Randy edsall started going for 2 in the 1st quarter today

thwg

thwg

Damn Good Rat
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
1,454
I'm being serious, this takes him off of any potential list for me. The easy decision making that can be made by any coach who could hire or use a grad assistant with regards to kicking the PAT or 2 pts. worries me. going for 2 just sounds too much like our last 2 head coaches. Personally, I'd prefer not to have 3 coaches in a row with PE degrees (did O'L have a degree at all?)

Going for 2 in the 1st quarter is just plain stupid. Do these guys ever have to take a statistics course? surely they have a math prof on campus who can help them make better decision-making. Grobe's last few calls before the FG attempt were almost as frustrating as Gailey at MD.
 
Last edited:
thwg said:
Do these guys ever have to take a stistics course?
Click to expand...

Everything I've ever seen says that the 2 point conversion rate is about 40%, which means it is not necessarily a bad idea. Why do you think it is so dumb, specifically in relation to statistics? I have a feeling that you and a lot of other people say this just because it is accepted that you always go for the near-sure thing in the extra point, just like it is accepted that you need to punt on 4th and 2 from your own 30. However, no one has really ever challenged this, except for Bill Belichick this year, and his team is so good that it might be a moot point.

Bottom line, I'm not sure this is a horrible idea. It's just something that has never really been tried before, mainly because coaches would catch a lot of crap if they tried it and it failed.
 
Randy is a great coach and person, some school is about to try and snatch him up!!
 
Sometimes it's best to not go by the book and let the game dictate what you need to do.
 
I didn't get to watch the game (don't have "The U"), but did follow the game on ESPN's GameTracker.

For someone that actually got to see the game, did UConn actually attempt a 2 pt conversion? According to the online play-by-play, PK Tony Ciaravino missed the PAT after UConn scored to go up 8-0 (They were already leading 2-0 after a blocked punt for a safety). Later in the 1st, Ciaravino converted his next PAT to make it 18-3.
 
A 2 point conversion always makes sense with at least a 50 percent probability of success. Well, I didn't watch the game, but maybe he thought he had the defense on the ropes after that first drive or something like that. I've seen good coaches do some pretty unorthodox things, like kicking an onside kick in the first quarter.
 
Maybe there was a reason he made that call.
Do they have an injured kicker? Was it to throw off the other team? Either would make it a good call. Kinda like going for an onside kick in the second quarter.
 
gth816f said:
Everything I've ever seen says that the 2 point conversion rate is about 40%, which means it is not necessarily a bad idea. Why do you think it is so dumb, specifically in relation to statistics? I have a feeling that you and a lot of other people say this just because it is accepted that you always go for the near-sure thing in the extra point, just like it is accepted that you need to punt on 4th and 2 from your own 30. However, no one has really ever challenged this, except for Bill Belichick this year, and his team is so good that it might be a moot point.

Bottom line, I'm not sure this is a horrible idea. It's just something that has never really been tried before, mainly because coaches would catch a lot of crap if they tried it and it failed.
Click to expand...
40% makes it a horrible idea. 0.95 * 1 > 0.4 * 2.
 
gth816f said:
Everything I've ever seen says that the 2 point conversion rate is about 40%, which means it is not necessarily a bad idea. Why do you think it is so dumb, specifically in relation to statistics? I have a feeling that you and a lot of other people say this just because it is accepted that you always go for the near-sure thing in the extra point, just like it is accepted that you need to punt on 4th and 2 from your own 30. However, no one has really ever challenged this, except for Bill Belichick this year, and his team is so good that it might be a moot point.

Bottom line, I'm not sure this is a horrible idea. It's just something that has never really been tried before, mainly because coaches would catch a lot of crap if they tried it and it failed.
Click to expand...

I believe the rate is closer to 30% but even at 40% it's dumb. That would mean the PAT rate would need to be in the 80% range to be a wash.

He went for 2 because it was 8-0 and he decided the book that O'Leary gave him said to go for 2. There was no logical reason. His kicker kicked fine the rest of the day.
 
JoltinJacket said:
I didn't get to watch the game (don't have "The U"), but did follow the game on ESPN's GameTracker.

For someone that actually got to see the game, did UConn actually attempt a 2 pt conversion? According to the online play-by-play, PK Tony Ciaravino missed the PAT after UConn scored to go up 8-0 (They were already leading 2-0 after a blocked punt for a safety). Later in the 1st, Ciaravino converted his next PAT to make it 18-3.
Click to expand...

I was watching multiple games and did not see the play. I was told by the guy next to me they went for 2 and didn't make it which led us into a long discussion on whether or not it was the right call. This guy was taking the position it was as it would have put them up 10-0. I assumed he actually saw the play since he was taking Edsall's side. If he was drunk and they actually missed the PAT, then I am fine with Edsall as coach still.;)
 
If we ever hire a coach who is bad at math we have plenty of kids on campus we could hire for pizza and beer who could be the designated "student assistant math geek" and help him out with it.
 
GTKyle said:
40% makes it a horrible idea. 0.95 * 1 > 0.4 * 2.
Click to expand...

I was just trying to point out that math does not suggest that you should overwhelmingly not do it. Someone in this thread already pointed out VT doing an onside kick against us, something that math and conventional football wisdom don't dictate. There is a slight mathematical edge to kicking the PAT, but there are other things to consider in football besides math. He just had a different philosophy about what to do in an unusual situation with regards to the score...and since he's been doing pretty well this season I think he gets a pass.
 
Going for 2 in the 1st quarter is just plain stupid.
Click to expand...

O'Leary lost us a game this way. Seems like it was Clemson 2001, but I can't remember for sure. Started going for 2 early in the 3rd quarter, missed every won, and 3 TDs later we lost by 1 or 2.
 
beej67 said:
O'Leary lost us a game this way. Seems like it was Clemson 2001, but I can't remember for sure. Started going for 2 early in the 3rd quarter, missed every won, and 3 TDs later we lost by 1 or 2.
Click to expand...
Nice beej.
 
beej67 said:
O'Leary lost us a game this way. Seems like it was Clemson 2001, but I can't remember for sure. Started going for 2 early in the 3rd quarter, missed every won, and 3 TDs later we lost by 1 or 2.
Click to expand...

It was @ UVA '01. I was so mad at GOL for not breaking the streak, and it further solidified my stance at never going for 2 until late in the game/absolutely necessary.
 
2001 was also the year Clemson beat us by scoring 40 points in the second half by repeatedly calling the Woody Danzler Draw Play, right?

Hard to believe we'da had an 11 win season in 2001 if it weren't for those two boneheaded coaching decisions.

It's also hard to believe Tech fans forget that crap when they're touting O'Leary as a good coach.
 
you shouldn't even entertain the notion of going for two until you reach the 4th quarter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top