For those still confused about the 2-pt call

[CWR]

There has to be a feel for the game and momentum factor.

Going for 2 after the offense had been shaky all game was a terrible decision.

Analytics aside, if we were going to go for 2 it should've been after the next td. At that point we'd have had back to back drives of success and the offense rolling.

I like the analytics aspect of the game, but it doesnt factor in all the necessary context. If we were to plug it into some type of ai program which compiled the entire game id wager the decision would be to kick.

 

[HungryLion]

Analytics don't win football games. Men do.

Men do math

Honestly it’s fine to either go for it or to kick. Depending on factors such as your offense, their defense, the psychology of your team, etc.

There was nothing Inherently wrong with going for 2 there.

The problem is none of us trust Schottenheimer to make that call because he’s been a bad coach so far with a losing record.

If it was a Super Bowl winning coach, a lot of people wouldn’t second guess them going for it.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I hope this helps you understand.

I didn’t like it but I understood it. Especially supposedly a good offense.

We ask him to be aggressive and then get mad when he does it.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

There has to be a feel for the game and momentum factor.

Going for 2 after the offense had been shaky all game was a terrible decision.

Analytics aside, if we were going to go for 2 it should've been after the next td. At that point we'd have had back to back drives of success and the offense rolling.

I like the analytics aspect of the game, but it doesnt factor in all the necessary context. If we were to plug it into some type of ai program which compiled the entire game id wager the decision would be to kick.

The offense was on a roll at that time though.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Men do math

Honestly it’s fine to either go for it or to kick. Depending on factors such as your offense, their defense, the psychology of your team, etc.

There was nothing Inherently wrong with going for 2 there.

The problem is none of us trust Schottenheimer to make that call because he’s been a bad coach so far with a losing record.

If it was a Super Bowl winning coach, a lot of people wouldn’t second guess them going for it.

For me it’s him doing that and then weeks ago playing scared against Ravens. He has zero identity and this team doesn’t as well. Be aggressive or don’t but you can’t play the middle.

 

[HungryLion]

So when making calls like this. There is both objective data and there are subjective factors.

The analytics is looking at objective data from thousands of past football games. It’s important to have this information to weigh into your decision.

That said. There are also subjective factors. The weather, your team, the opposing team, player matchups, who your kicker is, etc.

A good coach should use both the analytics AND the subjective factors together to ultimately make their decision.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong for going for 2 there. I also don’t think kicking the xp would be bad either. Depending on other factors I previously mentioned.

Problem is. We don’t have a good head coach that any of us trust. So we are going to question everything at this point.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Men do math

Honestly it’s fine to either go for it or to kick. Depending on factors such as your offense, their defense, the psychology of your team, etc.

There was nothing Inherently wrong with going for 2 there.

The problem is none of us trust Schottenheimer to make that call because he’s been a bad coach so far with a losing record.

If it was a Super Bowl winning coach, a lot of people wouldn’t second guess them going for it.

You're not making any sense. if you DO:
"Depending on factors such as your offense, their defense, the psychology of your team, etc"


then WE play it safe and get the point there.

 

[HungryLion]

For me it’s him doing that and then weeks ago playing scared against Ravens. He has zero identity and this team doesn’t as well. Be aggressive or don’t but you can’t play the middle.

I think that’s a fair criticism. Schottenheimer hasn’t earned any faith or benefit of the doubt from us fans. He needs to earn that with wins.

 

[Kevinicus]

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.

So...that doesn't help your argument. Kind of goes against it actually. Your way REQUIRES more of that offense you don't trust.

 

[HungryLion]

You're not making any sense. if you DO:
"Depending on factors such as your offense, their defense, the psychology of your team, etc"


then WE play it safe and get the point there.

I make perfect sense. Those factors are subjective. Perfectly reasonable people can disagree on whether to trust the cowboys offense there or not.

You could say “they’ve been playing bad so far. So just kick it”.

You could say “they are one of the best offenses in the league. So let’s let them try and win it for us”.

Both reasonable takes IMO

 

[Kevinicus]

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

And more often than the other option you will lose. You want to refuse to use the tool altogether.

 

[Kevinicus]

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

It 100% does.

 

[Kevinicus]

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.

That makes even less sense.

 

[Kevinicus]

There has to be a feel for the game and momentum factor.

Going for 2 after the offense had been shaky all game was a terrible decision.

Analytics aside, if we were going to go for 2 it should've been after the next td. At that point we'd have had back to back drives of success and the offense rolling.

I like the analytics aspect of the game, but it doesnt factor in all the necessary context. If we were to plug it into some type of ai program which compiled the entire game id wager the decision would be to kick.

They just got a stop with a goalline stop and drove 99.5 yards for a score with relative ease...exactly how much better momentum are you expecting?

The offense has to perform in ANY scenario you want to win.

 

[gtb1943]

The offense was on a roll at that time though.

that is another thing analytics does not measure
its factors like that which preclude it from being the deciding factor
knowing the odds (which in the end is what analytics really is) is just one factor in making a decision

 

[gtb1943]

It 100% does.

its another set of data and that is all
you seem to think its some kind of God

 

[ghst187]

Analytically, it was the correct call. But, situationally it was dumb at the time. The offense wasn’t very good that game and two EP’s was much easier than converting one two-point conversion out of two. It is playing for OT either way, no reason to go for two in that instance.

I disagree. Because we went for two and then got the ball back down by 8, we didnt know whether to push the tempo to score again in case we dont get thr two point conversion afterwards amd therefore need yet another possession, or if we do get it, then we leave the opposing team tons of time on the clock to go kick a fg and win. If we kick the xp, then we can run the clock out for the final td drive and then make the decision to go for two to win or kick the xp for OT knowing there’s hardly any time left for tampa to go down and get a fg afterwards. It changed the calculus for our last possession play calling out of our favor.

 

[Kevinicus]

its another set of data and that is all
you seem to think its some kind of God

Not in the least bit true. I never said to ignore everything else.

The people stubbornly fighting against it are doing so, not out of logic or reason, but because they're unwilling to open their minds to something that goes against what they have always just accepted. They want to trash a useful tool because it suggests something that doesn't fit with what's comfortable.

People can disagree with the decision based on some subjective factors (though I haven't seen good ones provided for last Tbursday), but to say it doesn't make sense or is dumb is quite frankly idiotic.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

And more often than the other option you will lose. You want to refuse to use the tool altogether.

No use it to give you data points. But you have time understand the flow of the game, the context and situation

In this case, I would not have done it...

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

I make perfect sense. Those factors are subjective. Perfectly reasonable people can disagree on whether to trust the cowboys offense there or not.

You could say “they’ve been playing bad so far. So just kick it”.

You could say “they are one of the best offenses in the league. So let’s let them try and win it for us”.

Both reasonable takes IMO

And yet...coach and Dak threw the ball out of bounds in 2 seconds on 3rd and short for the TYD and (likely) win.

that's NOT "best offense in the league".

So...no...you aren't making any sense.