Ron just staked his career (and potentially the season) on that playcall

[Mage]

1 minute ago, fjblair said:

Relax man, there was no "guarantee" the Lions would score, which renders your rant rather pointless.

I'm not the one acting like it is a guarantee they would score though.  

My point was if people wanna act like it is a guarantee, then I'm not sure how kicking the XP or going for 2 makes a difference.

[Mage]

3 minutes ago, jopie87 said:

The criticism would be on Gano. You have a top 5 paid kicker in the league, you expect him to make the extra point. 

Baltimore lost earlier this year on a missed extra point. I didnt see a single person blaming the coach.

Nor should they.  But do you really, genuinely believe the same people who are criticizing Rivera right now wouldn't just be criticizing him if he opted to kick with a kicker who had already missed twice and he missed again?  Or if we went to OT, Lions, got the ball first, and scored?  "Oh why would Rivera have faith in this defense?!"

Come on.  You and I are both on this forum.  We know what would happen.  

[SZ James (banned)]

16 minutes ago, PhillyB said:

a minute plus with stafford and all time outs and four downs and an amazing kicker in a dome.

for a kick that would've been a game winner even if you had just kicked the XP.

its not defensible my dude 

if they get a FG they win anyway

e- missed your other post

your scenario works if the Lions run out the clock next pos. 

you don't know if they would but if they did, it only emphasizes the fact that they  know they have a massive advantage, that being home field in OT

[jopie87]

Remember a few years back when they kicked a field goal which forced Buffalo to go for the win instead of the tie. This takes its place as the worst decision they have made.

[fjblair]

12 minutes ago, Mage said:

Ya'll act like the Lions would have just stopped trying to score if we tied it up.  And quite frankly, we wouldn't have been in this position if Gano would have made his 2 kicks.  How is the decision by Rivera bad?  What faith did Gano give him to even think, if XP was the best decision, that he would make it?
 

I mean seriously.  If we kicked the XP and Gano missed his 3rd kick, ya'll honest to God wouldn't be criticizing Rivera?  I doubt that.  This is just confirmation bias.

Gano has made a million PAT's and the odds for him making that one are overwhelming. It's not complicated, and there is no nuance to the decision to kick the PAT.

[Mage]

6 minutes ago, PhillyB said:

quoted the wrong post earlier.

see above: NOT kicking the XP doesn't stop them either. they win if they kick a field goal either way. the extra point is nearly meaningless unless you expect your leaky D to make a full stop against a lions team with loads of cards in their hands.

Yes, I know how scoring works.  This still fails to explain how going for 2 is a worse decision than kicking the XP.  You still aren't explaining that.  So I'm confused at what side your own.  How does kicking the XP give us better odds than going for the 2pt?

[jopie87]

3 minutes ago, Mage said:

I'm not the one acting like it is a guarantee they would score though.  

My point was if people wanna act like it is a guarantee, then I'm not sure how kicking the XP or going for 2 makes a difference.

Going for two, best case scenario you are giving them 4 downs to drive and beat you all the way down. They may stop them but you are giving them more plays to suceed with.

Going for two, worst case scenario, we saw it.

Best case scenario on the extra point, you tie and remove the "go for every 4th down until field goal range" option.

[Mage]

1 minute ago, fjblair said:

Have you watched other NFL games? Gano has made a million PAT's and the odds for him making that one are overwhelming. It's not complicated, and there is no nuance to the decision to kick the PAT.

Yes, I've watched other NFL games.  What kind of argument is that?  Gano missed 2 FGs in the game.  And he's missed multiple XPs this year.  It isn't a gimme.

But at the end of the day, I wouldn't have made a reactionary thread regardless.  If you think we should have kicked the XP, fine.  But to act like the 2 point call was some terrible decision?  Come on now.

[Carl Spackler]

2 minutes ago, Mage said:

Yes, I know how scoring works.  This still fails to explain how going for 2 is a worse decision than kicking the XP.  You still aren't explaining that.  So I'm confused at what side your own.  How does kicking the XP give us better odds than going for the 2pt?

If Graham Gano is involved in one of the choices, that choice is unequivocally the worst choice possible. 

[1919Eternal]

3 minutes ago, Mage said:

Gano missed 2 kicks in the game already and has always been shaky as hell on XPs.  What makes you think him kicking the FG > Cam Newton converting from 2 yards?

And show me the math then if I'm so bad.  For us to win with the XP, we'd need to stop them from scoring on a field goal the next drive, hope they don't get the ball first in OT, hope we get more than a field goal in OT, and hope they don't respond with a FG of their own or much less, a TD.

For us to win with a 2pt, we'd just need to stop them from scoring a field goal on the next drive.

How in the hell is the first scenario better odds than the second?

Gano's XP conversion is 92.3% this year vs Carolina's 2 point conversion rate of 50% this year.   The next drive is meaningless if you don't convert the the 2 point conversion.  You are cutting you are odds to win by almost 50%.  Even if we had made it, the Lions would still have a chance to win by scoring a field goal making the risk meaningless.  If we had gone to OT, we would still have a shot but we will never know because it was a stupid move. 

[PhillyB]

10 minutes ago, Mage said:

How is kicking the XP better than going for the 2 point conversion?  

because the difference between 20 points and 21 points is nominal compared to what happens if the lions kick a field goal, but the difference between 19 points and 20 points if you miss is winning and losing right away.

i don't know how else to explain it

[jopie87]

3 minutes ago, Mage said:

Yes, I know how scoring works.  This still fails to explain how going for 2 is a worse decision than kicking the XP.  You still aren't explaining that.  So I'm confused at what side your own.  How does kicking the XP give us better odds than going for the 2pt?

4th and 3 at their own 32, Lions down 1 with 25 seconds left, do they go for it?

4th and 3 at their own 32, Lions tied with 25 seconds left, do they go for it?

That is the difference. You force them to be more aggressive if they are down 1.

[Mage]

Just now, jopie87 said:

Going for two, best case scenario you are giving them 4 downs to drive and beat you all the way down. They may stop them but you are giving them more plays to suceed with.

Going for two, worst case scenario, we saw it.

Best case scenario on the extra point, you tie and remove the "go for every 4th down until field goal range" option.

What?  The Lions almost certainly would have tried to get into field goal range with over a minute left and 2 timeouts.  What are you talking about?

And giving them more downs?  You act like they'd somehow hit 4th down 2 or 3 times on a single drive in 1 minute.  It might make a one play difference.  And besides, they would just get more plays in overtime.

[jopie87]

2 minutes ago, Mage said:

What?  The Lions almost certainly would have tried to get into field goal range with over a minute left and 2 timeouts.  What are you talking about?

And giving them more downs?  You act like they'd somehow hit 4th down 2 or 3 times on a single drive in 1 minute.  It might make a one play difference.  And besides, they would just get more plays in overtime.

Approach is far different when tied versus down 1.