Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
lod001

Analytics is a complete failure & HCs are retarded

Recommended Posts

I'm no fan of over-reliance on analytics, but I think the Raiders decisions were fine.  Keep in mind the only reason they were even in the game is they went for it on 4th and 1 and scored a TD earlier in the game. 

I heard a guy make an interesting point against the decision to go for two which I didn't think of.  If the Raiders go up 1, it puts the Chiefs in a spot where they have to score and given that the Raiders couldn't stop the Chiefs for 5 straight drives, the chances of stopping the Chiefs on 4 downs when they couldn't stop them on 3 was not in their best interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lod001 said:

I'll admit the calls were not the worst but they are losing games when they coach makes stupid calls. This is happening weekly. You know its bad when you can sit on your couch and scream at the TV, take the points on 4th & goal with the score 6-0 in the 1st Q. Hell, even Keenan Allen called out his own coach from his couch asking "WTF are we doing going for it on 4th down at our own 30". Coaches are idiots who are hooked on analytics. I'm not sure if its that it gives them someone else to blame for their ignorant calls but that's what it seems like. 'oh I was just being told to go for it by my analytics crew'. Well then why re we paying you big $ to do nothing?. An excuse of 'well the chiefs are scoring on us' is especially super lame when you scored the same number of points. 

not disagreeing with you at all.   lets be clear on this.

Analytics are a tool to be used like any other.   but you dont use them in lieu of common sense,    you use the tool to your advantage when it makes sense to do so.

you also need to take into account game flow, and how your team is playing.   at least in the raiders game, they had been owning the chiefs on the line, so the decision to run the ball on the two point convert made some sense even if it was the wrong call.

but why would you turn down a 99% chance to tie the game on an extra point with very little time to go in the game?

if worried about the defense holding, it wont matter if you lead by one or if you are tied.   KC had time to drive the ball down the field either way and if you got the ball back it wouldnt be with much time left on the clock.

there was no way the analyitics would help you with that.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you always go for 2 instead of 1, you only need a success rate of 50% (or actually slightly less) to equal your overall point production compared to always going for 1.

In the NFL, the success rate of 2 point conversions is about 48%, so you should NEVER go for 2, according to that success rate.

However, the success rate of 2 point conversions rushing is about 62% (while passing is about 43%), so you should ALWAYS go for 2--on the ground--given that success rate.

Look before you leap, but he who hesitates is lost...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to be an analytics expert witness for defensive coordinators playing the Saints. It goes something like this.......if Taysom Hill runs on to the field, he is getting the ball. Do not be fooled. Tackle him before he scores. 100% guaranteed success. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another loss due to stupid coaches. Had the bears kicked the FG early in the game with the score at 0-0, they would only have need to kick a FG at the end.

Back when coaches knew how to coach the unwritten rule was take the points. The score is 0-0 in the 1st Q and this idiot goes for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lod001 said:

Another loss due to stupid coaches. Had the bears kicked the FG early in the game with the score at 0-0, they would only have need to kick a FG at the end.

Back when coaches knew how to coach the unwritten rule was take the points. The score is 0-0 in the 1st Q and this idiot goes for it.

yeah and in a defensive battle a FG is valuable points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

It's funny how whenever a gamble is successful, nobody says they shouldn't have done it.

its also funny how certain coaches have a higher percentage of being right than others.  

and certain coaches are almost never wrong when they take a risky gamble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

and certain coaches are almost never wrong when they take a risky gamble.

Those are the ones with Mahomes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AxeElf said:

It's funny how whenever a gamble is successful, nobody says they shouldn't have done it.

I'm glad you singled me out there because I have 100% definitely said that even after a successful conversion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listening to the nerds try to defend all these analytic failures by blaming the play calling is hilarious.  Never question if the model is accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, nobody said:

Listening to the nerds try to defend all these analytic failures by blaming the play calling is hilarious.  Never question if the model is accurate.

Agreed.  Oh and this analytics is also ruining baseball.  Why did we let dateless dorks take over our pro sports? Send these doofusses back to the lab where they can work on rounding off infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2022 at 12:55 PM, lod001 said:

Title change to better show the ignorance of todays NFL.

This weeks loser is Cincy. The Chargers should have joined them but the Browns inept play calling at the end caused them to have to try a 54 yarder instead of an easier one. They had 1:10 to get 15-20 yards and make it less than a 50 yarder but they called a deep out like idiots. Wasted down.

Week 4 , the Falcons were the idiots of the week by going for it on 4th & 3 from the 4 instead of kicking the game tying FG.

The Lions went full on stupid at least once week so far. Their idiot coach made 2 bonehead calls that were fireable calls.

Can't remember the other stupid go for it on 4th down moves so far but it's been rampant and the majority have failed.

Analytics takes nothing into account as far as the rank of the defense you are playing against, weather, etc. With the large number of 4th down failures costing games this year, it should be pointing to 'take the points' and 'punt the damn ball' by now. Otherwise it would be more complex like 'when going for it on 4th down vs a top 10 defense, the analytics says to punt or kick the FG.'

Raiders lose going for 2 when down 1.

Week 6. CHI goes for it at the 1. Fail. -3 points. Forced them to score a TD to win instead of a FG.

Analytics has been a load of since day one. Translates to baseball too. Buck Showalter had a pitchers ears checked for substances based on people saying crap o Twitter. If it was accurate why didn't the "analytics" team pick up on it?

 

Just play the freaking game and keep the nerds away from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is becoming increasingly clear that none of you know what analytics are and how they work...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jrokh said:

It is becoming increasingly clear that none of you know what analytics are and how they work...

Dunning and Kruger are the gods of the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

Dunning and Kruger are the gods of the internet.

for sure, tends to rear its head in Fantasy Football as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely know what analytics is.  Probably better than most.  The reason I'm so skeptical is I happen to overlap with the field of modelling and I'm aware of all the pitfalls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, all the people who just trust this shìt like it's gospel are kind of telling on themselves.  Some dude coded up a bunch of stuff, and because it sounds complicated, we're supposed to just assume they're all correct.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may know what it is, but you don't know how it works or how its implemented. Analytics are neither correct nor incorrect, for the record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jrokh said:

You may know what it is, but you don't know how it works or how its implemented. Analytics are neither correct nor incorrect, for the record.

I know how it works.  I don't know how it's implemented.  But neither do you, so why do you you trust it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nobody said:

I know how it works.  I don't know how it's implemented.  But neither do you, so why do you you trust it?

I think part of the problem is some coaches dont use it properly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, nobody said:

I know how it works.  I don't know how it's implemented.  But neither do you, so why do you you trust it?

Never said I do. It’s just data. What’s to trust?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jrokh said:

Never said I do. It’s just data. What’s to trust?

That the data and the context under which it should be applied are accurate. 

That's what I've been saying the whole time.  All this is someone's computer code spitting out a percentage.  If you don't know exactly what went into making that computer code, how the hell can you say for certain that it's either accurate or applicable to the situation?

I'm claiming it's likely not overly applicable to a certain situation since the amount of variables that go into predicting the future of a game are legion, and the models likely don't cover enough of them accurately enough.

The problem is people who have know idea what they're talking about see that a computer spits out a number and assume it must be perfect since it's a computer.

I'll go back to one of my previous arguments, if it was so easy to accurately predict the chances of winning a game, we wouldn't waste it on determining 4th down calls.  Syndicates would use it to make money gambling.  The error bars around these predictions are huge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I trust that a guy like Paul Depodesta, who now works in the Browns front office is extremely well qualified to determine which data sets to trust and which to discard…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking Analytics (for 4th down decisions) doesn't account for if your QB is Pat Mahomes or Carson Wentz or the matchup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Gepetto said:

I'm thinking Analytics (for 4th down decisions) doesn't account for if your QB is Pat Mahomes or Carson Wentz or the matchup.

In general, you are correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2022 at 9:03 AM, Donkey said:

not going with the most pc thread title i guess...

No doubt about it, it's not a pretty word. That being said, I believe in free speech & thankful that this forum doesn't censor things like that.

Anyone who finds it extremely offensive, can choose to find another forum. That's the way it should be.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody actually lost yesterday with stupid moves but they tried.

Jax. ran the option on 4th and 1. 🤣🤣 Pretty sure I don't have to divulge the result. You already know it.

CLE was tied 3-3. Went for it on 4th down on the NE 18. FAIL. They got shellacked by ZAPPE!!! after that.

Packers went for it on 4th & 3. They threw a deep low % pass. 🤣 Rogers cashed another paycheck which is all he cares about.

There were 2 other idiot moves that failed this week. Don't recall seeing any successful idiot moves.

The product on the field in 2022 is mostly complete garbage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Nobody actually lost yesterday with stupid moves but they tried.

Jax. ran the option on 4th and 1. 🤣🤣 Pretty sure I don't have to divulge the result. You already know it.

CLE was tied 3-3. Went for it on 4th down on the NE 18. FAIL. They got shellacked by ZAPPE!!! after that.

Packers went for it on 4th & 3. They threw a deep low % pass. 🤣 Rogers cashed another paycheck which is all he cares about.

There were 2 other idiot moves that failed this week. Don't recall seeing any successful idiot moves.

The product on the field in 2022 is mostly complete garbage.

A+

ZAPPE HOUR!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, easilyscan said:

A+

ZAPPE HOUR!

He looked good. Fortunately Belicheck is still HC so if he thinks Zappe is the better QB, he won't give a crap that Mac Jones was a 1st rounder. Most HC's feel the need to continue putting whatever was drafted in the 1st Rd out on the field as the GM wants to prove he knows what he's doing, even though its obvious he does not.

All the while the Bears FO/HC won't give up on what is obviously a pile of sh1t at QB in fields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2022 at 11:53 AM, Gepetto said:

I'm thinking Analytics (for 4th down decisions) doesn't account for if your QB is Pat Mahomes or Carson Wentz or the matchup.

you can adjust to account for that, but the problem is your sample size becomes smaller and your error rate then becomes larger.

that is another problem with analytics.   if you encounter a unique situation where analyitics have been reliable in the past but your situation is different, you have to make sure your analysis is still accurate with the new situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ray_T said:

If you encounter a unique situation where analyitics have been reliable in the past but your situation is different, you have to make sure your analysis is still accurate with the new situation.

That's the biggest problem with analytics/statistics.  In the NFL pretty much every situation is unique.  Unless you have data on the same 11 guys/coaching staffs against the same opposing 11 guys/coaching staffs in the game same situation any percentage is just a number based on historical performance in similar situations and really has no bearing on the situation at hand (and even if you had that data, it would not really tell you much because unlike flipping a a fair coin, these are human beings that need to work together as a team - not robots that function the same way every time).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Analytics are just Data. The HC still has to make the call, and the players have to execute the play. The analytics don't change whether a single play is successful or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Showboat said:

That's the biggest problem with analytics/statistics.  In the NFL pretty much every situation is unique.  Unless you have data on the same 11 guys/coaching staffs against the same opposing 11 guys/coaching staffs in the game same situation any percentage is just a number based on historical performance in similar situations and really has no bearing on the situation at hand (and even if you had that data, it would not really tell you much because unlike flipping a a fair coin, these are human beings that need to work together as a team - not robots that function the same way every time).

agreed. 

you cant use analyitics the same way you do in baseball.   

you just cant.

and baseball is such a long season you can get a real large sample size over 100+ games played which makes your statistics more valid.

in football, each team has a strategy both offensive and defensive.  and then you have special players that can upset the analytics.   in a 16 game season, its really tough for analyitics because your sample size is small in terms of games played.   and if your opponent is New England (for example) how many defenses out there are comparable in terms of scheme and talent?

you could argue the same for Buffalo and probably 3 or 4 other teams out there.

the answer is likely none are similar.  or one is similar and if your team hasnt played that defense its really tough to use the tool.

sure you can look at results vs the run the pass and various permutations and combinations but its only gonna help you so much.   The better focus is still (and always will be) on execution of the game plan.    Do your job, do it well.   if you execute to the letter, usually you have success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2022 at 2:57 PM, easilyscan said:

No doubt about it, it's not a pretty word. That being said, I believe in free speech & thankful that this forum doesn't censor things like that.

Anyone who finds it extremely offensive, can choose to find another forum. That's the way it should be.

 

In the words of the Dude, "this isn't a first amendment issue, man"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/17/2022 at 5:02 PM, lod001 said:

There were 2 other idiot moves that failed this week. Don't recall seeing any successful idiot moves.

Seahawks with ball at Giants 18, early 2nd Quarter score 0-0.  4th and 1. Go for it. Get first down.

Same drive, Seahawks at Giants 6. 4th and 2. Go for it. Get first down.

Eventually scored TD.

0-0 early 2nd quarter.... I just don't understand it. It's not like the Seahawks are in what-the-hell mode with no shot at playoffs. They've got a winning record.?.  It worked that time, but I still think it's insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Seahawks with ball at Giants 18, early 2nd Quarter score 0-0.  4th and 1. Go for it. Get first down.

Same drive, Seahawks at Giants 6. 4th and 2. Go for it. Get first down.

Eventually scored TD.

0-0 early 2nd quarter.... I just don't understand it. It's not like the Seahawks are in what-the-hell mode with no shot at playoffs. They've got a winning record.?.  It worked that time, but I still think it's insane.

Oh it's dumb that early. You fail and your team deflates like a gas powered car's tires at a climate change rally. Hell the only team that did what you just said before all this analytics ignorance was the Brady-Moss led Patriots because they were unstoppable in the reg. season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Oh it's dumb that early. You fail and your team deflates like a gas powered car's tires at a climate change rally. Hell the only team that did what you just said before all this analytics ignorance was the Brady-Moss led Patriots because they were unstoppable in the reg. season. 

with Carroll I suspect he saw something on the D line he likely felt he could exploit.

I'd be surprised if that was analytics based.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×