PostGame Thread 2024 OFFICIAL POSTGAME: Pats lose to the Jags 32-16, fall to 1-6

[Ring 6]

I want to specifically highlight this part because you keep regurgitating it like you think that it hasn't sunk in.

You way did not give us time to do what you said it would. You saw how it unfolded. It didn't work. It literally did not work, despite you arguing that it gives us the best chance.

Of course it did. It let us know we needed 2 scores. The fact that we sucked doesnt change that it was the best decision.
We needed 3 scores. My way we at least knew it.

 

[festy1986]

Going on the first TD gives you the opportunity to play those 9 minutes knowing you need 2 more scores (if you miss). Waiting makes you entire game plan about 1 scores enough and when you miss the 2 it wasn’t.

And my way keeps the game a one possession game AND still gives you time to score twice.

So you disagree with that?

 

[festy1986]

Of course it did. It let us know we needed 2 scores. The fact that we sucked doesnt change that it was the best decision.
We needed 3 scores. My way we at least knew it.

See my above post. I ended your argument with a pretty bad fatality. Thanks for the chuckle.

 

[Ring 6]

Incorrect. The situation they was in was down 9 with a chance to make it 8.

They had 9 minutes to score a TD, a 2 point conversion while saving time for a game winning FG.

Huh? Down 15 and score a TD is he exact same thing as down 9 pending the PAT.

They missed the 2. They missed the 2. Stop pretending they made it.

 

[Ring 6]

And my way keeps the game a one possession game AND still gives you time to score twice.

So you disagree with that?

It does not make it a 1 possession game because you used the first score to find out if you could make the 2. That is exactly, and completely the point.

 

[festy1986]

Huh? Down 15 and score a TD is he exact same thing as down 9 pending the PAT.

They missed the 2. They missed the 2. Stop pretending they made it.

Stop pretending that missing the 2 means they would have missed it had they waited for their second chance. It's made up fantasy.

 

[Ring 6]

And my way keeps the game a one possession game AND still gives you time to score twice.

So you disagree with that?

It doesn’t. Because you will be playing for a game tying 8 point score, having fooled yourself into believing you could tie.
When you get the 2 point conversion settled on the first TD you have to play for the 2 scores you actually need.

 

[festy1986]

It does not make it a 1 possession game because you used the first score to find out if you could make the 2. That is exactly, and completely the point.

So to be clear. Kicking the PAT doesn't make it a one possession game? We're not down by 8?

So in my scenario we kick the PAT and we're down 8 with the same 9 minutes left you keep telling me is plenty of time to score two more times.

So why is it you can argue that we have 9 minutes left to score twice with the missed 2 point conversion but you won't agree that in my scenario we have 9 minutes to score twice while also having it as a one possession game?

 

[Ring 6]

Stop pretending that missing the 2 means they would have missed it had they waited for their second chance. It's made up fantasy.

It does.
They could have gone on either td. They missed it.

You can’t analyze which is a better strategy by changing the result of the 2.

 

[festy1986]

It doesn’t. Because you will be playing for a game tying 8 point score, having fooled yourself into believing you could tie.
When you get the 2 point conversion settled on the first TD you have to play for the 2 scores you actually need.

You're making this up. You can argue that they are settling cause it's a one point game while also arguing that missing the 2 point conversion didn't change the rest of the game.

 

[festy1986]

It does.
They could have gone on either td. They missed it.

You can’t analyze which is a better strategy by changing the result of the 2.

My way allows for a TD, a missed 2 point conversion and a game winning FG.

Your way demands a TD and a FG.

 

[Ring 6]

So to be clear. Kicking the PAT doesn't make it a one possession game? We're not down by 8?

So in my scenario we kick the PAT and we're down 8 with the same 9 minutes left you keep telling me is plenty of time to score two more times.

So why is it you can argue that we have 9 minutes left to score twice with the missed 2 point conversion but you won't agree that in my scenario we have 9 minutes to score twice while also having it as a one possession game?

It fools you into thinking it’s a one possession game, which is the problem because you fail the 2.

9 minutes is time to score twice when you know you have to score twice. It’s much harder to score twice in 9 minute when you are playing to score once because you think it’s a one possession game.

 

[Ring 6]

My way allows for a TD, a missed 2 point conversion and a game winning FG.

Your way demands a TD and a FG.

Um that’s the same thing.

Can you simply not understand that a game plan is different when you are down 9 instead of 8?
This is the point. You have to conserve time, you have to play more aggressively if you need 2 scores.
That is why you try the 2 the first time so you know whether 1 TD is enough.

 

[festy1986]

It fools you into thinking it’s a one possession game, which is the problem because you fail the 2.

9 minutes is time to score twice when you know you have to score twice. It’s much harder to score twice in 9 minute when you are playing to score once because you think it’s a one possession game.

How many times are you going to keep saying it fools you?

I've understood your point the entire time. I disagree with it.

There's no way of predicting that had they kicked the PAT they would of missed the 2 point conversion on the second TD and your assertion that we know they would because they did the first time is ridiculous.

Again, you're rebuttal to that is they would still have 9 minutes to chase the extra points known now they need them.

Ok so back to my argument that they didn't have the time.

Your argument for that is teams score twice in 9 minutes all the time. Yes sir they do.

To which I said, in my scenario they still have time to score twice but they're only down one possession


To which you said no man, they're going to be complacent, conservative and play it fooled into the mindset that they only need one TD and a 2 pointer.


So you can argue there's plenty of time while my argument that there's plenty of time is denied.

Your way lost the game. We know that because we saw it. My way we will never know and your assertion earlier that "of course" we do is conjecture, disinformation and frankly a lie. How could we know. It never happened.

 

[Ring 6]

You're making this up. You can argue that they are settling cause it's a one point game while also arguing that missing the 2 point conversion didn't change the rest of the game.

I am going for 2 because I want it to change the game if i miss. Because I have 9 minutes to do something about it.

If you don’t think teams down 8 play to tie and don’t worry about needing to score again if they miss the 2 you don’t watch much football.

 

[festy1986]

Um that’s the same thing.

Can you simply not understand that a game plan is different when you are down 9 instead of 8?
This is the point. You have to conserve time, you have to play more aggressively if you need 2 scores.
That is why you try the 2 the first time so you know whether 1 TD is enough.

I understand perfectly well that the game plan is different. That was my argument the entire time.

Because they were down 2 possessions the whole game changed and not for the better.

 

[festy1986]

I am going for 2 because I want it to change the game if i miss. Because I have 9 minutes to do something about it.

If you don’t think teams down 8 play to tie and don’t worry about needing to score again if they miss the 2 you don’t watch much football.

My way doesn't prevent any of that. You haven't proved it one bit.

My way still allows for the TD and FG to happen and your argument that it doesn't is only because you don't want it to.

 

[Ring 6]

How many times are you going to keep saying it fools you?

I've understood your point the entire time. I disagree with it.

There's no way of predicting that had they kicked the PAT they would of missed the 2 point conversion on the second TD and your assertion that we know they would because they did the first time is ridiculous.

Again, you're rebuttal to that is they would still have 9 minutes to chase the extra points known now they need them.

Ok so back to my argument that they didn't have the time.

Your argument for that is teams score twice in 9 minutes all the time. Yes sir they do.

To which I said, in my scenario they still have time to score twice but they're only down one possession


To which you said no man, they're going to be complacent, conservative and play it fooled into the mindset that they only need one TD and a 2 pointer.


So you can argue there's plenty of time while my argument that there's plenty of time is denied.

Your way lost the game. We know that because we saw it. My way we will never know and tour asserion earlier that "of course" we do is conjecture, disinformation and frankly a lie. How could we know. It never happened.

Money didn’t lose the game, the patriots defense did.

Look we are talking about whether it is a better decision to get the 2 pointer out of the way on the first TD or the second from a strategic standpoint. That is the discussion.

Whether you choose to do it on the first or second you can’t taint the data of what is a better strategy by saying if you do it your way you miss it but if you do it my way maybe you make it.
You are taking the same play and either running it the first time or the second time.
The 1 is easy. The 2 is hard. Get the hard one out of the way so you know your chances better. Simple as that.

If you can’t get that I dint know how many more ways I can get through to you so you understand it.

 

[festy1986]

Money didn’t lose the game, the patriots defense did.

Look we are talking about whether it is a better decision to get the 2 pointer out of the way on the first TD or the second from a strategic standpoint. That is the discussion.

Whether you choose to do it on the first or second you can’t taint the data of what is a better strategy by saying if you do it your way you miss it but if you do it my way maybe you make it.
You are taking the same play and either running it the first time or the second time.
The 1 is easy. The 2 is hard. Get the hard one out of the way so you know your chances better. Simple as that.

If you can’t get that I dint know how many more ways I can get through to you so you understand it.

They didn't have the time. If you're arguing they did then unfortunately you're wrong. You saw it play out.

 

[Ring 6]

I understand perfectly well that the game plan is different. That was my argument the entire time.

Because they were down 2 possessions the whole game changed and not for the better.

It changed because they missed and since they weren’t getting the 2 it’s good for them that they knew.
You are still arguing they couldn’t convert the 2 but should have played like they could.