This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
x.com
Per a Bucs writer, Greg Auman, there is no 2 onside kick limit. So, Google search AI Overview hallucinated. See below from ChatGPT 4o, which cites 3 sources and got it right.
>>Lot of you trying to say the NFL puts a limit on how many times a team can attempt an onside kick. There is no such limit, so long as it's the fourth quarter and you're trailing. Here's the entirety of the onside kick language in the NFL rulebook<<
x.com
ChatGPT.
>>For the 2024 NFL season, there isn't a limit on the number of onside kicks a team can attempt. However, the rules for executing an onside kick have changed significantly. Onside kicks are now restricted to the fourth quarter, and only teams that are trailing can attempt them. Additionally, teams must declare their intention to perform an onside kick in advance, eliminating the element of surprise
These rule adjustments aim to increase safety and maintain game fairness while still allowing teams an opportunity to recover the ball late in the game.<<
www.palmbeachpost.com
Yeah, trying to score when you're down 10 is totally defensible, even if the odds are long. But at the point Godwin got hurt I would have just packed it in.
Per a Bucs writer, Greg Auman, there is no 2 onside kick limit. So, Google search AI Overview hallucinated. See below from ChatGPT 4o, which cites 3 sources and got it right.
>>Lot of you trying to say the NFL puts a limit on how many times a team can attempt an onside kick. There is no such limit, so long as it's the fourth quarter and you're trailing. Here's the entirety of the onside kick language in the NFL rulebook<<
x.com
ChatGPT.
>>For the 2024 NFL season, there isn't a limit on the number of onside kicks a team can attempt. However, the rules for executing an onside kick have changed significantly. Onside kicks are now restricted to the fourth quarter, and only teams that are trailing can attempt them. Additionally, teams must declare their intention to perform an onside kick in advance, eliminating the element of surprise
These rule adjustments aim to increase safety and maintain game fairness while still allowing teams an opportunity to recover the ball late in the game.<<
Per a Bucs writer, Greg Auman, there is no 2 onside kick limit. So, Google search AI Overview hallucinated. See below from ChatGPT 4o, which cites 3 sources and got it right.
>>Lot of you trying to say the NFL puts a limit on how many times a team can attempt an onside kick. There is no such limit, so long as it's the fourth quarter and you're trailing. Here's the entirety of the onside kick language in the NFL rulebook<<
x.com
ChatGPT.
>>For the 2024 NFL season, there isn't a limit on the number of onside kicks a team can attempt. However, the rules for executing an onside kick have changed significantly. Onside kicks are now restricted to the fourth quarter, and only teams that are trailing can attempt them. Additionally, teams must declare their intention to perform an onside kick in advance, eliminating the element of surprise
These rule adjustments aim to increase safety and maintain game fairness while still allowing teams an opportunity to recover the ball late in the game.<<
someone replied to a tweet of mine about a month ago saying that there was a limit of 2 onside kick tries per game. he had a screen shot of "something" but who know what the source was. I did a quick search and didn't see anything that said there was a limit.
Apparently some announcer thought there was a limit and made a comment during a game. That might have added to the confusion.Per a Bucs writer, Greg Auman, there is no 2 onside kick limit. So, Google search AI Overview hallucinated. See below from ChatGPT 4o, which cites 3 sources and got it right.
>>Lot of you trying to say the NFL puts a limit on how many times a team can attempt an onside kick. There is no such limit, so long as it's the fourth quarter and you're trailing. Here's the entirety of the onside kick language in the NFL rulebook<<
x.com
ChatGPT.
>>For the 2024 NFL season, there isn't a limit on the number of onside kicks a team can attempt. However, the rules for executing an onside kick have changed significantly. Onside kicks are now restricted to the fourth quarter, and only teams that are trailing can attempt them. Additionally, teams must declare their intention to perform an onside kick in advance, eliminating the element of surprise
These rule adjustments aim to increase safety and maintain game fairness while still allowing teams an opportunity to recover the ball late in the game.<<
someone replied to a tweet of mine about a month ago saying that there was a limit of 2 onside kick tries per game. he had a screen shot of "something" but who know what the source was. I did a quick search and didn't see anything that said there was a limit.
That's correct, there is no 2 kick limit. The NFL proposed that change in the off-season but did not implement it. Somehow collectively the world seems to think it is in the rules though.
I understand what happened before and the thought that he is "chasing points". I am just saying that being up 12 at the point, going for 2 is the right play, regardless of the reason.
Last night the Bengals faced this situation and went for two. They didn't get it -- in part because of two pretty egregious non-calls -- but it was clearly the right call. Once again, the team facing the decision was a road underdog. Lamar had led the Ravens on four consecutive TD drives, plus they had Derrick Henry. I actually think that's an under-appreciated factor when going to OT: If the other team can bully your tired D-line in the run game, your chances of stopping them drop precipitously (see also KC last Monday and Detroit in their Week 1 OT win against the Rams). If Cinci had gone to OT and lost the coin toss, they were cooked. Much better to put it in the hands of a red-hot Burrow.
Agree that overall Sirianni is a bad in-game coach, and also that the decision to go for two up 16-0 is mystifying. The others don't seem nearly as bad. You shouldn't chase points just because you didn't get it last time, but you also shouldn't automatically take the points for the same reason. You have to evaluate each situation on its own terms. If it makes sense to go for two (for example, up 12 in the 4th quarter), you should do it irrespective of what happened previously.
If this all happened with 0 seconds left on the 4q clock, I would be completely fine with your logic. The problem is I think people are severely discounting how often you get that 2pt conversion and still lose.
They got stuffed on the tush push twice. In fact, the reason why they went for 2 the first time was because Jacksonville committed a penalty on the PAT which gave them the ball at the 1. Normally that's an automatic score for Hurts but in this game it wasn't. I don't think the tush push will be as automatic as it was in previous years since Kelce is gone -- especially in the short term with LT Mailata out.
Yeah If Cincy converts the 2 points there, Baltimore still would have had 30 seconds and two timeouts to get into FG position for the win.
Watched a video breakdown of this play, I will see if I can find it. Chase was 1 on 1 on the other side, Burrow never even looked at him.
See, I just don't agree with this.
What are you talking about??? That was just a calculated preview of coming attractions for the Raiders.
I think the assumption is under 20 seconds, ideally less.
I mean we can do the math. What's the chance of getting 2? 55%?
You're falling for the classic fallacy of thinking that there's value in "staying alive". What does it matter if you lose in regulation vs extending it another 10 minutes before you lose?
In the specific situation at hand, it's not primarily an analytics question. A 2PC and an OT game are both basically coin flips, so there's no obviously dominant solution. You have to look at the specifics of each case. In last night's game, for example, the Bengals were road dogs and had been absolutely boatraced by the Ravens offense in the second half. That would argue in favor of ending the game right there to ensure Lamar and Henry don't have a chance to beat you. Same with Tampa against KC last Monday. But I could easily imagine a scenario where it makes more sense to send the game to OT
Agree on going from 3 to 6. Not as sure about the difference between a tie and a one-point lead. If the Ravens had gotten the ball back with 30 seconds left, I think they would have tried to score regardless of whether they were tied or down 1. Yeah, maybe in a scenario where they botch the return and start inside their own 10, they're more likely to play it safe. But if they get a touchback and start at the 30, they're going to be aggressive either way.
Doubtful. To date, only 24 out of 73 attempts have been successful. That's a rate of 32.88%. If we assume the amount of attempts will stay steady, there should be 138 attempts by the end of the season. And 55% of 138 would be 76 successful attempts. That would mean over the next 8 games, teams will have to convert 52 out of 65 to reach 55% for the year. There's no way teams are converting at 80% for the 2nd half of the season. Even if they managed to convert 55% from here on out this year, it would still put them at 43.5% for the year.
If teams convert at a 55% rate from here on out, they would end up around 43% for the season. I'll say they will not reach 43%.
I believe you, but I’m curious to know a) how much that number fluctuates from year to year and b) if there’s any reason to think there are structural reasons for that decline. My base assumption is that this is random variation and we should expect regression to the mean. But maybe there’s something going on this year that’s causing the decline
Here are the 2pt conversion success rates for the last 10 years:
Looks like the recent average has been in the mid/high 40s. Last year saw some positive variance and this year has seen even more negative variance. I can’t think of anything structural that would lead to a lower conversion rate league-wide, so I would assume some regression to the mean over the second half of the season
I chose to go back to 2015, because that's when the EP moved back to the equivalent of a 33 yard FG. Here are the EP success rates:
A slight historical edge for the 2 point way, a larger variance in the short term for the 1 point way.
I get what you’re saying, but that’s a dangerous game to pay when you need a TD. If you willingly pass up a chance to score, you may not get another
It’s probably a little bit of luck and a little bit of teams figuring out how to play it better, like in this case the safety coming up and tush pushing back. the biggest factor is probably that they have Fred Johnson in instead of Jordan mailata right now and mailata’s rugby background makes him devastating. Also not having Kelce this year plays a little bit of a role.
there is no injury, just rest. Didn’t you hear Nick’s totally believable explanation?
Well, my prediction might have come true if not for the fact that the Rams once again drove down to the Miami 13 down 8 with 42 seconds left, and then kicked a FG on third down!!!!!!! That makes absolutely no sense. At a minimum, you should take an additional five seconds and take one more shot at the end zone.
