Film Review vs Pitt

[Texxcane]

Bummer. Was looking forward to this installment even though we lost. This is as entertaining as watching the games themselves.

Just wanted to say thank you. This was very kind of you to say.

Always very humbled that people have thought this way about my writing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm with bear here. While I've followed football since I was a kid, I never played/coached the sport and have very little insight into the "acute details" of how you defend certain situations and/or how you set your offense for success. You've provided both for those like me and I thank you for it!

Hey at least you are honest about it, unlike the many former high school all Americans on here that can't find their *** with both hands. Kudos to you my friend

 

[HurricaneVision]

We didn’t deserve to win this game, but if this game is played exactly the way this went, we win 8 of 10. The issue is obviously it was one of the two.

Ten rushes from the backs and you think it equates to 8 out of 10? Yeah...losses not wins.

Anything else is Dumboville.

It literally would get laughed out of the room in the circles I've frequented in Las Vegas, but on these fan forums every type of subjective adjuster crap is embraced.

While you are absolutely correct that it was a flippant statement meant to draw attention to the fact that in a normal distribution this game was on the far left end of the tail in regards to how often the long passes were missed on throws that would have high probabilities to hitting. 1 out of ~10. If the throws are 70% type throws you could calculate expected points for each throw and then work back towards a median or mean for those throws and get an accurate assessment of how many points were left on the field in this game without changing a single thing other than those passes.

It might surprise you to know that I'm actually a Chartered Underwriter who specialized in risk analysis, data, and probabilities. Some of the math courses I had to finish were pretty hectic and got into multivariate calculus, which is basically a foreign language.

That said, I've said and done a lot of things that would rightfully land me in Dumboville, so I'm not above it if that's your opinion of me.

 

[Handsome Squidbum]

I think it's like the statistic for flipping a coin 10 times in a row. If I flip a coin and get tails 9 times, what are the odds that I get tails on the 10th flip? Still 50%. If I instead ask what are the odds that I flip a coin 10 times in a row and get tails each flip, the odds are quite low. So the deep passes might only have 50% shot of completion (or less) but the odds of missing on all 7 deep passes is probably pretty low. In a normal game, odds are that you'd hit 1 or 2. So if you play the game out again 10 times with the same play calls, you are likely to hit a couple of the deep passes in most of those simulations, which would have given us the W (assuming we get points and something weird like AR82 dropping the ball on the one yard line while high stepping into the end zone doesn't happen).

 

[UknowWhat]

Bummer. Was looking forward to this installment even though we lost. This is as entertaining as watching the games themselves.

Just wanted to say thank you. This was very kind of you to say.

Always very humbled that people have thought this way about my writing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No doubt.. you do us all a great service... thank you

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[RichterScale]

Up voted just for the use of "multivariate calculus".

 

[TheU1984]

We didn’t deserve to win this game, but if this game is played exactly the way this went, we win 8 of 10. The issue is obviously it was one of the two.

Ten rushes from the backs and you think it equates to 8 out of 10? Yeah...losses not wins.

Anything else is Dumboville.

It literally would get laughed out of the room in the circles I've frequented in Las Vegas, but on these fan forums every type of subjective adjuster crap is embraced.

While you are absolutely correct that it was a flippant statement meant to draw attention to the fact that in a normal distribution this game was on the far left end of the tail in regards to how often the long passes were missed on throws that would have high probabilities to hitting. 1 out of ~10. If the throws are 70% type throws you could calculate expected points for each throw and then work back towards a median or mean for those throws and get an accurate assessment of how many points were left on the field in this game without changing a single thing other than those passes.

It might surprise you to know that I'm actually a Chartered Underwriter who specialized in risk analysis, data, and probabilities. Some of the math courses I had to finish were pretty hectic and got into multivariate calculus, which is basically a foreign language.

That said, I've said and done a lot of things that would rightfully land me in Dumboville, so I'm not above it if that's your opinion of me.

The dudes in his Vegas circles teach multivariate calculus. And laugh at you.

 

[acento]

We didn’t deserve to win this game, but if this game is played exactly the way this went, we win 8 of 10. The issue is obviously it was one of the two.

Ten rushes from the backs and you think it equates to 8 out of 10? Yeah...losses not wins.

Anything else is Dumboville.

It literally would get laughed out of the room in the circles I've frequented in Las Vegas, but on these fan forums every type of subjective adjuster crap is embraced.

While you are absolutely correct that it was a flippant statement meant to draw attention to the fact that in a normal distribution this game was on the far left end of the tail in regards to how often the long passes were missed on throws that would have high probabilities to hitting. 1 out of ~10. If the throws are 70% type throws you could calculate expected points for each throw and then work back towards a median or mean for those throws and get an accurate assessment of how many points were left on the field in this game without changing a single thing other than those passes.

It might surprise you to know that I'm actually a Chartered Underwriter who specialized in risk analysis, data, and probabilities. Some of the math courses I had to finish were pretty hectic and got into multivariate calculus, which is basically a foreign language.

That said, I've said and done a lot of things that would rightfully land me in Dumboville, so I'm not above it if that's your opinion of me.

Drop the mic Vision.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[prinmemo]

I think it's like the statistic for flipping a coin 10 times in a row. If I flip a coin and get tails 9 times, what are the odds that I get tails on the 10th flip? Still 50%. If I instead ask what are the odds that I flip a coin 10 times in a row and get tails each flip, the odds are quite low. So the deep passes might only have 50% shot of completion (or less) but the odds of missing on all 7 deep passes is probably pretty low. In a normal game, odds are that you'd hit 1 or 2. So if you play the game out again 10 times with the same play calls, you are likely to hit a couple of the deep passes in most of those simulations, which would have given us the W (assuming we get points and something weird like AR82 dropping the ball on the one yard line while high stepping into the end zone doesn't happen).

This assumes the passes are independent of each other. If the QB is hungover that analysis fails.

 

[kryptonite]

We didn’t deserve to win this game, but if this game is played exactly the way this went, we win 8 of 10. The issue is obviously it was one of the two.

Ten rushes from the backs and you think it equates to 8 out of 10? Yeah...losses not wins.

Anything else is Dumboville.

It literally would get laughed out of the room in the circles I've frequented in Las Vegas, but on these fan forums every type of subjective adjuster crap is embraced.

While you are absolutely correct that it was a flippant statement meant to draw attention to the fact that in a normal distribution this game was on the far left end of the tail in regards to how often the long passes were missed on throws that would have high probabilities to hitting. 1 out of ~10. If the throws are 70% type throws you could calculate expected points for each throw and then work back towards a median or mean for those throws and get an accurate assessment of how many points were left on the field in this game without changing a single thing other than those passes.

It might surprise you to know that I'm actually a Chartered Underwriter who specialized in risk analysis, data, and probabilities. Some of the math courses I had to finish were pretty hectic and got into multivariate calculus, which is basically a foreign language.

That said, I've said and done a lot of things that would rightfully land me in Dumboville, so I'm not above it if that's your opinion of me.

I don't think that comment deserved a thoughtful response, or really any response, but cheers to you for keeping it classy.