Really disappointed that Chris Simms couldn’t grasp the “Down 9 points with 8 minutes left after scoring a TD” scenario. I thought of a way to try to explain to someone:
Let’s assume you go ahead and kick the extra point. So you’re down 8. Your defense holds and gets a three and out (yay). You have the ball back on your 20 with 6 minutes left.
Now imagine a genie appears on the sideline and tells you that he can see into the future. If you would like, he will let you know whether or not your 2pt try will be successful if you score a TD.
Clearly that is useful information, right? If the genie says no, you’re going to try to score sooner, maybe kick a quick FG. If the genie says yes, you might try a long drive and score with less than 30 seconds left.
Now, what if I told you, you can recreate the genie by going for 2 when you scored the first TD?
<<<>>>
There is one argument against though. You’re also giving better information to the defense. The defense has to assume you’re going to make the 2pt conversion, and play tighter, which could open up a big play and also make it easier to get OOB and preserve clock in case you don’t make the 2pter. If the defense knows you still need two scores, they can give up stuff underneath and try to funnel everything in bounds.
But no one against going for it on the first TD ever makes that argument. They don’t grasp the concept.
The worst thing as far as understanding the concept is the constant parroting of the stupid “fact” from announcers that an 8-point game is a “one-possession game”. It’s fucking not, it’s a two-possession game like 52% of the time or whatever, and you don’t know whether it is or not until you try the damn conversion. It’s like Schroedinger’s possession or something. (Of course if you want to be pedantic, a 7-point game isn’t one possession either, but I’m fine if you want to call the XP miss% a rounding error or whatever.)
In a game last week Aikman gave lip service to the concept by saying something like “yeah I understand some people like to go for two early because then ya know what ya need, but I disagree because kicking the extra point puts so much pressure on the other team because now it’s a one-possession game”…argh. Fucking circular reasoning.
I think there is something to be said for the idea that a defense is going to play a 7pt lead and an 8pt lead basically the same way, but play a 9pt lead differently. Also the opposing team’s offense will play differently if they’re up by 9 vs. up by 8. So by going for it later, you’re giving less information to the opposing teams defense and offense.
But the offense has so much more control over the pace of play than the defense, that information has to be much more valuable to the trailing team’s offense.
And again, no one who’s against going for it has ever tried to make that argument.
Ironically if 8 points was actually one possession, going for it would be even more correct but trying to explain that to a person with average intelligence would just make their head explode
Adams, 32, shot two air conditioning technicians outside the home of a prominent doctor in Rock Hill on April 7, authorities said.
He then forced his way into Dr. Robert Lesslie’s home, where Lesslie, his wife and two grandchildren, ages 5 and 9, were killed inside, authorities said.
Jesus. I never even heard about this when it happened.
Yeah but he’s not acknowledging the extra information that the trailing team gets by going for 2 early. If he said, “I realize the trailing team gets more information, I just think the extra information you give to your opponent is more valuable” or something to that effect, then at least you know he gets the concept.
