Crazy thought of day: Cowboys should have missed extra point on purpose with 2:32 left so they'd be up 3, not 4

put another way:

the Colts kicker is 3 for 3 this year on onside kicks

statistically the Colts recover every onside kick this year

so this weekend should they just onside kick it every chance they get against Peyton and Denver?

it would be fun to see though

Time to put this thread to rest. People have come up with some well written posts that show a real lack of understanding of prediction statistics.

1. The purpose is to determine probability for success not establish as one poster said a "universal truth". Each situation will be unique but that doesn't diminish the reliability of a prediction.

2. The publisher of the calculator doesn't even stand behind the idea of three being better than four points with 2:32 left in a game. He's pretty clear on that point. Even his competitor's calculator didn't reflect 3 being better than 4.

3. The rationale and all the arguments for 3 better than 4 are based on seasoned very intelligent professional coaches making bad decisions at the end of the game.

4. So you can come up with a million plausible theories on why 3 could be better than 4, but they just ain't true.

Time to put this thread to rest. People have come up with some well written posts that show a real lack of understanding of prediction statistics.

1. The purpose is to determine probability for success not establish as one poster said a "universal truth". Each situation will be unique but that doesn't diminish the reliability of a prediction.

2. The publisher of the calculator doesn't even stand behind the idea of three being better than four points with 2:32 left in a game. He's pretty clear on that point. Even his competitor's calculator didn't reflect 3 being better than 4.

3. The rationale and all the arguments for 3 better than 4 are based on seasoned very intelligent professional coaches making bad decisions at the end of the game.

4. So you can come up with a million plausible theories on why 3 could be better than 4, but they just ain't true.

Markov Chain is what defines the math. I think Rojo is looking at the final state, not the whole chain. The whole chain has a different probability than what he shows.

Because he always goes to starboard in the top half of the hour

Belichik is so lucky. I can't believe he went for the XP in that situation. Almost backfired on him with the 4th down and Hail Mary.

I thought the Ravens had a good chance when I saw they were only down by 4 instead of 3.

Seattle is in big trouble, they are up by 4!

The thing is, rojo's an idiot.

When the Seahawks took the lead with less than 2 minutes left to go up by 3, it actually crossed my mind that I was more comfortable (I'm a Seahawks fan) with the 'Hawks up by 3 than if they had been up by 4, 5 or 6 (or if they had only been up by 1, obviously). Once the Packers got into long field goal range, they got more conservative, didn't go for it on 4th down, and kicked the field goal to send the game into overtime. Normally, I would consider overtime to be a 50-50 proposition, but I was confident heading into overtime because it was clear who was playing better football at that point in the game (despite the absolutely horrifying display the Seahawks' offense put on for the first half...ok, more like 55 minutes).

Granted, this isn't an example of intentionally missing an extra point to be up by 3 instead of 4, but this thread actually crossed my mind because I felt much more comfortable with the thought of the Packers playing for a field goal and overtime than if they had been in touchdown-or-nothing mode.