Deadskins wrote:Please! Why don't you pull out a chart that deals with going for two too early. Always seems to bite you in the ass when you do.
The universe (not just NFL football) is governed by probabilities. No mortal has foreknowledge of anything, and that is the flaw in your reasoning. If you are going to argue that point and make statements like the one above, you are a person that I cannot reach. I will end by saying that I'm glad you aren't our coach.
"No one played with more heart."
-Clinton Portis on Sean Taylor
As of 11/27/07, I resolve to never again read any version of the Washington Post.
absinthe1023 wrote:The 2 pt. conversion was the right call at the time.
No, it wasn't. You should never go for two with that much time left. Atlanta gave us a gift when they tried for two before.
It was understandable at the time. You can only judge right/wrong in hindsight, which is unfair to judge him against in THIS situation..
I disagree. I said at the time that it was stupid, didn't need any hindsight. Like absinthe said, you don't know what's going to happen, so you don't go for two too early.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
Deadskins wrote:Please! Why don't you pull out a chart that deals with going for two too early. Always seems to bite you in the ass when you do.
The universe (not just NFL football) is governed by probabilities. No mortal has foreknowledge of anything, and that is the flaw in your reasoning. If you are going to argue that point and make statements like the one above, you are a person that I cannot reach. I will end by saying that I'm glad you aren't our coach.
You're making my point for me. It's precisely because you don't know what's going to happen, that you don't go for two too early.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
Chris Luva Luva wrote:51 yards rushing... THAT is why we lost this game.
It's a combination of Jay not being committed to the run and the QB/Receivers not converting on third and long to extend drives.
BINGO - they went to the pass because the run was not working - we cannot afford to let our best QB go to a passing game - he's an interception machine - this is what he does
we should of stayed with the run game - it might not work but it certainly will not if you don't keep doing it - the interception machine will kill u
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
Deadskins wrote:You're making my point for me. It's precisely because you don't know what's going to happen, that you don't go for two too early.
As I type this I know it is pointless. You either cannot argue logically, or do not understand the practical application of probability.
As an NFL coach, you need to use probabilities to guide your decisions. Ever wonder what's on that chart is the HC looks at right after scoring a TD? That's right: the probability of winning given a certain decision as predicted for the time remaining and score. I highly doubt that the chart says "going for 2 too early always comes back to bite you in the ass". There is a reason for the saying "hindsight is 20/20".
"No one played with more heart."
-Clinton Portis on Sean Taylor
As of 11/27/07, I resolve to never again read any version of the Washington Post.
Deadskins wrote:You're making my point for me. It's precisely because you don't know what's going to happen, that you don't go for two too early.
As I type this I know it is pointless. You either cannot argue logically, or do not understand the practical application of probability.
No, as a math major in college, I have no concept of the practical application of probability. I'd say it's you who doesn't get the concept.
Got it. On one side, we have every other THN poster who has weighed in, every NFL coach, and me. On the other, there's you, the college math major. Pardon the pun, but I like those odds.
"No one played with more heart."
-Clinton Portis on Sean Taylor
As of 11/27/07, I resolve to never again read any version of the Washington Post.
absinthe1023 wrote:Got it. On one side, we have every other THN poster who has weighed in, every NFL coach, and me. On the other, there's you, the college math major. Pardon the pun, but I like those odds.
Yes, because you polled every coach in the league about when to go for two, right? And only CLL has agreed, aswas didn't. The two point conversation chart that Dick Vermiel created over 40 years ago doesn't specify anything about the timing of going for two. Unless you are arguing that it's always better to go for two (which, with the new placement of the ball on PATs, might be best), your reasoning is flawed. Would you go for two in the first quarter just because we were behind by two? The chart you are so fond of says you should.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
Burgundy&Wha? wrote:Ryan Grant fell down. How is that on Kirk?
No reasonable, knowledgable observer would blame the quarterback when his receiver falls down before intersecting with an on target pass. The qualifier being reasonable and knowledgeable observer which are in short supply after a loss.
an interception is an interception - some QBs have a reputation for turning the ball over - Captain Kirk is one of them
that being said - he's the best option we have but he's going to throw interceptions - he doesn't mean to, he's just not able to stop doing it
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
Deadskins wrote: Would you go for two in the first quarter just because we were behind by two? The chart you are so fond of says you should.
Wrong again. Any modern chart that I have seen takes into consideration both the time remaining in the game and the score. You can google "2 point conversion chart" and see actual chart images if you are so inclined. I highly doubt that anyone in today's NFL is using Vermeil's chart. As the PROBABILITY (there's that word again) of both teams scoring multiple times during the remaining portion of the game is so high in the first quarter, the charts do not recommend going for 2 in the situation you described.
You really are making this too easy, math major. I'm bored and signing off until next week. Come up with a more compelling argument by then if you want to continue.
"No one played with more heart."
-Clinton Portis on Sean Taylor
As of 11/27/07, I resolve to never again read any version of the Washington Post.
I could be wrong, but don't players do better when they are given the opportunity to get into a rhythm? Could that be the problem with the running game? I think they need to feed Morris the ball, and used Matt Jones and Chris Thompson on third downs or other times where Morris needs to be spelled. Let him build up a rhythm, and get things going. They have different running styles, so the office of wine and a running back need to be able to establish that rhythm. Could be the problem with the running game?
SkinsJock wrote:an interception is an interception - some QBs have a reputation for turning the ball over - Captain Kirk is one of them
that being said - he's the best option we have but he's going to throw interceptions - he doesn't mean to, he's just not able to stop doing it
Except for last week when he didn't throw any. But why let that get in the way of some A+ trolling?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
SkinsJock wrote:an interception is an interception - some QBs have a reputation for turning the ball over - Captain Kirk is one of them
that being said - he's the best option we have but he's going to throw interceptions - he doesn't mean to, he's just not able to stop doing it
Except for last week when he didn't throw any. But why let that get in the way of some A+ trolling?
I see some Brett Favre in Kirk Cousins, and as a person I wouldn't care for that, but as a quarterback I'll take it.
“He was at that time the smartest player in the league. We did everything we could to try to eliminate him from the play. We knew if we didn’t neutralize him, then we had less of a chance of winning.” - John Hannah on Chris Hanburger
Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:I see some Brett Favre in Kirk Cousins, and as a person I wouldn't care for that, but as a quarterback I'll take it.
I would love for that to be the case, but he doesn't throw TDs like Favre did. You can live with turnovers if you're scoring touchdowns also. If you're scoring FGs instead while also turning the ball over, not good.
Its just a stupid stat to keep pointing out like it says everything there is to say. More than half of those QBs WON THEIR GAME.
So tired of the imbecilic posts about this. If Cousins was out there throwing the ball away like he did last year against the Giants and Cardinals, I would be the first guy to call him out on it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax "We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
Its just a stupid stat to keep pointing out like it says everything there is to say. More than half of those QBs WON THEIR GAME.
So tired of the imbecilic posts about this. If Cousins was out there throwing the ball away like he did last year against the Giants and Cardinals, I would be the first guy to call him out on it.
Stop making sense.
“He was at that time the smartest player in the league. We did everything we could to try to eliminate him from the play. We knew if we didn’t neutralize him, then we had less of a chance of winning.” - John Hannah on Chris Hanburger
Its just a stupid stat to keep pointing out like it says everything there is to say. More than half of those QBs WON THEIR GAME.
So tired of the imbecilic posts about this. If Cousins was out there throwing the ball away like he did last year against the Giants and Cardinals, I would be the first guy to call him out on it.
It's stupid if it was one game. It's not. Dude has multiple turnovers in 6 of his past 10 games. How many of the named above fall into that category?
That said, Cousins did OK. The final drive in regulation was special. I can't say why he threw the INT...coaches will know and so will Cousins and the receivers. Standing back, it looks like the Redskins never got had running game, even though they had a lead. Bad coaching? Probably not. Probably the Falcons stopped the run. Could Cousins and the receivers opened up? I don;t know, and probably else does unless they have broken down the game films.
Given than, I believe Cousins did well enough.
These Redskins are not a championship team. Probably not a playoff team, no matter how sloppy the NFC East might be. The Skins are building something. Let's wait until next game before trashing Cousins. It's my instinct, but I doubt the Redskins need an All-pro QB for the same reason I doubt that the Nats need an All-star closer. If the whole team is solid, they will do well.
Its just a stupid stat to keep pointing out like it says everything there is to say. More than half of those QBs WON THEIR GAME.
So tired of the imbecilic posts about this. If Cousins was out there throwing the ball away like he did last year against the Giants and Cardinals, I would be the first guy to call him out on it.
It's stupid if it was one game. It's not. Dude has multiple turnovers in 6 of his past 10 games. How many of the named above fall into that category?
How many of the named above have started less than 20 games in their respective careers? Some of the all-time greats started out like this and corrected it.
“He was at that time the smartest player in the league. We did everything we could to try to eliminate him from the play. We knew if we didn’t neutralize him, then we had less of a chance of winning.” - John Hannah on Chris Hanburger
