WHAT IS THE FATE OF THE DIRTY ANDERS ?

[MadtownPacker]

heres an idea

we're gonna be in brazil the first week of the season. hold open tryouts

todlers can kick the shit out of balls down there

Your finest moment of the season and it hasn’t even started! This shit would be great. Movie level awesome if it could come to be.

[MadtownPacker]

Okay, okay. I didn't put enough qualifiers in my short post. I figured people could understand there's implied assumptions behind what I stated. I figured wrong.

Look at this fukin guy! We practically say you are a genius and it still isn’t enough. Now you have to be the one who take Tex out if he doesn’t give up his cowboys fandom.

[texaspackerbacker]

I see Carlson and Joseph were both 6 for 6 today, several over 50 yards. I guess that's good news hahahaha.

[sharpe1027]

Look at this fukin guy! We practically say you are a genius and it still isn’t enough. Now you have to be the one who take Tex out if he doesn’t give up his cowboys fandom.

Wait, I'm practically a genius? When did this happen! I need to start a packer mensa chapter.

[red]

fuck you guys

i have other good ideas

[Fosco33]

Another idea for Brazil.

Instead of no cheerleaders or the occasional GB high school of UW badgers - we do an open cheerleader tryout?

[sharpe1027]

Look at this fukin guy! We practically say you are a genius and it still isn’t enough. Now you have to be the one who take Tex out if he doesn’t give up his cowboys fandom.

Let me go back to what Bobble wrote. It's not that his post was wrong, it's just that he was answering a different question.

I wasn't very precise in how I worded my original post. The stats don't tell you whether or not to go for it. The stats are mathematical truths. Historically, you would average more points by going for it on fourth down. It's not a debate. It's just numbers.

Bobble was technically correct. It just seemed to too literal of a read. Giving no credit to the obvious unspoken aspects.

[bobblehead]

I guess I'm even challenging that sharpe. Its hard to say if thats true because of the way they derive the numbers. Most teams who attempt 4th and 4 are in desperation mode and also facing a prevent D. But some data nerd who isn't a football guy wouldn't understand that. And thats why I said I wasn't criticizing YOU.

I'd also assert that if you constantly go for it on 4th and 4 the other team will benefit even MORE than you might (I have zero evidence of that other than the fact that coaches have done it my way for 50.years.)

[MadScientist]

I guess I'm even challenging that sharpe. Its hard to say if thats true because of the way they derive the numbers. Most teams who attempt 4th and 4 are in desperation mode and also facing a prevent D. But some data nerd who isn't a football guy wouldn't understand that. And thats why I said I wasn't criticizing YOU.

I'd also assert that if you constantly go for it on 4th and 4 the other team will benefit even MORE than you might (I have zero evidence of that other than the fact that coaches have done it my way for 50.years.)

The 50 years argument is not relevant as more modern data analysis has significantly changed a lot of sports over the last 20 years. In fact, going for it on 4th and short in marginal FG territory has become common in recent years, when teams were more likely to punt 50 years ago. The blanket 'go for it on 4th and short' is more of a pundit level analysis, though. Teams will look at the exact field position,the reliability of their kicker, and the game situation as well. So in general you will score more points if you go for it on 4th and short instead of kicking a field goal, but head coaches get paid the big bucks to make the right call on the specific case.

[Fritz]

The 50 years argument is not relevant as more modern data analysis has significantly changed a lot of sports over the last 20 years. In fact, going for it on 4th and short in marginal FG territory has become common in recent years, when teams were more likely to punt 50 years ago. The blanket 'go for it on 4th and short' is more of a pundit level analysis, though. Teams will look at the exact field position,the reliability of their kicker, and the game situation as well. So in general you will score more points if you go for it on 4th and short instead of kicking a field goal, but head coaches get paid the big bucks to make the right call on the specific case.

Warm Carlsen is heating up, hitting all his kicks in practice today, possibly making your argument irrelevant outside the philosophical realm.

I also saw an article that said two promising young kickers (Neverson? Schroeder?) could be available soon.

Better get hot, Carlsen!

[call_me_ishmael]

Maybe kick the tires on Blair Walsh? He's had a while to hopefully get his mind right. He was a great kicker prior to his big miss.

[Fritz]

Send a team of therapists, psychologists, and psychiatrists out to interview him.

The Iggles spent a third-rounder on Jake Moody last year. I know that’s way too high of a pick to use on a kicker for most of you, but the dude is really good. Not sure the Pack needs to do quite that next draft, but maybe a fifth rounder or so, in order to get a better prospect than Lukewarm Carlsen?

Or did he turn a corner in his last practice? For me, Joseph is absolutely not the answer. He is what he is at this point. At least Carlson still has some of that magical “p” word (potential, not “pudenda” or “pee pee”).

[bobblehead]

The 50 years argument is not relevant as more modern data analysis has significantly changed a lot of sports over the last 20 years. In fact, going for it on 4th and short in marginal FG territory has become common in recent years, when teams were more likely to punt 50 years ago. The blanket 'go for it on 4th and short' is more of a pundit level analysis, though. Teams will look at the exact field position,the reliability of their kicker, and the game situation as well. So in general you will score more points if you go for it on 4th and short instead of kicking a field goal, but head coaches get paid the big bucks to make the right call on the specific case.

Going for it from the other teams 40 and in has become more common as the game has evolved to favor offenses and the introduction of the 2 pt conversion. So in conclusion, going for it on 4th isn't so simple a calculation as "math".

[MadScientist]

Going for it from the other teams 40 and in has become more common as the game has evolved to favor offenses and the introduction of the 2 pt conversion. So in conclusion, going for it on 4th isn't so simple a calculation as "math".

You could reduce it to math if it weren't for those pesky humans being involved. But even then, it would not be as simple as "if distance to go < 4, then go for it".

[sharpe1027]

You could reduce it to math if it weren't for those pesky humans being involved. But even then, it would not be as simple as "if distance to go < 4, then go for it".

This is the way.