yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
Clearly you weren't feeling the emotion on the field.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
That kind of loser mentality is the same kind of loser mentality that punts on 4th and 1 from Oregon's 39 yard line.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
You go for two based on the flow of the game. Minnesota was starting to exert their will on the OSU defense. If you think you have a greater than 50% chance of converting, you go for two. The only scenario I don't is if your down 6, when an extra point wins it. You even see this in the NFL. How many times did the Steelers go for two last year, even when they didn't have to?
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
That kind of loser mentality is the same kind of loser mentality that punts on 4th and 1 from Oregon's 39 yard line.
So you would internet tough guy it and go for 2 when up 5 early in the 4th quarter. Got it.
Going for 2 made no sense there either, but was very unlikely to cost them. They went from having to give up 2 scores just to tie (TD and 2 pt conversion) to only having to give up 1 score to tie. True, OSU is dreck and wasn't going to score, but still, stupid. It's a loser mentality just like taking a knee with less than a minute left to run out the clock with a lead in AZ vs. running your sure handed running back take the hand off. Good football management is good football management.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
That kind of loser mentality is the same kind of loser mentality that punts on 4th and 1 from Oregon's 39 yard line.
So you would internet tough guy it and go for 2 when up 5 early in the 4th quarter. Got it.
Going for 2 made no sense there either, but was very unlikely to cost them. They went from having to give up 2 scores just to tie (TD and 2 pt conversion) to only having to give up 1 score to tie. True, OSU is dreck and wasn't going to score, but still, stupid. It's a loser mentality just like taking a knee with less than a minute left to run out the clock with a lead in AZ vs. running your sure handed running back take the hand off. Good football management is good football management.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
That kind of loser mentality is the same kind of loser mentality that punts on 4th and 1 from Oregon's 39 yard line.
So you would internet tough guy it and go for 2 when up 5 early in the 4th quarter. Got it.
Going for 2 made no sense there either, but was very unlikely to cost them. They went from having to give up 2 scores just to tie (TD and 2 pt conversion) to only having to give up 1 score to tie. True, OSU is dreck and wasn't going to score, but still, stupid. It's a loser mentality just like taking a knee with less than a minute left to run out the clock with a lead in AZ vs. running your sure handed running back take the hand off. Good football management is good football management.
Early in the 4th quarter I would go for 2 up 5 because my opponent is more likely to score 1 touchdown than 2 field goals.
I'm not an Internet Tough Guy. I'm a guy who likes to maximize the odds of winning.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
That kind of loser mentality is the same kind of loser mentality that punts on 4th and 1 from Oregon's 39 yard line.
So you would internet tough guy it and go for 2 when up 5 early in the 4th quarter. Got it.
Going for 2 made no sense there either, but was very unlikely to cost them. They went from having to give up 2 scores just to tie (TD and 2 pt conversion) to only having to give up 1 score to tie. True, OSU is dreck and wasn't going to score, but still, stupid. It's a loser mentality just like taking a knee with less than a minute left to run out the clock with a lead in AZ vs. running your sure handed running back take the hand off. Good football management is good football management.
I'm not an Internet Tough Guy. I'm a guy who likes to maximize the odds of winning.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
That kind of loser mentality is the same kind of loser mentality that punts on 4th and 1 from Oregon's 39 yard line.
So you would internet tough guy it and go for 2 when up 5 early in the 4th quarter. Got it.
Going for 2 made no sense there either, but was very unlikely to cost them. They went from having to give up 2 scores just to tie (TD and 2 pt conversion) to only having to give up 1 score to tie. True, OSU is dreck and wasn't going to score, but still, stupid. It's a loser mentality just like taking a knee with less than a minute left to run out the clock with a lead in AZ vs. running your sure handed running back take the hand off. Good football management is good football management.
I'm not an Internet Tough Guy. I'm a guy who likes to maximize the odds of winning.
I can see why Minny went for two, but the play call was fucktarded. If the d returns the conversion OSU gets 2 pts and a TD beats you. The out route at the goal line is risqué as Dawgs fans recall
I can see why Minny went for two, but the play call was fucktarded. If the d returns the conversion OSU gets 2 pts and a TD beats you. The out route at the goal line is risqué as Dawgs fans recall
Totally agree. Even Lambo fucking stupid hated that play call.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
That kind of loser mentality is the same kind of loser mentality that punts on 4th and 1 from Oregon's 39 yard line.
So you would internet tough guy it and go for 2 when up 5 early in the 4th quarter. Got it.
Going for 2 made no sense there either, but was very unlikely to cost them. They went from having to give up 2 scores just to tie (TD and 2 pt conversion) to only having to give up 1 score to tie. True, OSU is dreck and wasn't going to score, but still, stupid. It's a loser mentality just like taking a knee with less than a minute left to run out the clock with a lead in AZ vs. running your sure handed running back take the hand off. Good football management is good football management.
Early in the 4th quarter I would go for 2 up 5 because my opponent is more likely to score 1 touchdown than 2 field goals.
I'm not an Internet Tough Guy. I'm a guy who likes to maximize the odds of winning.
Yet you like to give examples that totally dispute that.
yeah put it that way and i can't really argue against it
lol @ the idea of browning and his band of pants-shitting losers rallying back
i retract my previous statement
No you're entirely correct. That OSU was unlikely to score again doesn't weigh one way or the other.
The question is, assuming that by some miracle OSU does score again, whether you'd rather have your 'O' try a 2 pointer to win/tie if they fail OR your opponent try a 2 to tie/lose if they fail.
Obviously given the dreck fest offenses involved you'd rather be up the guaranteed 8 than 7/9.
The 8 is worth more than the 9.
That's the dumbest thing I've read in ages.
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
You don't go for two based on what happens if you make it. You go for two based on what happens if you miss it. That's why the coaches up 5 early in the 4th quarter who go for two are idiots.
That kind of loser mentality is the same kind of loser mentality that punts on 4th and 1 from Oregon's 39 yard line.
So you would internet tough guy it and go for 2 when up 5 early in the 4th quarter. Got it.
Going for 2 made no sense there either, but was very unlikely to cost them. They went from having to give up 2 scores just to tie (TD and 2 pt conversion) to only having to give up 1 score to tie. True, OSU is dreck and wasn't going to score, but still, stupid. It's a loser mentality just like taking a knee with less than a minute left to run out the clock with a lead in AZ vs. running your sure handed running back take the hand off. Good football management is good football management.
Early in the 4th quarter I would go for 2 up 5 because my opponent is more likely to score 1 touchdown than 2 field goals.
I'm not an Internet Tough Guy. I'm a guy who likes to maximize the odds of winning.
Yet you like to give examples that totally dispute that.
7 point lead = 89% chance 8 point lead = 93% chance 9 point lead = 97% chance
Personally I think the 97% number is too low because you have to recover an onside kick, but based on the numbers the choice had equal upside and downside.
Comments
A two score lead is much better than an eight points lead.
Going for 2 made no sense there either, but was very unlikely to cost them. They went from having to give up 2 scores just to tie (TD and 2 pt conversion) to only having to give up 1 score to tie. True, OSU is dreck and wasn't going to score, but still, stupid. It's a loser mentality just like taking a knee with less than a minute left to run out the clock with a lead in AZ vs. running your sure handed running back take the hand off. Good football management is good football management.
obligatory
She was worth the $12.00 I paid for her.
I'm not an Internet Tough Guy. I'm a guy who likes to maximize the odds of winning.
Any dumbass white trash trump voter can see that. Only a retard needs to see the expected values and probabilities.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/win_prob.cgi?request=1&vegas_line=0&score_differential=-7&quarter=4&minutes=2&seconds=0&field=team&yds_from_goal=25&down=1&yds_to_go=10
7 point lead = 89% chance
8 point lead = 93% chance
9 point lead = 97% chance
Personally I think the 97% number is too low because you have to recover an onside kick, but based on the numbers the choice had equal upside and downside.