Going For 2

[CashInFist]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

lol that was funny

 

[CashInFist]

Somebody convince me seriously that going for 1 in that scenario was the best plan. Honestly, convince me.

 

[Mondio]

Hey look, an invite to a lesson in futility. Line starts over there

 

[TJV]

I think it is a rigged game by Las Vegas, and when they want to win they almost always do, jmo. Been studying in my mind for decades.

When you post something meant to be funny, you've got to help us out a little: Add a smilie, include JK, or at least put it in italics.

Somebody convince me seriously that going for 1 in that scenario was the best plan. Honestly, convince me.

No. But here's a suggestion: Go to the OP of this thread and read it all the way through. If you're not convinced, consider yourself unconvinced.

 

[Pkrjones]

Somebody convince me seriously that going for 1 in that scenario was the best plan. Honestly, convince me.

We're ALL opinionated AND headstrong... that's why we all love coming here. Our differences keep things fun... no convincing necessary.

 

[adambr2]

Somebody convince me seriously that going for 1 in that scenario was the best plan. Honestly, convince me.

I voted for the 2, but honestly I think it just comes down to which statistics you want to put the most weight on. If we give Crosby a 98% chance of hitting the PAT, and go with the road win percentage in OT of 46%, playing for 1 gives you a 45% chance of winning.

Going for 2 is obviously simply whatever the chances are of getting the 2. I believe the league average for this year is around 47%, which is slightly favorable for the 2. If you took our 2 pt conversion percentage from this year, the 2 is very favorable, but if you used the last 2 years, it wouldn't be, nor if you used our 3rd/4th and 2 percentages.

If you factor in Arizona being possibly caught off guard, or factor in our inexperienced players on offense being the ones to execute the play, it becomes even more murky.

While I agree with you I think there are so many variables in play that it's very difficult to objectively say, 'This is the correct statistical decision.' While we can certainly disagree with it, it's true that in the absence of a clear black and white choice, most coaches are going to go with the safe choice that limits the amount of scrutiny that they'll be subject to if it doesn't work.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

When you post something meant to be funny, you've got to help us out a little: Add a smilie, include JK, or at least put it in italics. No. But here's a suggestion: Go to the OP of this thread and read it all the way through. If you're not convinced, consider yourself unconvinced.

Sadly, I don't think he meant it to be funny - I think he really believes Vegas controls the outcome of NFL games. Somehow I don't think anything will convince him playing for overtime was the right decision, except if they had gone for 2 and not made it, then he probably would agree.

 

[CashInFist]

Sadly, I don't think he meant it to be funny - I think he really believes Vegas controls the outcome of NFL games. Somehow I don't think anything will convince him playing for overtime was the right decision, except if they had gone for 2 and not made it, then he probably would agree.

I truly believe they do. When it all boils down.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

I truly believe they do. When it all boils down.

What does it all boil down to? Your opinion? And how do they go about controlling the outcome - do they buy off the refs or the players? I guess you really believe they could keep this all a big secret and no one would ever find out - right. Just another conspiracy theorist.

 

[Packer Fan in SD]

Well, it is interesting that the only two coaches to make the playoffs 7 years straight had the same situation. Each did the opposite of the other. Neither won. Going for overtime didn't work, and going for broke didn't work. One is a goat to us, the other a genius. Both have the same amount of Super Bowl wins since ours was hired. Both lost this year. But one is a God and the other is detested by some. Interesting.

 

[CashInFist]

What does it all boil down to? Your opinion? And how do they go about controlling the outcome - do they buy off the refs or the players? I guess you really believe they could keep this all a big secret and no one would ever find out - right. Just another conspiracy theorist.

If you were Las Vegas, wouldn't you want to win too? At all costs? In any given situation? I would.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

LOL.....conspiracy, casino's and bookies.....with betting the odds/margins favor the house/bookie, they don't need to fix anything. All they have to do is keep building those new buildings with gamblers money.

As far as sports bookies in general: http://www.gamblingsites.org/sports-betting/beginners-guide/how-bookmakers-make-money/

If I bet on sports, I would worry more about individual athletes throwing games for profit (Pro Tennis) before I would worry about Vegas or any other Sports betting agency rigging games.

 

[Sky King]

If you were Las Vegas, wouldn't you want to win too? At all costs? In any given situation? I would.

Las Vegas is where I live. Thanks for giving this local a good laugh!

 

[TJV]

I truly believe they do. When it all boils down.

How sad for you.

How do you think it works? Does "Vegas" buy off players? Head coaches? Are all the players involved or just a select few? Do you have any evidence to support how you think it works? How long has it been going on? In all that time, why hasn't a disgruntled player decided to get rich by exposing the scandal?

 

[Half Empty]

1. The Ignore button

2. The worst punishment for a troll, especially a new one, is just not to reply.

 

[CashInFist]

How sad for you.

How do you think it works? Does "Vegas" buy off players? Head coaches? Are all the players involved or just a select few? Do you have any evidence to support how you think it works? How long has it been going on? In all that time, why hasn't a disgruntled player decided to get rich by exposing the scandal?

No I have no evidence. It's just what I believe. I didn't mean to upset anyone. Sorry if I did.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Well, it is interesting that the only two coaches to make the playoffs 7 years straight had the same situation. Each did the opposite of the other. Neither won. Going for overtime didn't work, and going for broke didn't work. One is a goat to us, the other a genius. Both have the same amount of Super Bowl wins since ours was hired. Both lost this year. But one is a God and the other is detested by some. Interesting.

The Patriots had to go for 2 at the end of the game though, Belichick should be criticized for not kicking field goals on the two previous drives though.

Once again, regarding the Packers situation there are different results if kicking the extra point or going for 2 was the right decision, depending on which set of data is being used.

 

[Un4GivN]

Well, it is interesting that the only two coaches to make the playoffs 7 years straight had the same situation. Each did the opposite of the other. Neither won. Going for overtime didn't work, and going for broke didn't work. One is a goat to us, the other a genius. Both have the same amount of Super Bowl wins since ours was hired. Both lost this year. But one is a God and the other is detested by some. Interesting.

In what world were these the same situations? The Pats were down by two, they had no choice. The Packers were down by 1 and had a choice. Not even remotely close to the same decision.

One also has 5 straight AFC championship games 3 super bowl appearances. Were two miracle catches in the some of the greatest super bowls of all time away from having 3 in the last 10 years and 7 overall. Also were a mere quarter from PERFECTION. Literally the greatest team of all-time.

The Packers and Patriots success even if you only include the last 10 years is totally in favor of the Patriots. Not to mention if you want to evenly compare. You should compare the first 10 years of each, not the second 10 years of 1 and first 10 of another.

People are just trying to manipulate the scenario to make it seem like the Patriots and Packers are on even ground. Which is not even remotely close to reality.

 

[TJV]

No I have no evidence. It's just what I believe. I didn't mean to upset anyone. Sorry if I did.

It didn't upset me. I'm just curious why someone would believe in something for which they don't have even a scintilla of evidence.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

Well, it is interesting that the only two coaches to make the playoffs 7 years straight had the same situation. Each did the opposite of the other. Neither won. Going for overtime didn't work, and going for broke didn't work. One is a goat to us, the other a genius. Both have the same amount of Super Bowl wins since ours was hired. Both lost this year. But one is a God and the other is detested by some. Interesting.

No, they were not the same situation. McCarthy had the option whether to go for 2 to win the game or kick the PAT and go to overtime. Belichik had no choice but to go for 2 just to try and get to overtime.

 

[Daryl Muellenberg]

No I have no evidence. It's just what I believe. I didn't mean to upset anyone. Sorry if I did.

If that's really what you believe, then why even watch football if the winner of every game is already determined before hand? FYI - Vegas makes enough money on bets that they don't have to rig any games. The payout is fixed at 11/10 odds - in other words in order to win $100 you would have to bet $110 (so the house would get $10 of that bet). Why would they risk doing something illegal when they are making plenty of money legally?

 

[JBlood]

Going for the tie was fine with me, since our power success in 3rd and 4th down situations was only 61%--good for 21st in the league. So I'll take Crosby's sure 1 point over a 60% success rate for 2. I'm sure MM is aware of all these stats. Our defense, which admittedly had played well enough for us to win up to that point, gave up another big play (like the 88 it gave up in the regular season) in O.T. to lose. A truly good defense would have given Rodgers another chance in OT, which would have given us another scenario to debate if he had failed to deliver. Or another chance at a Championship if he had.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Going for the tie was fine with me, since our power success in 3rd and 4th down situations was only 61%--good for 21st in the league.

Also, keep in mind that there is a very big difference in making 2 yards for a first down somewhere on the field VS. picking up 2 of the hardest yards (opponents 2) on the field, for the victory in a very meaningful game. I don't even like using "regular season % of 2 point conversions", since those were attempted under completely different circumstances. Doubt any of them were for the "last play of the game victory". Also guessing that many were to bring a team that was behind by quite a bit, just a bit closer on the scoreboard, which probably meant facing a defense that isn't going to play quite as hard to stop you as AZ would have been playing us.

 

[CashInFist]

If that's really what you believe, then why even watch football if the winner of every game is already determined before hand? FYI - Vegas makes enough money on bets that they don't have to rig any games. The payout is fixed at 11/10 odds - in other words in order to win $100 you would have to bet $110 (so the house would get $10 of that bet). Why would they risk doing something illegal when they are making plenty of money legally?

Point blank, it was that throw by Aaron Rodgers that brought me back. The Dolphins and NFL were both FIRED in my life until that one throw, which I believe is the greatest throw in NFL history.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Point blank, it was that throw by Aaron Rodgers that brought me back. The Dolphins and NFL were both FIRED in my life until that one throw, which I believe is the greatest throw in NFL history.

Welcome back. I think you will enjoy the smell of cheese, brats and beer over that of Fish.

Now go grab yourself a cheese head and stay out of the casino's!