Skip to content
The Browns Board
Theme
  • System
  • Light
  • Dark
  • Login
  • Register
  • Forums
  • Recent
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Donate
  1. Home
  2. The Browns Board
  3. Basic Analytics (And How The Nfl Simply Doesn't Use Them)

Basic Analytics (And How The Nfl Simply Doesn't Use Them)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Browns Board
15 Posts 11 Posters 515 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • flyingfooldoug flyingfooldougF One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
    • 4k Posts
    • 728 Reputation
    flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on last edited by
    #5

    It makes a lot of sense. Why play for the tie? I get tired of seeing coaches playing not to lose. If it's winning, play to win!

    Mark OM T 2 Replies Last reply
    Quote Reply
    • flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug

      It makes a lot of sense. Why play for the tie? I get tired of seeing coaches playing not to lose. If it's winning, play to win!

      Mark O Mark OM Very Popular Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
      • 6k Posts
      • 1k Reputation
      Mark OM Mark O wrote on last edited by
      #6

      @flyingfooldoug said:

      It makes a lot of sense. Why play for the tie? I get tired of seeing coaches playing not to lose. If it's winning, play to win!

      But what he did made no sense. he's down 2 scores and he's wasting time and then tries to justify wasting the time. This isn't pickup basketball where if you score you get the ball. He wasted any chance of scoring and then playing defense and using his timeouts to scoring wihtout a lot of time and then having to try an onside kick.

      flyingfooldougF 1 Reply Last reply
      Quote Reply
      • Mark OM Mark O

        @flyingfooldoug said:

        It makes a lot of sense. Why play for the tie? I get tired of seeing coaches playing not to lose. If it's winning, play to win!

        But what he did made no sense. he's down 2 scores and he's wasting time and then tries to justify wasting the time. This isn't pickup basketball where if you score you get the ball. He wasted any chance of scoring and then playing defense and using his timeouts to scoring wihtout a lot of time and then having to try an onside kick.

        flyingfooldoug flyingfooldougF One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
        • 4k Posts
        • 728 Reputation
        flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on last edited by
        #7

        @mark-o said:

        But what he did made no sense. he's down 2 scores and he's wasting time and then tries to justify wasting the time. This isn't pickup basketball where if you score you get the ball. He wasted any chance of scoring and then playing defense and using his timeouts to scoring wihtout a lot of time and then having to try an onside kick.

        I agree, he fucked up on the clock. I was referring to the general idea of playing the odds that give you a better chance to win. Gb should have gone for the 2. I have never been a fan of playing to tie unless it's a FG to keep you in it.

        Mark OM 1 Reply Last reply
        Quote Reply
        • flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug

          @mark-o said:

          But what he did made no sense. he's down 2 scores and he's wasting time and then tries to justify wasting the time. This isn't pickup basketball where if you score you get the ball. He wasted any chance of scoring and then playing defense and using his timeouts to scoring wihtout a lot of time and then having to try an onside kick.

          I agree, he fucked up on the clock. I was referring to the general idea of playing the odds that give you a better chance to win. Gb should have gone for the 2. I have never been a fan of playing to tie unless it's a FG to keep you in it.

          Mark O Mark OM Very Popular Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
          • 6k Posts
          • 1k Reputation
          Mark OM Mark O wrote on last edited by
          #8

          @flyingfooldoug said:

          I agree, he fucked up on the clock. I was referring to the general idea of playing the odds that give you a better chance to win. Gb should have gone for the 2. I have never been a fan of playing to tie unless it's a FG to keep you in it.

          I didn't think of GB doing that...but in hindsight and reading some stuff since the game...it would've made sense. They had all the momentum...why not go for the win.

          flyingfooldougF 1 Reply Last reply
          Quote Reply
          • Unsympathetic U Reacting Well Conversation Starter Dedicated Very Popular Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
            • 4k Posts
            • 1k Reputation
            U Unsympathetic wrote on last edited by
            #9

            Andy Reid's coaching career... Is it a performance art piece focused on innovating ways to lose in only the last 2 minutes of every half he coaches? So.. when he wins, he actually loses?

            The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown
            1 Reply Last reply
            Quote Reply
            • Mark OM Mark O

              @flyingfooldoug said:

              I agree, he fucked up on the clock. I was referring to the general idea of playing the odds that give you a better chance to win. Gb should have gone for the 2. I have never been a fan of playing to tie unless it's a FG to keep you in it.

              I didn't think of GB doing that...but in hindsight and reading some stuff since the game...it would've made sense. They had all the momentum...why not go for the win.

              flyingfooldoug flyingfooldougF One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
              • 4k Posts
              • 728 Reputation
              flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug wrote on last edited by
              #10

              @mark-o said:

              I didn't think of GB doing that...but in hindsight and reading some stuff since the game...it would've made sense. They had all the momentum...why not go for the win.

              Right, you're at the 2 and need 2 pts to win. Some of that playing for OT just doesn't make sense.
              1 Reply Last reply
              Quote Reply
              • flyingfooldougF flyingfooldoug

                It makes a lot of sense. Why play for the tie? I get tired of seeing coaches playing not to lose. If it's winning, play to win!

                TexasAg1969 T Conversation Starter Dedicated Reacting Well Very Popular Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
                • 23k Posts
                • 6k Reputation
                T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by
                #11

                @flyingfooldoug said:

                It makes a lot of sense. Why play for the tie? I get tired of seeing coaches playing not to lose. If it's winning, play to win!

                If you clearly have the other team's D worn out or if your team's D is clearly worn out, then going for 2 and the win makes all the sense in the world. Baylor did that in the first overtime against A&M in 2005 for their first win ever in 20 years. A&M had scored something like 3 or 4 straight TDs including the game tier to get into overtime and had scored a TD in overtime. Baylor made the TD and went for broke and made it.

                OldBrownsFanO 1 Reply Last reply
                Quote Reply
                • T TexasAg1969

                  @flyingfooldoug said:

                  It makes a lot of sense. Why play for the tie? I get tired of seeing coaches playing not to lose. If it's winning, play to win!

                  If you clearly have the other team's D worn out or if your team's D is clearly worn out, then going for 2 and the win makes all the sense in the world. Baylor did that in the first overtime against A&M in 2005 for their first win ever in 20 years. A&M had scored something like 3 or 4 straight TDs including the game tier to get into overtime and had scored a TD in overtime. Baylor made the TD and went for broke and made it.

                  OldBrownsFan OldBrownsFanO
                  • 11k Posts
                  • 3k Reputation
                  OldBrownsFanO OldBrownsFan wrote on last edited by
                  #12

                  @texasag1969 said:

                  If you clearly have the other team's D worn out or if your team's D is clearly worn out, then going for 2 and the win makes all the sense in the world. Baylor did that in the first overtime against A&M in 2005 for their first win ever in 20 years. A&M had scored something like 3 or 4 straight TDs including the game tier to get into overtime and had scored a TD in overtime. Baylor made the TD and went for broke and made it.

                  I agree with that. Looking ahead to the overtime you have to think about what gives you the better chance to win. If a defense is worn out or shown little ability to stop the other team's offense than it would be better to go for 2 and the win in regulation versus trying for the win in OT.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  Quote Reply
                  • The Gipper The GipperT In Memoriam Very Popular
                    • 57k Posts
                    • 4k Reputation
                    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
                    #13

                    I need DePodesta to come and explain this to me.

                    bbedwardB 1 Reply Last reply
                    Quote Reply
                    • The GipperT The Gipper

                      I need DePodesta to come and explain this to me.

                      bbedward bbedwardB Conversation Starter Reacting Well Dedicated Very Popular Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
                      • 9k Posts
                      • 1k Reputation
                      bbedwardB bbedward wrote on last edited by
                      #14

                      @the-gipper said:

                      I need DePodesta to come and explain this to me.

                      I heard today on the radio that Sushi and DePodesta are having a press conference today at 12:30 (they said it will be on WTAM 1100 locally, probably on team website and stuff too I'd imagine)

                      Maybe your questions will be answered

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      Quote Reply
                      • poplarbluffman P
                        • 46 Posts
                        • 1 Reputation
                        P poplarbluffman wrote on last edited by
                        #15

                        John Urschel, a backup guard for the Ravens and likely the smartest man in the NFL, including players, coaches, GM's, did research on this topic and said all teams should go for the 2 pt conversion based on mathematical probability

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        Quote Reply

                        Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                        Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                        With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                        Register Login
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        Theme
                        • System
                        • Light
                        • Dark
                        The Browns Board Terms Privacy

                        The Browns Board is an independent fan community. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the Cleveland Browns, Cleveland Cavaliers, Cleveland Guardians, the NFL, NBA, MLB, or any of their affiliates. Team names, logos, and other marks are the property of their respective owners.

                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Forums
                        • Recent
                        • Popular
                        • Users
                        • Donate