For those still confused about the 2-pt call

[Captain43Crash]

So, you'd have confidence in the offense in OT? Not after marching 99.5 yards?

I had very little confidence in our offense even after the long drive. TB played prevent defense during the long drive.

What happened after the long drive? Dak throws a wobbly rocket ball and Ferguson has it bounce of his hands for an Int.

 

[ak47kaehu]

Vegas....

 

[Maverick84]

Analytics don't win football games. Men do.

candidate for Cringiest Post of 2026

holy **** lol

 

[Chocolate Lab]

The problem with analytics is that the game is played by human beings with emotions. And no matter how much mathematicians may wish otherwise, humans are not dice rolls or random numbers.

Anyone who has ever played sports should know that momentum is real.

 

[visionary]

You can’t even compare one to the next on this.

The matchups and situations are entirely different. Regardless of what other teams have done in the past, that tells you nothing about your immediate situation.

Just ridiculous.

It is the same kind of stupidity math geeks fall into like “it is important to stop the pass and not the run” without understanding the situation

Pick up some cherry picked stats and draw a conclusion without understanding situations or context

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

I hope this helps you understand.

So let's get rid of coaches and just have analytics call the plays.

Analytics is a tool. Not a decision maker. You go for kick. And tie the game

 

[Ranching]

The math of the probabilities still works regardless of sample size. But yes, there should be more data. Unfortunately, people are stuck in old ideas they don't want to look at the reality of that probabilities part, and just want to stick with what they know.

What we know is usually the way to go. There is room for analickings, but if a HC needs to look them up, he shouldn't be head coach.

 

[kskboys]

It is the same kind of stupidity math geeks fall into like “it is important to stop the pass and not the run” without understanding the situation

Pick up some cherry picked stats and draw a conclusion without understanding situations or context

Can't be stated any better.

 

[gtb1943]

no mathematical formula is ever going to do better than a coach who understands both the game and the situation.

It is a CRUTCH for the weak and incompetent

 

[Coogiguy03]

Vegas....

Same thing I said lol

 

[gtb1943]

no formula can deal with the situation as it is at that moment
who is playing well and who is not on both teams
weather and field conditions
is the crowd into it
so many factor no analytics can ever deal with

 

[diamonddelts]

The problem with analytics is that the game is played by human beings with emotions. And no matter how much mathematicians may wish otherwise, humans are not dice rolls or random numbers.

Anyone who has ever played sports should know that momentum is real.

Exactly. You can tell the guys who never played football or any other sport on here. They are the ones pushing this analytics nonsense.

 

[diamonddelts]

candidate for Cringiest Post of 2026

holy **** lol

Let us know when emotionless bots play football. Then your post will make sense.

 

[diamonddelts]

The math of the probabilities still works regardless of sample size. But yes, there should be more data. Unfortunately, people are stuck in old ideas they don't want to look at the reality of that probabilities part, and just want to stick with what they know.

This crap does not apply to football games with emotions, injuries, off the field issues, crowd noise, weather, etc.

 

[csirl]

14pts down, you could understand going for 2pts on the 2nd TD if you thought you were likely to lose in OT, but doing it on the 1st TD is dumb. You're taking a chance at a point in time where it isnt necesary to do so.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

I hope this helps you understand.

Did you factor in "Cowboys suck" into the meta AI machines tell us exactly what to do equations?

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

The math of the probabilities still works regardless of sample size. But yes, there should be more data. Unfortunately, people are stuck in old ideas they don't want to look at the reality of that probabilities part, and just want to stick with what they know.

 

[TNCowboy]

Actually, my math was a bit off. You have a 75% of converting on one of the attempts, but if you fail on the first, you go to overtime.

Using last year’s season averages:

XP conversion: 96%
2P conversion: 41%

And using 50% chance of winning in overtime (this obviously changes in a real game, but it’s the only baseline we can use).

Strategy 1:
XP * XP * OT = 0.96 * 0.96 * 0.5 = 46%

Strategy 2:
XP * 2P = 0.96 * 0.41 = 39%

Strategy 3:
2P * (XP or 2P). If you convert on the first 2P, you kick to win. If you convert on the second 2P, you go to overtime.
The formula is more complicated, but it’s 52%. Still higher than the others, but not as significant.

Home favorites win more than 50% of their OT games, and Aubrey hasn’t missed a normal XP in 3 years.

Bad assumptions make all of the above a bunch of hot air trying to justify a bad decision.

 

[jaythecowboy]

The notion the Cowboys should play for ot because they don’t trust the offense to get a 2 point conversion is crazy because I would trust that WAY more than I trust the defense to get a stop in overtime.

 

[pansophy]

The math of the probabilities still works regardless of sample size. But yes, there should be more data. Unfortunately, people are stuck in old ideas they don't want to look at the reality of that probabilities part, and just want to stick with what they know.

The strategy is entirely dependent on base rate probability of a 2-pt conversion, and we have already seen evidence of that base rate changing as DCs spend more time preparing for it since teams are doing this.