Started By
Message

re: Going for 2 in that situation.

Posted on 1/23/24 at 3:09 am to
Posted by Diseasefreeforall
Member since Oct 2012
5591 posts
Posted on 1/23/24 at 3:09 am to
quote:

I think the people arguing against it are so caught up in the moment that they don't stop and think 'maybe the people that get paid 10s of millions of dollars a year have all started doing this for a logical reason rather than just following the trend'

Like, does bill belichick seem like the type of guy (a defensive specialist) to just start going for 2s in that situation because someone tells him to? Or he saw the math and said yeah that makes sense.

Meanwhile random jackasses that never coached a game in their life will watch it happen in a playoff game and give their 2 cents haha. Yeah if it doesn't work it sucks


Maybe some folks here have a more nuanced view of probability than you realize.

And whether your appeal to authority works or not in the context of the actual game depends on whether Mike Evans has a much higher conversion percentage on fade routes than the typical receiver does on all other routes and than he has on other routes since the fade is by far the lowest probability common goal line throw.

Posted by Dawgsontop34
Member since Jun 2014
42726 posts
Posted on 1/23/24 at 8:26 am to
Yeah, if you’re playing the math you don’t run a fade. But I guess most people who thought the Bucs should go for two would also agree that it was a dumb play call.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram