re: Aggy Board OT Discussion Thread

1 more 5 star and a 4 star are expected to decommit from horn by end of November

quote:

---

2 more 5 stars are expected to decommit from horn by end of November

---

They only have 1 5-star still committed. (running back from Arizona)

sip fails are Ws for the entire world

SMU vs Memphis - I've been waiting for someone to figure this out but, not surprisingly, when executed it created a buzz of stupidity questioning the decision.

Last night, SMU down 54-40 with 2 minutes left, scored a touchdown and proceeded to go for 2 (which they converted). When down 14 late in the game, it is (virtually) always correct to go for 2 after the first touchdown. Yet, when it happened twitter blew up with the "craziness" of it. 

Assumptions - you must score 2 touchdowns and the other team cannot score. Any other result and you lose so it just doesn't matter. I will, in doing this quick math, assume that all XPs are made for simplicity. If you go to overtime, I will assume 50/50 win/loss. 

Scenario 1 - the standard
Score twice, Kick XPs and go to OT. Since we are assuming 50/50 in OT, you win 50% of the time

Scenario 2 - go for 2 on the 2nd TD
Sometimes you see coaches do this because they don't fancy their chances in OT. For this analysis, we assume 40% win, 60% loss. 

Scenario 3 - go for 2 on the 1st TD
40% of the time you will make the 2, score the 2nd TD, kick the XP and win. 60% of the time you will fail on the 2pt conversion. So when you score your 2nd TD, you go for 2 again to tie. 40% of 60% you will convert. So 40% you win, 24% you go to OT, 36% you lose. The net expectation is 52% win.
 
These numbers are extremely conservative. 2pt conversions are generally executed in the mid 40% range. Additionally, as was evidenced last night, the opposing team is rarely prepared to defend a 2pt conversion (Memphis used a timeout to prep). 

In this particular situation, SMU has a bad kicker. They were likely not 50-50 in OT. This is one reason why coaches select Scenario 2 above but given the option for Scenario 3, it's a comically stupid endeavor and despite this, coaches are often given props for the courage of Scenarios 2 (especially when they win). 

If we do the math on 45-55 win in OT and a 45% 2pt conversion it looks like:
Sc 1 - 45% win
Sc 2 - 45% win
Sc 3 - 56% win

So it was clearly the correct decision by SMU and should be a no-brainer. (Your OT win % has to exceed 60% for Sc3 to not be the best choice at 45% 2pt conversion)

I'm a little rusty on my stats some maybe I'm wrong, but shouldn't scenario 1 be 50% chance of winning and not 45?

Also, if playing the stats shouldn't you always go for 2 when time isn't a factor? Obviously some scenarios late in the game when 1 makes more sense.

quote:

---

I'm a little rusty on my stats some maybe I'm wrong, but shouldn't scenario 1 be 50% chance of winning and not 45?

---

I'm assuming you mean the 2nd set? If so, I made the adjustment that SMU was only 45-55 to win because they have a terrible kicker. It is 50% in the first set (neutral OT rates)

quote:

---

Also, if playing the stats shouldn't you always go for 2 when time isn't a factor? Obviously some scenarios late in the game when 1 makes more sense.

---

Depends on how often you expect to make it. If you expect 45%, then your expected points are 0.9 vs whatever you expect on kicks (in my example it's 1.0).

The actual success rates in college per google are between 41-43% for 2-pt conversions and XP rates are 96%. So unless you have a pretty shitty kicker, doing it all the time probably doesn't make sense. Rates vary pretty dramatically though so it may make more sense for some teams.

And I do think coaches are far too conservative on 2-pt conversions and it should be done more often as a surprise because (1) you may get a too many men penalty and two shots at it, (2) you may convert at a higher rate if the other team isn't prepared, or (3) they may just use a timeout (and you can just kick then).

Take your lady on a nice country drive to Royers in Round Top

You won’t regret it and she’ll love it

The wording was goofy. A no vote means you did not support a constitutional amendment prohibiting a state income tax

That's what I mean. I voted for no tax. :)