Search results

You would be mistaken on both counts. The issue I have with your analysis is that your "58% win" is fully dependent on scoring two touchdowns, thus the idea that it represents a true probability of winning the game is at best a conclusion that can be easily misinterpreted. Prob(B | A) = Prob(B...

The compound probability of scoring 1 PAT followed by a 2 PAT is the same as the probability of scoring a 2 PAT followed by a 1 PAT, as long as the assumptions for converting the 1 PAT and 2 PAT remain the same for both the first and second touchdowns. Thus the expectation of getting a total of...

It's an excuse, a throw away remark from the KF-speak repertoire. Again, it's a subtle way of saying that the players are inadequate until they are fully developed, which mostly depends on the players desire and work ethic to get better.

I'll bite but I'll tell you right up front, I am answering for myself, I do not pretend to know how KF proceeds through his "logical" thought process. I would say it's poor decision-making, i.e. game planning because your son is trying to overcome your overplaying his strong side by executing...

I will also mention that the 47% figure is from the NFL and is probably based on their latest rule change of placing the ball at the 2 yard line. Thus the idea that the college average is 47% is likely overstated, and in Iowa's current case, drastically overstated, given their recent offensive...

Okay, I will concede you are using conditional probabilities correctly, however, your 58% probability of victory is highly dependent on the 47% two point conversion success rate. If you take this assumption down to 40%, the overall probability is just over 50%. Bottom line, does KF believe his...

You can put odds on anything, but there are all kinds of variables to take into account, and the global 47% average is only a starting point. Like any "average", it cannot be uniformly applied to all teams because some teams are better than average and some are worse. And if I was betting I...

No, I'm not forgetting anything. And Gohawks does not have all possible scenarios factored into his example because you can also tie the game by kicking two PATs. The probability of successfully doing that is 90.25% and if that is accomplished, you now have a 50/50 chance of winning by...

I had not read Gohawks' post before I posted mine. Now that I have read it, I will comment. I agree on his calculations regarding the probabilities of winning or losing in regulation (although I believe the % for 1 PAT is higher than 95% and the % for 2 PAT is lower, especially for Iowa), but...

You are certainly entitled to believe whatever you wish, but you are not allowed to conflate your belief with logic. Again, you're making several conditional assumptions to arrive at your probabilities. Logically, the goal is to score the most points, and this is based on probabilities...

You don't seem to understand the concept of conditional probability. If you are 14 points down, the reason you don't go for two is the much higher percentage play is to kick the PAT and do the same if you score another TD. It DOES NOT help your chances to win the game if you FAIL to convert...

Absolutely, especially when it is clear that game planning and play calling was the main reason for "poor execution". Accountability for the entire coaching staff is lacking; under KF the reason for failure is almost always due to players not executing properly. I can go along with that...

I'm not sure if I can make it any plainer than this: Because of the limited period of time left in the game, you will only have ONE more opportunity to possess the ball, and that presumes you recover the onside kick. If you play the much riskier option and go for 2 when you are 9 points down...

At the risk of extending this discussion, let me make a few points. First, let's set the stage by providing the known information: 1. Iowa just scored a touchdown, they are 9 points down with just over one minute to play. 2. Iowa's offense has been poor for most of the game, Stanley has been...

I understand that we're not going to hear KF talk about the next opponent in any detail, other than to highlight what has been working for them thus far. If you asked him what he had seen on tape that he thinks can be exploited and how they plan to do it, he's not going to answer that question...

If possible, I would ask that the OC and DC coordinators be available to answer questions and I would ask them what tendencies/weaknesses they had noticed on tape and how they game planned to exploit those weaknesses. And as they were answering, I would look at their facial expressions and...

The questions that KF will not answer ARE LEGITIMATE questions, that's the problem.

I don't know, but one thing I am sure of, KF needs to explain the decision that was made. If he is not willing to do that much, what is his team supposed to think of him and his staff? I know he does not want his team second guessing him in public but how can you play well for a coach and...

I really doubt it, especially when they have literally no offensive play they can count on to get them the needed yardage. I really think whoever made the decision failed to understand the ramifications of failing to get the 2 point conversion after the score; i.e. turning it into a two...

I agree, he would have to start over but at least he could say he earned it, which he cannot say now.