Classic example of retard math by a college coach. What planet are these animals from?

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

LMFAO at this fucking animal of a coach at Colorado.

Down 31-14 with about 4:00 left. At the 19 yard line. 4th and 5.

Any way that you slice it, you need 3 scores. Two TD's and a FG. So what does he do on 4th and 5? He fucking goes for it. LMFAO. Absolute moron. Luckily, they're blanketing all the receivers and the QB escapes and sprints into the end zone.

Touchdown. Okay, they got lucky. You still need a TD and a FG.

What does the fucking donkey do? LMFAO. He fucking goes for two. Absolutely no benefit, no advantage and it makes zero fucking sense.

I watch the Pats' coach and just go, "That's fucking smart. That's the right play. Common sense." 90% of these other fucktard coaches can't do basic math. It is absolutely fucking amazing.

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

Speaking of retards, Caroline Garcia might be the dumbest bitch I've seen in a while.

0-40 chance to break Pliskova and tanks it.

On her own serve he blows an easy smash.

Now she's got a huge point at 30-30 on Plis' serve and it's time for another smash. This time she lets it bounce and can go for the kill. She fucking hits it right to Pliskova when she had 80% of the court open.... Ha ha. French players just can't help but suck ass and choke dick.

Now *3-4

Will get broken.

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

holds

4-4

choking away more chances to break

5-4

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

Ha ha. Bitch is out-dumbing herself.

5-5

Should be 0-30, instead it's 30-0. It's like she's trying to lose.

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

6-6

here comes a massive choke in the TB

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

1-0 Plis

2-1 Plis... up a mini. right on sched. fucking choking French whore

3-1 choke

4-1 what a fuckign loser

French are a fuckign joke

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

5-1

ha ha. what a loser

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

5-3

brak here and might have a shot

5-4!!!!

on serve. but no doubt will massive choke

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

5-5

one more serve... get it and its set point....

WHAT A FUCKIGN LOSER.... CHOKED AGAIN... AND AGAIN ON A SMASH

FUCKING BITCH

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

6-5 Plis serve for it.... she chokes

6-6

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

double break!!!
7-6 SERVING FOR IT NOW!!!

COME ON WHORE!!!

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

fucking pahetic

7-7

one more serve

8-7 SP again

RunMaker · Oct 14, 2018

WOW!!!!

DOWN 5-1 AND WINS IT.... tried to outchoke herself... but pulled off the miracle.

bodyforlife · Oct 14, 2018

RunMaker said:
LMFAO at this fucking animal of a coach at Colorado.

Down 31-14 with about 4:00 left. At the 19 yard line. 4th and 5.

Any way that you slice it, you need 3 scores. Two TD's and a FG. So what does he do on 4th and 5? He fucking goes for it. LMFAO. Absolute moron. Luckily, they're blanketing all the receivers and the QB escapes and sprints into the end zone.

Touchdown. Okay, they got lucky. You still need a TD and a FG.

What does the fucking donkey do? LMFAO. He fucking goes for two. Absolutely no benefit, no advantage and it makes zero fucking sense.

I watch the Pats' coach and just go, "That's fucking smart. That's the right play. Common sense." 90% of these other fucktard coaches can't do basic math. It is absolutely fucking amazing.

Not going to say I totally agree on not going for it on a 4th down play. You can always kick a fg from a much larger distance. In a situation like that, I'd say it's a bit of a coin toss with it being close enough to the end zone and only needing 5 yards for a first down. The two point conversion was absolutely idiotic. Of course, this kind of coaching stupidity is not reserved only for college football. There have certainly been more than a few bonehead calls by coaches in the NFL this year.

TomGshotput · Oct 14, 2018

RunMaker said:
What does the fucking donkey do? LMFAO. He fucking goes for two. Absolutely no benefit, no advantage and it makes zero fucking sense.

The benefit is that it most likely increases the teams chance of winning, according to most math based in reality*: https://predictivefootball.com/late-and-trailing-by-14-points-always-go-for-2-after-a-touchdown/

The graphic in that article is awesome. If Colorado scored a field goal and two touch downs and had a 100% chance of making both one-point attempts (which it didn't), they still would have only had a 50% chance of winning in overtime.

However ... had Colorado scored a field goal and two touch downs and gone for two on that first touchdown (with a 50% chance of success), their chance of winning in regulation would have been 50%. But they would have had a chance to win in OT also (by making two points on the second TD). Their overall chance of winning would have been over 60%

The math on going for it on fourth and five is a bit more complicated.

*If the chance making a two point conversion was less than 40%, going for two is the wrong call

Greenbacks · Oct 14, 2018

5-0 ranked team catching 7 points from a 3-2 team

bodyforlife · Oct 14, 2018

TomGshotput said:
The benefit is that it most likely increases the teams chance of winning, according to most math based in reality*: https://predictivefootball.com/late-and-trailing-by-14-points-always-go-for-2-after-a-touchdown/

The graphic in that article is awesome. If Colorado scored a field goal and two touch downs and had a 100% chance of making both one-point attempts (which it didn't), they still would have only had a 50% chance of winning in overtime.

However ... had Colorado scored a field goal and two touch downs and gone for two on that first touchdown (with a 50% chance of success), their chance of winning in regulation would have been 50%. But they would have had a chance to win in OT also (by making two points on the second TD). Their overall chance of winning would have been over 60%

The math on going for it on fourth and five is a bit more complicated.

*If the chance making a two point conversion was less than 40%, going for two is the wrong call

I remember the saying that there are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics. I happen to believe this is one of those cases. Not that it matters all that much, but I believe Colorado was down by 17 when they made the move (not the 14 that the article states). I also think, at least with the NFL, it is not factoring in the outcome of a tie. In addition, it has some assumptions of Clevelands likelihood of winning at 35% in OT. I'm not quite sure where they get that from and it sounds rather subjective. How would anyone know that? There are plenty of things that go on doing a game that certainly change the likelihood of a team winning. Key players get eliminated for targeting fouls that can certainly change one team's advantage. How would a pointspread change if, for example, a player of the caliber of JJ Watts was removed from the game in the 1st quarter? Would anyone in their right mind think that wouldn't give the other team an advantage if the game came down to a possible OT outcome? I also believe college football still has a relatively close PAT compared to the NFL.

CoolBreeze22 · Oct 14, 2018

Going for 2 in that spot certainly isn't the traditional move but if the odds of converting a 2 pt. conversion are close to 50/50 then going for two there greatly increases their chances of winning the game in regulation vs. winning the game in overtime(obvious a lot of things still had to happen, but that is the philosophy.)

bodyforlife · Oct 14, 2018

CoolBreeze22 said:
Going for 2 in that spot certainly isn't the traditional move but if the odds of converting a 2 pt. conversion are close to 50/50 then going for two there greatly increases their chances of winning the game in regulation vs. winning the game in overtime(obvious a lot of things still had to happen, but that is the philosophy.)

I'd love to see them run their numbers and include the tie (maybe I missed it in the article, but I do believe they are only looking at the "winning" scenario). Clearly any coach would take a tie or win, over a loss. I think that truly is more the question.

CoolBreeze22 · Oct 14, 2018

No ties in the college example but I get what you're saying.

Classic example of retard math by a college coach. What planet are these animals from?

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Member

Rx. Senior

Active member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Forum statistics

Share this page