Ron Rivera: Going for two "was purely analytics'

wpr
Preferred Member Topic Starter

5 years ago

Not everyone understood why the Panthers attempted a two-point conversion when they scored a touchdown to cut the Packers' lead to 24-16 on Sunday. But Panthers coach Ron Rivera understood why it was the right call. Rivera said after the game that he has studied the analytics and knows that a two-point conversion attempt when [more]

Continue Reading @ Michael David Smith

Michael David Smith wrote:

I loved the call because it was the Panthers doing it. I didn't think it would work and would put them in a deeper hole for the rest of the game.

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

dyeah_gb
Member

5 years ago

Unsurprising that a coach doesn't understand the context of a statistical model and the assumptions that go into it. The psychological impact of being down by basically 2 scores is huge for us fans and probably the players as well.

This quote comes to mind
"All models are wrong, but some are useful" Statistician George Box

Maybe the global warming zealots can learn something from this?

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool - R. Feynman

beast
Select Member

5 years ago

I thought it was stupid... because if you get the two points, then all you need is two FGS (with two defensive stops) to tie... which with the time left, was less likely, than punching it once with a second TD... and if you then wanted to go for two and the lead, you could.

I get that the analytics say, going for two, on average, leads to more points... but in that participial circumstances, at that time of the game, it just didn't make sense... because the best they could then do is tie... and they'd have to get the extra two points for that.

In those circumstances, the mental toll of missing was too much, to take that chance. Unless maybe you thought there was enough time, to do it three times or something.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

5 years ago

Originally Posted by: beast

I didn't get it at the time until I read an article that laid it out. Of the four outcomes, only one was trailing and the other were winning or tying. In hindsight, it was a good move by me.

Us going for it on 4th down at end of half ... I would have liked us to take the 3 points. We just aren't that good within two yards. I know, I know, but I said Mike McCarthy should have gone for the jugular! I feel the 3 points plus opening the half with the ball would have sufficed.

Cheesey
Preferred Member

5 years ago

I’d say it was “ANALytic”!😂
I saw it as stupid at the time. Which means n the end I’m glad they tried it.
If there had been only a few minutes left and it was their only chance at a tie or win, THEN I’d say it was the right call.

beast
Select Member

5 years ago

If it was purely analytics, then why not do it after every single touchdown? That's where the pure analytics suggest it's best... not just the last two times.

I just think if you're just gonna save it for the end, then you should save it for the last time. That way your team is playing from further behind mentally if you miss... and gives the other team less time to react.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

5 years ago

Originally Posted by: beast

Because they were hoping they'd be relying on the extra point to be leading and if missed, a tie.

Why not go for it every time? I think we'll see that grow more and more. Especially at the rate kickers are missing extra points. Analytics say you convert about 48% of 2-point attempts.

beast
Select Member

5 years ago

Because they were hoping they'd be relying on the extra point to be leading and if missed, a tie.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Yes I agree that hoping was a big part of it, but that "hoping" is NOT "purely analytics" as Rivera said... and in my opinion, that hoping slanted the judgement, and got him to ignore (to a certain degree) the analytics and reactions of a potential miss... As he doesn't seem to factor in the analytical possibility of missing it both times.

dyeah_gb
Member

5 years ago

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I like the idea of going for two if you know you are winning the battle in the trenches. If you are team that easily converts on third and short with a beastly O-line, it makes more sense. If you are more of a scheming team, looking for mismatches, then it probably is better to just take the kick.

Interesting thinking back to the Eagles and Cowboys game where Rodgers threw a very quick pass right after the snap before even seeing what was going on. The one against the Eagles led to the int. The one against the cowboys was odd as it bounced off someones helmet. Would be great to see if MLF cooks up something new and reliable in the red zone based on a quick pass, like exploiting the AI in Madden. Maybe they gave up on it after those two failures.

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool - R. Feynman

KRK
Veteran Member

5 years ago

#10

ZTC said:

Us going for it on 4th down at end of half ... I would have liked us to take the 3 points. We just aren't that good within two yards. I know, I know, but I said Mike McCarthy should have gone for the jugular! I feel the 3 points plus opening the half with the ball would have sufficed.

I think it was dumb not to have kicked the FG.

In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Martha Careful (8h) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me

Martha Careful (8h) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not

Mucky Tundra (11h) : Rude!

beast (12h) : Martha? 😋

Zero2Cool (16h) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.

dfosterf (18h) : I'm going with a combination of the two.

beast (20h) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.

beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?

beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you

wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.

wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.

wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious

beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere

beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.

beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.

beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...

beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered

wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.

wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.

wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet

beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury

beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State

beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22