mannc
-
Posts
17,689 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mannc
-
-
It happens maybe 10 times per season, I would guess, and almost invariably, the coach makes the easy call to play for OT and no one thinks twice about it. Whether a team should go for two in that situation will depend on a lot of factors. How good is your kicker? Is he automatic on PATs? Are you playing on the road? Do you have a lot of injuries? How much confidence do you have in your offense or the other team's defense? Do you have a two-point conversion package that you like? What is the weather like? It's not always a good idea to go for two in that situation, but it at least deserves serious consideration, coaches almost never do it, and TV announcers never even discuss the possibility.How often does this situation arise? And are you going to be the first to forgive your coach for losing a game on an unsuccessful two-point conversion try? Let me guess, you will laud his courage in the face of conventional wisdom; for not bowing to a conformity that says he must. How many times will you cut him that slack? Every time?
GO BILLS!!!
And to answer your last question, I would never be unhappy with my team's coach if he makes a bold decision to try to win a game and it does not work out, as long as there was strong logic behind the decision. I would be far more upset if my coach just fell back on the conventional wisdom, without thinking things through.
-
Yes, and another part of the CBA is that a player can refuse to sign a franchise tag tender. So how are these guys "not honoring the contract" by refusing to sign one?You are making stuff up - part of contract is ability to cut people. How and when is was agreed to by NFLPA.
Because part of agreement is ability to be cut including injury settlements.
-
And the above is a perfect example: Never actually offer a fresh or thoughtful football insight or opinion; just take cheap shots at Bills fans who are not 100 percent down with OBD's fabulously successful program. Carry on.I have a take. It's that your takes are consistently laughable (with all due respect)
Want a football take ? Cam Newtons good, Ryan Fitzpatrick bad.
Shaq Lawson is good. Lot of Clemson players are lately.
-
And your next actual take on a football related topic will be your first. John and I frequently disagree, but he always has a take that is worth responding to or discussing.Can't listen to him jfh. His whole offseason has been a repetitive application for the NNN club.
-
That should be the case, but I don't think it is. Otherwise we would not see so many teams punting on fourth and short near or inside mid-field. NFL coaches are a hide-bound group who are afraid of anything different. I agree, however, that there is insufficient data right now to support going for two every time, although coaches should do it more often, for example, when they score a TD at the end of the game and a 1point conversion would send the game to OT, but a two pointer would win.When it can be shown to coaches that going for 2 has a direct impact in the win column, they will climb aboard. Not before. Until then, the "When to go for 2" chart suffices just fine.
GO BILLS!!!
-
As I understand it, the numbers do not support going for 2 all the time. I think the success rate on two-point conversions last year was around 46% and for 1-pointers it was around 93%, so it's basically a push. But if you have weak kicker and a strong two-point conversion package, the numbers could swing in favor of going for two almost all the time. But i don't expect any NFL coach to do it, including Belichick.
But if the analytics, right now (as many have argues, including mannc) support going for 2 all the time, it would make no sense not to commit to that right now. If your analytics tell you it's 50%, why would every team give it a go?
If 85% of games are won by a margin of greater than 3 points, the benefit of a few extra points over a season doubtfully will alter a team's record.
-
Exactly. And the reason no one does it is because it's easier to just do what everyone else has done from time immemorial. If a team wins two games by going for two, but blows one when a two pointer fails, the criticism would be merciless (but wrong).He did say "if" in the post. Until a team commits they don't really know the rates they will convert. Otherwise, his point stands that statistically over time you should come out ahead in the win column if you are scoring more points- even if you get a cluster of misses that costs a game across a small sample, you should have that countered by clusters that win 2 games in the long haul (oversimplified but conceptually is there)
-
This is 100% wrong. This mindset is exactly what analytics is meant to counter. If you are converting 50% of your two point tries and only 90% of your 1-pointers, then you are better off going for two every time, except in the odd situation where a 1-point conversion ices the game. That's just basic math.For each individual game, not the year. You could get all of your 2 point conversions in games that don't end up mattering (blowout loss or win) and miss them all in close games where that is the difference between a win and a loss. 50% for the year, but your record is worse. Obviously that's an extreme example.
Lose ONE game because you went for a two point conversion that you didn't have to, and this whole argument goes away. In a 16 game season where every win matters, you just can't take the chance.
-
Relax, John. I'm not trying cram anything down anyone's throats. I was just pointing out that taking a healthy WR at 19 was a viable option--despite what you keep calling a weak WR class--instead of taking an injured DE. It certainly would not have been a reach.What logic are you trying to shove down peoples throats......that we should have taken a gamble that the weak WR crop might be better then Shaq Lawson?
I guess?
Or are you just crying that they will be immediately available and Shaq wont be?
I will tell you what will really be funny is if Dez Lewis......who would not be getting the same looks if we had taken a WR number 1......actually turns into a player and is having a nice camp.
-
I swear John, sometimes you seem to be impervious to logic...Of course the fact that three WRs came off the board almost immediately after the Bills' pick doesn't mean any of them will necessarily turn out to be better than Shaq; all it means is that it would hardly have been a reach for the Bills to have taken one of them at 19, regardless whether it was supposedly a weak overall class for WRs. Of course Shaq might turn into the next Bruce Smith and the three WRs might all bust, but it might be the other way around, too. And I'm not troubled by Treadwell's 40 times. There are plenty of really good WRs who ran "slow" 40 times at the combine--Marshall and Boldin come to mind immediately.Just because they were available to pick does not mean they would be better players
Treadwell is SLOW.....there is a reason why these WR's fell
-
Not necessarily true. Three WR in a row came off the board shortly after the Bills took Shaq. I would have been very happy with Treadwell at 19.WR? The crop this year was week......might have gotten into a situation like we did that weak draft with Hardy.
-
It amazes me how down you folks are on this guy. It borders on ridicule/hatred and it also seems to be coming from some of the most avowed "optimists". Granted, Goodwin has not been healthy very often, but when he has gotten on the field, he has looked very good, IMO. As BADOL says, he needs to hone his craft, but he's extremely difficult to cover and if we can get him on the field with Sammy, it will poses serious problems for opposing defenses. I would much rather have a guy like Goidwin, even with his health issues, than someone who is durable, but lacks his speed and ability to get open.
-
Don't they also have Devin Smith, who was injured last year? They definitely have some weapons.I can't believe Fitz would turn down $12M at this point in his career. Chan , Marshall , Decker , Forte , that's the perfect storm for him to close out .
-
It is an open forum. That's why TBC has the right to call you out if he disagrees with your take.I am not RAILING against anyone, just expressing my views as I SEE THEM..I thought this was an OPEN FORUM...WTF!
-
Not really. I was mostly being flippant, but there is no logical reason why a scheme that struggles against the spread couldn't also suck against a power attack.Because I don't believe it's suddenly a scheme that's ineffectual against whatever an offense throws its way. Do you believe that?
-
Except for Peyton Manning, of course.Jesus. We never know what these guys are really like
-
Why not?I've heard that Rex's scheme is weak against power football and weak against the spread. Can't possibly be both.
-
Respect has to be earned, especially in the NFL. I don't think talking big makes men want to follow you, unless you have a history of backing it up. Unfortunately, Rex hasn't "backed it up" in a long time, so the big talk isn't going to win him a lot of followers in the Bills' locker room, and neither is his fellowship with people like Rob and D Thurman.Look up the "Pygmalion Effect." When leaders believe in their people, they tend to perform better. And when people believe in themselves, they tend to perform better (sometimes called the "Galatea Effect."). These two generalities have been proven in numerous studies in a number of different environments. Let's add a third observation: when people believe in the plan, they perform better. I think these are the things Rex is looking for.
I don't think Rex meant that he wants a culture where there's no constructive criticism. Having read Collision Low Crossers, I don't think he's that kind of guy.
More than once in his career, General Patton said something to the effect, "If 10 men are thinking alike, 9 of them aren't thinking." If Rex is in fact looking for group-think and yes-men, you're right, he's not going to build a winning environment.
I remember something Chad Eaton, who was a really good DT on some of the early NE teams, said about Belichick: That rah rah talk doesn't work among grown men; what gets NFL players fired up is knowing your coach is smarter and better prepared than the guy on the other sideline and if you do what he says, you will probably win. The Ryans have a lot to prove in that regard, and until they do, there will be doubters, even (or maybe especially) in the locker room.
-
There is absolutely no reason personal fouls should not be reviewable. PI too, but that's been discussed ad nauseum.I really feel as though all "targeting a defenseless player" personal foul penalties should be subject to review. It seems like whenever there is a huge hit across the middle, or somebody's hat pops off, the immediate reaction and inclination from the refs is to throw the flag. In many cases, a review of the play in slow motion reveals that the hit was perfectly clean and impeccably timed.
I guess I've just seen too many drives extended by what appeared to be fantastic defensive plays that were not dirty.
-
Wow, I hope not. Everything I have read said the heart issue wasn't a concern and I have never heard that was why Ragland "dropped", if in fact he did. If you are right, then we are once again counting on the Bills medical staff and/or Whaley to be correct in their medical assessment. Let's hope the other shoe doesn't drop.Ragland dropped because of his medical in my opinion.
-
Almost anyone can replace Whaley if all his job requires him to do is "find talent." That's not at all difficult in this day and age considering the vast amount of resources available.
Besides finding a quality head coach, his job description should also entail adequate public speaking skills and not embarrassing the league or organization.
Thank you. Of course, Whaley looks positively brilliant compared to his predecessor as Bill's GM.
-
Hey, if Mark Sanchez can take Rex to the AFC championship twice, then he can be a franchise QB in the NFL. See how that works?Hey if Rex can take Mark Sanchez to the AFC championship twice then he can be a HC in the NFL. You people did the exact same thing with Belichick in Cleveland and Pete Carol's first romp along with many other coaches.
-
"We are at war with Eurasia. We have always been at war with Eurasia."He has released another qualifying statement:
"What I actually meant to say is that all humans are cleared to play football by our medical staff. I have complete confidence in that staff. Everyone will be a day one starter. No if something were to happen....."
-
Maybe those Lee, Lynch, and those WRs were simply not the right value on their board?
It really could be that simple
Maybe so, but if those guys become stars and Shaq doesn't, does the fact that they were "not the right value on their board" exonerate OBD?
So you are NOT saying that Rex had influence over the picks?
I'm saying that I suspect Rex had a great deal of influence over the picks at the top of the Bills' draft.
RD 1, Pick 19: DE Shaq Lawson, Clemson University
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted · Edited by mannc
RLB, please tell me what I have been wrong about, other than applauding the hiring of Rex Ryan. I'm waiting.