Eddie

Independent thinker with contrarian takes. I like to argue, respectfully.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@Tag15___ @DmicMedia Let's assume you save your 2 pt conversion attempt for the second TD and you happen to miss it. If you had a time machine and could go back to the first TD to change your PAT decision, would you use it or stick with 1 pt?

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@IBookWins Doesn't the conventional wisdom of attempting the kick suffer from the same critique? In the moment, respecting the situation and coach's feel, perhaps these conditional factors enhance the case for going for 2. Shouldn't we defer to the coach's judgment in these cases?

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@PeteFiutak Flip it around. You are up 14 and your opponent scores a TD to go down 8. They go for 2 and convert. This is catastrophic since their next TD now wins the game.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@KeevaMB @chrisbrockman What happens to the team's momentum the 50% of the time they cut the lead to 6 points?

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@bburkeESPN The coach is basically saying, "I prefer 1st and 10 to 2nd and 1."

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

I think the quants and the quant critics are talking past one another. The critics are saying, "There are team/situational nuances." The quants are saying either, "We have accounted for those nuances," or "The nuances can swing equally in either direction so why don't we see an equivalent nunber of nuance/feel-adjusted-going-for-it adjustments when the model says kick?"

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@friscojosh I agree. Let's start with the low-hanging fruit. We know that Kyle is on board for the 98/2 scenarios. Can we get him to buy into the 70/30 ones? The 51/49 can come later.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@katsuxbt This is a strawman argument. Between 51% and 98%, where does he switch from gut to analytics?

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@NateSilver538 NYG should have gone for 2 when down 8. WAS should have downed the ball with 3 seconds left, then kicked the winning FG. This isn't hard.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

For the anti-analytics crowd who likes to take their chances in OT and loves to draw conclusions from small sample sizes, you got what you wished for...a tie. WAS mismanaged the clock; NYG should have gone for 2 down 8. Instead, they both kiss their sister.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@hottakeharry @LateRoundQB It's not really a question of wanting to avoid OT. It's about having a 62.5% chance of winning the game versus a 50% chance. Waiting to go for two on the second TD forgoes that extra 12.5%.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@Go_Bengals_ @JJWatt They are psychologically fragile, apparently.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@LateRoundQB Good stuff. I discovered this in 1995 and discussed it with Tennessee Oilers GM Floyd Reese in November 1998. Full story of that encounter and my own version of this decision tree/flowchart are in my new book, Running Against the Herd.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@NateSilver538 @jarvis_best As a lifelong Chargers fan, season ticket holder in 1993-95 and 2021-2026, I sigh. The Chargers belong in San Diego. Please retire "Bolt Up" and "Bolt Fam." So lame.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

Running Against the Herd is now out!

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@CharlieFox3427 @Houseofyogi I agree. Don't accept the premise by debating the logistics.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@AlexBerenson I have been asking this question for years. I have never gotten a satisfactory answer.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@Lev1athan_J3fe @AllKindsWeather Agree. It's a doubled-edged sword. You can't say it would have been a goal because the on-field AR would have been more trigger-happy w/no VAR to fix their mistakes. The alternative is AR's calling offside when it wasn't (by an inch).

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@AllKindsWeather What's the complaint? Offside shouldn't be a rule? It should be a rule, but not enforced on close calls? It should be a rule, enforced on close calls, but not w/aid of VAR? VAR's issue is the on-field ARs let close calls play on, which leads to the buzzkill of disallowed goals.

[Eddie @EddiePerkin72]

@PaulSpacey I enjoyed this article. Very well reasoned. I wonder how one resolves the inherent tension between attracting/developing stronger coaches who focus on the right things, and moving away from the pay-to-play model. Who pays?