Hawkeye0202
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 23,411
- Reaction score
- 43,096
Kudos to one poster here ( not sure who ) for nailing this 100%
Kudos to one poster here ( not sure who ) for nailing this 100%
That's an interesting take. I thought it was a mistake at the time he did it.
That was me, thanks.Kudos to one poster here ( not sure who ) for nailing this 100%
Except for the fact that it was absolutely the right call, for exactly the reason MM gave.It was a mistake and its still is a mistake.
That's an interesting take. I thought it was a mistake at the time he did it.
Yep. You sold me. I didn’t think much about it yesterday because beer.That was me, thanks.
I hate when people say an 8-point deficit is a "one-score game." It's not. There's about a 50% chance it's a one-score game and a 50% chance it's a two-score game: you just don't know which.
Relatedly, a 7-point deficit is about 98% one-score game and 2% two-score game. We all treat that as 100/0, but there's a game or two a year where we remember that it isn't.
Kudos to one poster here ( not sure who ) for nailing this 100%
Thanks for the explanation MM, but it was still stupid.
For him to try and rationalize it is pathetic.
The Campo move is really dumb. But this one wasn't.I still do. It is the same thinking that Campo did on US Thanksgiving in 2001 I believe it was when he was down 16 and kicked a XP instead of going for two claiming it was easier to score 3 times than 2 TDs and 2 2pt conversions. I get his thinking but it seems to me it is easier to have to score once in 4 minutes than 2x. We won and that is all that matters, but that does not make the decision any less puzzling.
It is easier, but he wanted to get the two point make or miss over with then gameplan from there. You needed a two one way or the other.I still do. It is the same thinking that Campo did on US Thanksgiving in 2001 I believe it was when he was down 16 and kicked a XP instead of going for two claiming it was easier to score 3 times than 2 TDs and 2 2pt conversions. I get his thinking but it seems to me it is easier to have to score once in 4 minutes than 2x. We won and that is all that matters, but that does not make the decision any less puzzling.
Thanks for the explanation MM, but it was still stupid.
For him to try and rationalize it is pathetic.
Yeah, that was pretty terrible. I loved the first fake punt call: they saw what they wanted and the play was right there. The second one really felt like desperation: they didn't get the look they wanted, but they did it anyway.I would disagree. I think this is a classic case of "analytics" clashing with traditional football thinking. The traditional thinking is you wait. Charlie Weiss was on the radio this morning talking about this very thing and how "everyone knows you wait to go for 2!!" McCarthy is listening to the analytics people on this decision.
I didn't mind that decision at all. Doing the fake punt with a run up the middle was a strange one...
Except for the fact that it was absolutely the right call, for exactly the reason MM gave.