Ketchman on the two point conversion try

duck wrote:I've already said that at the time I felt a one-point try would have been better.  However, I also understood why MM went for two, given that fact that at that point in the game there was no indication that the Packers were capable of two more scores than Minnesota.



Some people, including Vic Ketchman, feel the two point try was a slam dunk.


*************************************



Matt from Columbia, SC

Why in the world did they go for two points? Does anyone realize we would have won if we had kicked the extra point?

Every coach in the league would’ve gone for two. Not having gone for two would’ve resulted in criticism so intense that it, too, could cost a coach his job. I have to believe 99.99 percent of all fans would’ve gone for two. I have to believe 100 percent of all the ex-jockos on NFL Network would’ve gone for two. Mike Mayock would’ve gone for two. The drunk in the upper deck would’ve gone for two. My dogs would’ve gone for two. Yet, as it turned out, it would’ve been better to go for one. What’s the point of all this? The point is that we overrate strategy. Just win, baby. It doesn’t matter how you do it, just do it. When you win, everything you say and do is right. When you lose, you are without excuse.

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:I've already said that at the time I felt a one-point try would have been better.  However, I also understood why MM went for two, given that fact that at that point in the game there was no indication that the Packers were capable of two more scores than Minnesota.



Some people, including Vic Ketchman, feel the two point try was a slam dunk.


*************************************



Matt from Columbia, SC

Why in the world did they go for two points? Does anyone realize we would have won if we had kicked the extra point?

Every coach in the league would’ve gone for two. Not having gone for two would’ve resulted in criticism so intense that it, too, could cost a coach his job. I have to believe 99.99 percent of all fans would’ve gone for two. I have to believe 100 percent of all the ex-jockos on NFL Network would’ve gone for two. Mike Mayock would’ve gone for two. The drunk in the upper deck would’ve gone for two. My dogs would’ve gone for two. Yet, as it turned out, it would’ve been better to go for one. What’s the point of all this? The point is that we overrate strategy. Just win, baby. It doesn’t matter how you do it, just do it. When you win, everything you say and do is right. When you lose, you are without excuse.

Once again...it's the dolts in your sportsbar, established idiots like Vic and cheesehead TV that tell you how you should think.  Ketchman has weighed in and once again established himself for what he is.  Engage your brain.  Early 4th quarter.  23-15, 23-14 or 23-13.  Do the risk assessment and probability table for the likelihood of each option.  Where do your best interests lie?  What do YOU think, Duck?  Hint:  It's a no-brainer for anyone this side of Vic Ketchman and Fatty McFatty...

_HD_ wrote:I've already said that at the time I felt a one-point try would have been better.  However, I also understood why MM went for two, given that fact that at that point in the game there was no indication that the Packers were capable of two more scores than Minnesota.



LOL!  Yup--that's Ketchman logic.  Let me ask you this, then...  If it was a foregone conclusion that the Pack wasn't capable of two more scores than Minnesota--why set yourself up to have to get into the enzone with THREE more (two 2-point conversions and one TD)?

Short bus logic, Duck.  You're listening to the wrong people.

Make it--you're still down 8...so it does NOTHING for you unless you want to believe that you're going to make TWO 2 point conversions in the SAME GAME.  Fail, and you're down 10 so a TD and FG only ties.  Take the sure bet and you WIN with a TD and FG.  These are the VIKINGS being played for Christ's sake.  No-fucking brainerland as everyone in the stands around me seemed to understand immediately.  THERE WAS STILL 12 FUCKING MINUTES LEFT IN THE GAME.  But--Vic said *99.99% of all fans would've gone for 2*, right?  You bring ridicule upon yourself for even posting his pile...

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:I've already said that at the time I felt a one-point try would have been better.  However, I also understood why MM went for two, given that fact that at that point in the game there was no indication that the Packers were capable of two more scores than Minnesota.



LOL!  Yup--that's Ketchman logic.  Let me ask you this, then...  If it was a foregone conclusion that the Pack wasn't capable of two more scores than Minnesota--why set yourself up to have to get into the enzone with THREE more (two 2-point conversions and one TD)?

Short bus logic, Duck.  You're listening to the wrong people.

Make it--you're still down 8...so it does NOTHING for you unless you want to believe that you're going to make TWO 2 point conversions in the SAME GAME.  Fail, and you're down 10 so a TD and FG only ties.  Take the sure bet and you WIN with a TD and FG.  These are the VIKINGS being played for Christ's sake.  No-fucking brainerland as everyone in the stands around me seemed to understand immediately.  THERE WAS STILL 12 FUCKING MINUTES LEFT IN THE GAME.  But--Vic said *99.99% of all fans would've gone for 2*, right?  You bring ridicule upon yourself for even posting his pile...

Really?  You should be embarrassed for being so close-minded to alternative viewpoints.

LOL!  Alternative viewpoints, Duck?  There are only two choices in this particular exam.  Wrong and right.  When you unnecessarily reach for risk in situations where the corresponding reward isn't equal to/greater than if you succeed--that's only called one thing, Duck.  STUPID.  You're right, I'm VERY close-minded to STUPID.   

Even though I actually happen to agree with you on this particular point, I wouldn't get uppity about it and suggest that anyone who disagreed with me is an idiot.

I do...but you see -- I didn't form my conclusion in a sports bar...  That's the difference, Duck.  I don't think I know.  I DO know.  If I don't know--I keep my mouth shut until I do...   

Ketchman isn't my favorite writer but he does provide many interesting and valid viewpoints.  From the seventies on, the guy has devoted his entire life to covering pro football.  He's seen hundreds of games from the press box, knows personally hundreds of players and coaches and has a much greater understanding of the behind the scenes and inner workings of the games than you or I.

So, he's an idiot whose been around a long time perfecting his craft of being an idiot--but that doesn't score any favor with me, Quackles...

But of course a couple of fans like you and I know much more than him.

It isn't necessarily a question of *what you know* Duck...  These are judgment calls.  Judgment comes down to how well your intellect can identify/process various outcome probabilities and appropriately assign risk/reward functions to them.  Idiots are defined by treating low probability calls as high and vice-versa and equally misjudging risk/reward.   Vic Ketchman is an unrepentent homer who does what he does for a living--for a reason...  They don't pay him for judgment because his role requires none....and judgment costs BIG $$$$$$$

I still think MM should have gone for one... but I can see the logic of his decision and I respect the fact that many other knowledgable people agree with him.  This is one of those points upon which good people can disagree.

Wrong.  Any time you swim upstream in the logic canal you BETTER have a valid corresponding desperation in play for doing so.  For example, if you're standing at the edge of a cliff with a firestorm arriving in 5 seconds--then your best choice might be to jump...otherwise NOT.  Fatty regularly reaches in his decision-making into risk profiles way beyond where he is at the time.  Sunday was no exception.  It's the hallmark of someone whose intellect is in over it's head.  They become desperate before they need to be and further fuel their desperation in doing so.  It's otherwise known as STUPID...but--ask any dumbass if they're stupid and what will they tell you?   

duck wrote:There are only two choices in this particular exam.  Wrong and right.



I don't think I know.  I DO know.





Uh, sure, HD.  Whatever you say.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Yup.  That's your *Coach of the Year* Duck...  Maybe you, Vic and Fatty can get together, pull your chubbies out and play sword fight while the other teams are in the playoffs...    

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:There are only two choices in this particular exam.  Wrong and right.



I don't think I know.  I DO know.





Uh, sure, HD.  Whatever you say.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

It wasn't a tough call to figure out, Duck...  Contrary to what your buddy Ketchman stated, most NFL caliber head coaches this side of the Lezbo kick the extra point there...  Different story if it brings you within 6 or possibly even 7 if later in the game...  At 8, you buy next to nothing in prospective reward for all that risk in having to get a a TD, a SECOND 2 point conversion and a FG to prevail and not merely a TD and a FG to win the game...  It really doesn't take any special intelligence to sort this out...  The woman behind me right on the spot crinkled her brow and said...so--they're setting themselves up to have to get a SECOND 2 pointer in order for this to give them anything?

Yup.  That's your *Coach of the Year* Duck...  Maybe you, Vic and Fatty can get together, pull your chubbies out and play sword fight while the other teams are in the playoffs...    

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:There are only two choices in this particular exam.  Wrong and right.



I don't think I know.  I DO know.





Uh, sure, HD.  Whatever you say.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

It wasn't a tough call to figure out, Duck...  Contrary to what your buddy Ketchman stated, most NFL caliber head coaches this side of the Lezbo kick the extra point there...  Different story if it brings you within 6 or possibly even 7 if later in the game...  At 8, you buy next to nothing in prospective reward for all that risk in having to get a a TD, a SECOND 2 point conversion and a FG to prevail and not merely a TD and a FG to win the game...  It really doesn't take any special intelligence to sort this out...  The woman behind me right on the spot crinkled her brow and said...so--they're setting themselves up to have to get a SECOND 2 pointer in order for this to give them anything?

Yup.  That's your *Coach of the Year* Duck...  Maybe you, Vic and Fatty can get together, pull your chubbies out and play sword fight while the other teams are in the playoffs...    

Watch your step, HD.  Keep this up and MB is going to call you a "condescending prick."  Oh wait, MB only brings out the big guns against someone he disagrees with.  

No...not likely, my friend...  First, I'm far from a condescending prick.  Often a prick--yes--but, condescending pricks reach to make others feel inferior to build themselves up.  In contrast, I let other's arrive at their own concluded inferiority... LOL.  It does nothing for me.  Secondly, MB has never established himself as a malicious individual...nor has he demonstated any insecurity that I've noted in his acceptance of other's viewpoints that might offer something beyond his own.  I don't always agree with him but I do find his perspective most refreshingly reality-based.  No, Duck...with all due respect, if MB labeled your behavior as that of a *condescending prick*, my bias would be to the belief that you've earned it... 

_HD_ wrote:Really?  I find very little in the way of facts and stats from either of you.  You tend to pontificate, give us opinions and call anyone who disagrees with you an idiot.  MB erupts emotionally and starts spewing polarized nonsense (see below).  That's how we coined the term "going Bergamo."


Lately I get very little from either of you that's reality-based; just a lot of "I'm right and you're an asshole" kiddie stuff.


It's a damn shame because both of you have shined in the past and are capable of so much more.  I mean, poor Roofer was functioning with a roofing nail embedded in his skull and Milani has occasionally had issues without his meds... but you're two young healthy guys with no apparent disabilities.   


Two things Duck.  One:  Please refrain from using my font/blue color as you are suddenly wanton to.  Second, at this point, I believe I'll just leave it to PFKIA to come along and have his way with you.  I think you need some 'o that... 

duck wrote:I don't always agree with MB but I do find his perspective most refreshingly reality-based.




Really?  I find very little in the way of facts and stats from either of you.  You tend to pontificate, give us opinions and call anyone who disagrees with you an idiot.  MB erupts emotionally and starts spewing polarized nonsense (see below).  That's how we coined the term "going Bergamo."


Lately I get very little from either of you that's reality-based; just a lot of "I'm right and you're an asshole" kiddie stuff.


It's a damn shame because both of you have shined in the past and are capable of so much more.  I mean, poor Roofer was functioning with a roofing nail embedded in his skull and Milani has occasionally had issues without his meds... but you're two young healthy guys with no apparent disabilities.   


Win, lose, or tie, fuck these assholes for making me spend an extra hour watching this pus. I hope megatron lights us up for 450 on Thursday



And Rodgers should be IR'ed at this point. Just light the rest of this miserable season on fire once and for all



I, on the other hand, look at Mike McCarthy and see a guy who is the head coach of an unfocused, predictable, and incoherent football team with a defensive coordinator he should have fired 10 months ago, all because he's basically swinging the limpest dick in the North without the best football player on the planet propping him up. 



this team is still soft as a motherfucking pile of cotton candy.



what a steaming shitpile of a team this is without Rodgers. They are bottom-feeding garbage without him. They're the Curtis Painter Colts. Fucking garbage.

duck wrote:And MB mocks me for recognizing the fact that Fatty has done a good job under very trying circumstances.

MB20 wrote:

duck wrote:I don't always agree with MB but I do find his perspective most refreshingly reality-based.




Really?  I find very little in the way of facts and stats from either of you.  You tend to pontificate, give us opinions and call anyone who disagrees with you an idiot.  MB erupts emotionally and starts spewing polarized nonsense (see below).  That's how we coined the term "going Bergamo."


Lately I get very little from either of you that's reality-based; just a lot of "I'm right and you're an asshole" kiddie stuff.


It's a damn shame because both of you have shined in the past and are capable of so much more.  I mean, poor Roofer was functioning with a roofing nail embedded in his skull and Milani has occasionally had issues without his meds... but you're two young healthy guys with no apparent disabilities.   


Win, lose, or tie, fuck these assholes for making me spend an extra hour watching this pus. I hope megatron lights us up for 450 on Thursday



And Rodgers should be IR'ed at this point. Just light the rest of this miserable season on fire once and for all



I, on the other hand, look at Mike McCarthy and see a guy who is the head coach of an unfocused, predictable, and incoherent football team with a defensive coordinator he should have fired 10 months ago, all because he's basically swinging the limpest dick in the North without the best football player on the planet propping him up. 



this team is still soft as a motherfucking pile of cotton candy.



what a steaming shitpile of a team this is without Rodgers. They are bottom-feeding garbage without him. They're the Curtis Painter Colts. Fucking garbage.

Since we're quoting...

duck wrote:And MB mocks me for recognizing the fact that Fatty has done a good job under very trying circumstances.

Let's look at some facts that you so dearly crave. Since Rodgers' departure:

* 0-3-1
* 72 points scored, average 18 points per game
* 107 points allowed, average 26.75 points per game
* 1638 yards allowed, average 409.5 per game
* 1596 yards gained, average 399.0 per game
* 0-3 at Lambeau Correction: 0-2-1
* The best team of the four is a 6-5 Bears squad that just lost yesterday to the Rams and their backup QB by a score of 42-21
* The tie was after having to come back from a 16-point deficit against a 2-8 team, and would likely have been a win had their head coach not made the wrong decision in the heat of the moment after a 4th-quarter score  "Wrong" decision is debatable, even though I agree with you.
* Two of the losses were punctuated by game-ending, clock-chewing drives that consumed nearly the entire 4th quarter in large part due to missed tackles and blown assignments
* Before Injury: 5-2-0, 1st place in NFC North
* After Injury: 5-5-1, 3rd place in NFC North, 10th place in NFC
* QB rating of Packers QBs (excluding Flynn's 1.5 quarters): 65.6  (Why eliminate Flynn??)


Those facts support my opinion a whole lot more than they support yours. I don't know what about any of that says "Fatty has done a good job under trying circumstances." But I DO know you'll keep on doing your intellectual gymnastics to convince yourself otherwise, all the while nattering on about how I'm just a hothead who doesn't bring any facts to the discussion. I've been watching THAT shit for 15 years now...

_HD_ wrote:Can you be any more obtuse, Duck?  The team just tied the fucking Vikings in 18 degree weather at Lambeau Field after losing it's previous 3 and you want to whip it out and glue our eyes shut over the fact that they've been putting up yards while scoring no points throughout this ignominious streak?  Have you cracked your fucking block?   

duck wrote:Oh, and getting back to the 2 point try, check around the Internet and read the discussions going on in other Packer forums.  It's a mixed bag.  Many people think the 2 point try was correct; others think MM should have just gone for 1.  There are arguments for both sides.

As I said, it's one of those decisions on which good people can disagree.

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:Can you be any more obtuse, Duck?  The team just tied the fucking Vikings in 18 degree weather at Lambeau Field after losing it's previous 3 and you want to whip it out and glue our eyes shut over the fact that they've been putting up yards while scoring no points throughout this ignominious streak?  Have you cracked your fucking block?   

That's what I like about you, HD... your uncanny ability to ignore the broader thrust of an opposing viewpoint, distort and remix one small piece of it, snap your suspenders, pound your fist on the table, and smile broadly as if you just old off the guy on the next barstool.  Go get 'em, tiger!  

Games aren't won/lost by how many yards a team puts up while scoring minimal points in a losing effort--yet with each successive loss, that's what you trumphet.  You're like our Viking friend in the past buffing himself a smooth one over ridiculous, small measures of secondary success.  It's things like COACHING ERRORS that make impressive yardage tallies NOT translate into points and victories...yet you desperately reach yet again to make the tail wag the dog utilizing statistics that support the counterpoint in the process.  I'm thinking the Tinhorn might have a spot for you on his staff if he ever gets another head coaching job...  

duck wrote:Oh, and getting back to the 2 point try, check around the Internet and read the discussions going on in other Packer forums.  It's a mixed bag.  Many people think the 2 point try was correct; others think MM should have just gone for 1.  There are arguments for both sides.

As I said, it's one of those decisions on which good people can disagree.

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:Oh, and getting back to the 2 point try, check around the Internet and read the discussions going on in other Packer forums.  It's a mixed bag.  Many people think the 2 point try was correct; others think MM should have just gone for 1.  There are arguments for both sides.

As I said, it's one of those decisions on which good people can disagree.

My dear Duck--you just don't understand.  The winner on something like this isn't who gets the most votes.  Most people are fools.  I think you're having trouble wrapping your arms around that truth.  There's a logic tree to things like this.  Some people see it and follow it to advantageous probability scenarios and some people pinch their dick into the wind and wonder why rain wasn't forecast.  You DO get that, right?

_HD_ wrote:

duck wrote:

_HD_ wrote:Can you be any more obtuse, Duck?  The team just tied the fucking Vikings in 18 degree weather at Lambeau Field after losing it's previous 3 and you want to whip it out and glue our eyes shut over the fact that they've been putting up yards while scoring no points throughout this ignominious streak?  Have you cracked your fucking block?   

That's what I like about you, HD... your uncanny ability to ignore the broader thrust of an opposing viewpoint, distort and remix one small piece of it, snap your suspenders, pound your fist on the table, and smile broadly as if you just old off the guy on the next barstool.  Go get 'em, tiger!  

Duck--I believe it's been well-established here to anyone following along that the *broader thrust* you speak of has been barbarically self-inflicted in a tuck-under job protruding into your own stove pipe...   LOL

Games aren't won/lost by how many yards a team puts up while scoring minimal points in a losing effort--yet with each successive loss, that's what you trumphet.  You're like our Viking friend in the past buffing himself a smooth one over ridiculous, small measures of secondary success.  It's things like COACHING ERRORS that make impressive yardage tallies NOT translate into points and victories...yet you desperately reach yet again to make the tail wag the dog utilizing statistics that support the counterpoint in the process.  I'm thinking the Tinhorn might have a spot for you on his staff if he ever gets another head coaching job...