East Coast Bias Bowl -- Running Super Bowl XLVI Thread

You may disrespect what they do for a living, but it's been shown there is a consumer base for what they do.

And they don't deserve to get shot at. He and his wife worship the celebrity life, they can cope with the consequences.

 

Which is my point. Despite how unlikely it is, it happens. So, when you weigh the 1 percent chance you will fail against a 0 percent chance you don't have the lead after a TD, I'm taking the sure thing. Again, as a Steelers fanboi, I get more nervous with a fricken regular season game on the line and a kicker holding rhe outcome in the balance than I do going into the doctors office for THAT yearly appointment. So it has nothing to do with macho football fan. It has everything to do with a snap, hold and kick with the most important game of the year on the line.

 

No you aren't. You are taking a bigger risk of failure later (by your defense), because you don't want to deal with the risk immediately.

 

Is the risk of failure by the defense bigger? Tynes is not automatic by any means. And the idea of the Patriots going 80 yards in less than a minute with one timeout seems pretty low -- maybe not lower on pure statistical measurement, but in the flow of that game it was pretty clear the Giants had their number.

 

Ask the Ravens, Vikings and Bills.

 

Teams DO play for the field goal in overtime all the time, so it's not like it would be a radical strategy shift to do it in this situation. But the urge to score as many points as possible and the urge to extend the game whenever possible are pretty deeply rooted in the psyches of most coaches.
Giving Tom Brady the ball is not a risk-free strategy, either, of course. There's no such thing as risk-free strategy. But I think the risk difference between these two choices is probably small.

 

Sure thing as in the lead, not the win. It is a sure thing you are scoring a TD. I'm saying I would rather take the sure thing of a four point lead in that situation and chance the defense holding them out of the end zone on an 80 yards drive with one timeout than I am holding the ball, downing the clock and leaving it in the hands of my kicker. As i said, 99 out of a hundred times he will make it. I know that. Actually, it is probably closer to 9999 out of 10000. but if you are giving me a TD, I;m taking it.

 

To be clear, Hoody was completely right to do what he did on defense. And with Bradshaws decision to score a TD or neal down, it is a 50/50 proposition. Neither of the sides AB could have taken are "wrong". Hell, the Steelers have won a lot of games where they did the wrong thing and it worked out. They have also lost a few games where they did the right thing and it didn;t work out for them. As I said, the ultimate reality show known as sport.

 

If they are giving you the touchdown and the lead, I'll take the points every time.

I can't even imagine the uproar if Bradshaw had fell at the 1, and then the FG got botched, blocked, shanked, etc.

 

Didn't Holmgren do the same thing when the Packers were upset by the Broncos in the Super Bowl? Ie, roll over to see if they could get a quick score?

 

Not really all that close. In that time, timeout and yardage situation, the average offense will score a touchdown about 12% of the time.

That kick's going through the uprights 97% of the time, at least.

But if that's what the coach is thinking, I can respect that. I may not agree with the percentages he puts on it, but at least he's approaching it the right way.

 

Yes.