Buffalo Bills: 7-5 – at Denver

[misterchainsaw]

I guess Marrone is just ignorant, then ?

How else would you explain him taking a 30% chance

I'm not arguing what would have happened, I'm arguing his decision

No, I'm laughing at you being ignorant. You go for it there BECAUSE the 3 and out is not only not guaranteed, but not even especially likely.

 

[Chad Thundercock]

In game management, yes Marrone is ignorant. Unquestionably.

Assuming a 3-and-out can't be done. And also, kudos to Andy Reid for passing on 3rd and 8 to win the game.

Yes, Andy Reid just schooled Doug Marrone in game management. A new low.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

I guess Marrone is just ignorant, then ?

How else would you explain him taking a 30% chance

I'm not arguing what would have happened, I'm arguing his decision

because he was down inside the 20 with a chance to win the football game, and he decided to let his QB try to win it, he went for the win instead of the "oh god I better be conservative here"

Ill take that any day of the week

 

[enthusiast]

No, I'm laughing at you being ignorant. You go for it there BECAUSE the 3 and out is not only not guaranteed, but not even especially likely.

You think it's less likely than 30%, after the Bills had held KC to 2/8 on third down up to that point? That's irrqational

 

[misterchainsaw]

I guess Marrone is just ignorant, then ?

How else would you explain him taking a 30% chance

I'm not arguing what would have happened, I'm arguing his decision

So what's the percentage on a team going 3 and out when they get the ball back protecting a one score lead needing one first down to all but wrap it up?

It's not 100%, I guarantee you that, so you can't just "assume" it happens. My Lord.

 

[enthusiast]

because he was down inside the 20 with a chance to win the football game, and he decided to let his QB try to win it, he went for the win instead of the "oh god I better be conservative here"

Ill take that any day of the week

people thump their chest about "aggressive football" but it's not about attitude, it's about recognizing probabilities

chip kelly wouldn't have gone for that there

 

[enthusiast]

So what's the percentage on a team going 3 and out when they get the ball back protecting a one score lead needing one first down to all but wrap it up?

It's not 100%, I guarantee you that, so you can't just "assume" it happens. My Lord.

It's not different than any of their drives before. That's the problem with your line of thinking

 

[misterchainsaw]

You think it's less likely than 30%, after the Bills had held KC to 2/8 on third down up to that point? That's irrqational

Go take a statistics class or something. My God.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

You think it's less likely than 30%, after the Bills had held KC to 2/8 on third down up to that point? That's irrqational

it was 0%

the D went back on the field and failed to get a 3 and out, we got to watch what happened, they pulled a first and ran the clock to 16 secs

but hey if we would have kicked a fg then I bet KC wouldnt have tried as hard

 

[misterchainsaw]

It's not different than any of their drives before. That's the problem with your line of thinking

Uhhhh I never said it was? (And really, in the circumstances, the KC offense is probably slightly more likely to go 3 and out. Not enough to justify kicking the FG though.

 

[enthusiast]

For sake of argument, let's say that they get that 25% conversion rate.

7 scenarios with made FG end up with the 2:00, 2 end up with a sure loss


5 scenarios with attempt end up with 2:00, 2 end up with a sure loss.

 

[enthusiast]

Uhhhh I never said it was? (And really, in the circumstances, the KC offense is probably slightly more likely to go 3 and out. Not enough to justify kicking the FG though.

why did you add that nonsense about 'with a chance to win the game' if you didn't think it mattered?

 

[enthusiast]

Go take a statistics class or something. My God.

It's almost charming how you can't actually argue the numbers. If you have an objection to the method state it, but frankly I'd be surprised if you could form one

 

[misterchainsaw]

For sake of argument, let's say that they get that 25% conversion rate.

7 scenarios with made FG end up with the 2:00, 2 end up with a sure loss


5 scenarios with attempt end up with 2:00, 2 end up with a sure loss.

Probabilities of those scenarios are not the same. You're making basic statistical and probability errors time after time. It's really quite humorous how you think you know what you're talking about mathematically here. Sorry I don't have time to correct the statisical BS you've dropped on this thread right now, but you are flat out wrong. Maybe I'll get to it later.

 

[enthusiast]

Probabilities of those scenarios are not the same. You're making basic statistical and probability errors time after time. It's really quite humorous how you think you know what you're talking about mathematically here. Sorry I don't have time to correct the statisical BS you've dropped on this thread right now, but you are flat out wrong. Maybe I'll get to it later.

There's no reason to believe you when you haven't picked out a single piece that's inaccurate, only objected to treating what Marrone must have considered a probability an assumption


what exactly are you objecting to? the predictive value of a collection of data from similar situations? the same value of recent performance? The simple combination?

You've already admitted that the last drive isn't any different than earlier ones, so why treat it so?

 

[Yatzhee]

Bad play calling on that last drive in the 4th inside the 25 with 4 minutes left. Should have stayed with the short plays.

Bad coaching decisions on the offensive side of the ball all day actually, should have had more points.

Winnable game at home, this loss will most likely jettison them out of the playoffs. Sad really, the talent is there, the play calling and offensive coaching is just bad at the wrong times.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

For sake of argument, let's say that they get that 25% conversion rate.

7 scenarios with made FG end up with the 2:00, 2 end up with a sure loss


5 scenarios with attempt end up with 2:00, 2 end up with a sure loss.

o so we're supposed to expect them to get a 3 and out if we kick a fg, but if they scored a TD we arent supposed to expect a 3 and out, ok that makes sense

 

[enthusiast]

o so we're supposed to expect them to get a 3 and out if we kick a fg, but if they scored a TD we arent supposed to expect a 3 and out, ok that makes sense

the post you're quoting actually accounts for a 25% chiefs conversion rate in both scenarios, check it again

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

the post you're quoting actually accounts for a 25% chiefs conversion rate in both scenarios, check it again

check what?

 

[enthusiast]

check what?

the post you quoted


it has the exact same 3-and-out percentage applied to attempt and Fg scenarios


you say it doesn';t


Also in case you missed it I count any scenario where the Bills convert on 4th a sure win which is especially generous

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

the post you quoted


it has the exact same 3-and-out percentage applied to attempt and Fg scenarios


you say it doesn';t

are you daft? theres nothing in that post except you saying x of y scenarios we lose

NFL 4th and 10 conversion rate averages out to 30% here

let's be generous and assume that those 3/10 are guaranteed wins. We'll come back to the 7/10 later

From the same source, FG% roughly 90. 9/10 scenarios are made field goal, 1/10 scenarios is equal to the 7/10 above


Ok, what does that mean?

For the decision to make a field goal to be better, the overall percentage chance to win has to be better than equal.

The benefit, of course, lies in only needing a FG to win in those 9/10 scenarios.


For all scenarios ending with a FG score/no score, we assume the Chiefs begin possession between the 15-25.

Assume Bills force a 3-and-out, which must have been a consideration in Marrone's decision to take a low-percentage play. Average a 40 yard punt, and the Bills get the ball on their ~30 with 2:00.

In 9/10 FG scenarios, approximately 40 yards and a FG are needed to win.
In 1/10 FG scenarios, 70 yards and a touchdown are needed to win.
In 7/10 Attempt scenarios, 70 yards and a touchdown are needed to win.



What you must believe, then, is that it is likelier that the Bills would score fewer than 3 more FGs than TDs in these scenarios

this is the only post where I see you explain any of these scenarios

 

[enthusiast]

you know how movies have sequels that continue the story without adding two hours on to them at the beginning

 

[enthusiast]

here I'll lay it all out

3/10 attempts = sure win (charitable to marrone)
5/10 attempts = Need 70 yard td drive
2/10 attempts = sure loss

7/10 FG = need 40 yard FG drive
2/10 FG = Sure loss
1/10 FG = need 70 yard TD drive


we take out those which cancel

attempts: 3 sure wins, 4 70 yard td drives
fg: 7 40 yard FG drives, 1 70 yard td drive

 

[enthusiast]

Finally out of

we take out those which cancel

attempts: 3 sure wins, 4 70 yard td drives
fg: 7 40 yard FG drives, 1 70 yard td drive

Which do you think ends up with more net victories?

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

here I'll lay it all out

3/10 attempts = sure win (charitable to marrone)
5/10 attempts = Need 70 yard td drive
2/10 attempts = sure loss

7/10 FG = need 40 yard FG drive
2/10 FG = Sure loss
1/10 FG = need 70 yard TD drive

found your link, your going to need to point where your odds of the chiefs doing whatever you have them doing because I dont see anything in the pdf that talks about the odds of KC giving the ball back