PAT was the right decision. Bad snaps can happen when the quarterback is under center, too. Or did you miss the other aspects of the situation: Palmer had already tossed 2 interceptions in the game and Johnson had already fumbled for the 3rd time in as many games?

    Oops... I guess you conveniently omitted them, huh?
     
  7. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    42,390
    Likes Received:
    545
    Ratings:
    +1,751 / 78 / -77

    Disable Jersey


    Hey, slick.... my comments couldn't possibly have "as usual" destroyed the day we are celebrating. I haven't been here long enough for that to happen. And, I'm pretty sure that a fair number of people would note that you took the occasion of Christmas eve and Christmas day, after a Patriots win, to knock not only the Patriots O.C. after a brilliant game plan, but the Bengals coaching staff after they did the right thing. What's offensive is your constant harping of your supposed knowledge when you seem to have none. As I've said before, you don't know things that middle school football players know. Numbers don't tell everything? In other words, you're just pulling your comment out of your ass because you having nothing to back up your ridiculous assertion. The quarterback, running back and top receiver (Jackson had also fumbled) had all shown themselves quite capable of turning the ball over. 94% is a lot more likely to be successful than 43%.
     
  8. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    42,390
    Likes Received:
    545
    Ratings:
    +1,751 / 78 / -77

    Disable Jersey

    You didn't withhold from saying anything:

    So, now that we see you're a liar, let's continue.


    No, genius, they didn't do the WRONG thing. As people have tried to explain to you before, sometimes you can do the right thing and it doesn't work. Or, to put this in a more hyperbolic context, if I jump in the river to save a drowning person but fail in the rescue, I still didn't do the wrong thing, and contacting Washington D.C. for help rather than jumping in and making an effort does not suddenly become the thing that should have been done.


    You don't deserve any apology, and you're not going to get one. My "attack" in my first post was on the stupidity of second guessing someone who takes the 94% success rate option over the 43% success rate option. And, it was a comment that got a "well said", you may recall. My second post, AGAIN, was not a personal attack, but rather an attack on your asinine post, which I specifically stated. You then accused me of making personal attacks, which I hadn't. So, since you had decided to play "woe is me" again, I noted that you were pulling your comments out of your ass. I'll stand by that and offer to send you a tube of Preparation H should you have need of it.

    Trying to claim that the Bengals were wrong for taking the route that allows them to keep playing 19 times out of 20 rather than taking the route that has them as losers more than half the time is stupid. You, personally, may have the temperament to take the loss there, but most coaches like to keep their jobs and plan accordingly. Somehow, I feel confident that most people would agree with me on this. And my attacks on your opinions are PRECISELY what's called for in the back and forth of a message board.
     
  9. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    42,390
    Likes Received:
    545
    Ratings:
    +1,751 / 78 / -77

    Disable Jersey


    Actually, you were threatening me. However, as usual, you veiled them, so I deleted that part of my post even before you replied. Nonetheless, you did read it, so consider yourself warned regarding future threats against me.


    Look, from what I've seen of your posts, you are, in fact, stupid and asinine, at least when it comes to football and politics. Nonetheless, I wasn't attacking you personally, and I even flat out stated that I was attacking your post in my second response. If I were attacking you personally, I'd stand behind my comments and proudly defend them.


    No, your comment is still stupid. Again, 94% chance to keep playing versus a 57% chance you lose. People are entitled to play whichever odds they chose. But, when you play the odds that are almost certain to succeed and lose, you still didn't make the wrong play. Logic says you take the proper percentage. So, let's break it down:


    94% chance of tying = 6% chance of losing
    43% chance of winning = 57% chance of losing

    Now, even if you continue playing odds after that, it's still going to favor the PAT.

    50% chance on the coin flip.


    Here are some numbers for you, Chief:

    Total no. of overtime games (1974–2003)
    365
    Both teams had at least one possession
    261 (72 %)
    Team won toss and won game
    189 (52 %)
    Team lost toss and won game
    160 (44 %)
    Team won toss and drove for winning score
    102 (28 %)
    Games ending in a tie
    15 (5 %)

    Overtime games in 2002
    26
    Both teams had at least one possession
    15 (58 %)
    Team won toss and won game
    16 (62 %)
    Team lost toss and won game
    9 (35 %)
    Team won toss and drove for winning score
    10 (38 %)
    Games ending in a tie
    1 (3 %)

    Overtime games in 2003
    23
    Both teams had at least one possession
    16 (70 %)
    Team won toss and won game
    12 (52 %)
    Team lost toss and won game
    11 (48 %)
    Team won toss and drove for winning score
    6 (26 %)
    Games ending in a tie
    0 (0%)

    So, 94% chance you go to overtime. Once in overtime, statistically, you're going to get a chance to get the football for the win. In the 2003 season, the number of wins and losses based upon the coin flip were essentially even, 12-11. You can feel free to look up more recent years, this is just from the first site I found. The odds seem to say that both teams will likely get the ball and far less than 57% of the overtime games ended with the coin toss resulting in the team that won it scoring on its first possession.

    Again, the Bengals weren't wrong and your argument claiming they were was stupid.

    Oh, yeah.... you still lied about not attacking the O.C., so you might want to toss out an apology.
     
  10. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    42,390
    Likes Received:
    545
    Ratings:
    +1,751 / 78 / -77

    Disable Jersey

    Oh, I forgot something:


    The thread, started by the O.P., was about the screw job the O.P. felt the Bengals got regarding the officiating. You, as is your wont, chose to attempt to hijack the thread in the very next post, by completely ignoring the point of the O.P. in favor of an attack on someone's playcalling. The very next post, and only the third of the thread, was me calling you out for that stupidity. There was no "good pro and con debate", so do stop lying about what happened. It's pathetic, especially on Christmas.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>