2022-2023 NFL Thread

[Darththeo]

None of your analyses matter if you don't account for the TD ratio% of the first team as well, and the advantage of the knowledge the second team gets. Also, the team 2 matching team 1's TD should always go for two, because it's the best advantage they have, which they lose if they kick the XP and let it get to sudden death.

Given that the only change is the Auto-win for scoring a TD, any result for the offense that isn't a TD does not matter in the analysis. Because those games would play out identically under the new and old rule. Of the 10 wins for winning the coin toss, 7 of them were because a Touchdown was scored drive one.

There is no reason to focus on non-TD drive in the analysis ... they do not matter.

Secondly, he "simmed" based on what? What data did he use? Just saying "I simmed it" does not matter. He gives no guidelines or statistics he used. Did he just make two average teams, if so, what averages did he used? Or did he chose two specific teams? I have GIVEN where I got my sources from. I do not trust statements without their supporting data.

Thirdly, he is focused on all outcomes, which according to his sim the old Sudden Death only had a 57% favor to winning the coin toss. And the old rule 53% favor ... but the REAL WORLD data used has the coin toss winner winning well more than that. According to his sim, the coin toss winner in post season should have been 7 TOTAL, but it was 10 with 7 winning outright.

So, if this plays out similarly in the real world, will still have the coin toss winner winning more times that not.

- - - Updated - - -

I’d be down for those. I thought your point was that changing out at all was dumb. The second is kind of the college ot, isn’t it?

I am not against changing, I am against non-solutions to the problem.

[Faltemer]

Thirdly, he is focused on all outcomes, which according to his sim the old Sudden Death only had a 57% favor to winning the coin toss. And the old rule 53% favor ... but the REAL WORLD data used has the coin toss winner winning well more than that. According to his sim, the coin toss winner in post season should have been 7 TOTAL, but it was 10 with 7 winning outright.

So, if this plays out similarly in the real world, will still have the coin toss winner winning more times that not.

Since the old change to OT teams were 86-67-10 if they won the toss. That is 52.7% chance to win. That is where 53% comes from.


And as for what they are simming, I am guessing ESPN have huge database of data on % chances of things happening.

[Darththeo]

Since the old change to OT teams were 86-67-10 if they won the toss. That is 52.7% chance to win. That is where 53% comes from.


And as for what they are simming, I am guessing ESPN have huge database of data on % chances of things happening.

The issue is no one is focusing on all the games. They are all focused on the 10 post season wins following getting the coin toss. (The number of people throwing around 83% went to the coin toss winner is annoying).

And I would like a break down on how those games ended. How many ended in an autowin touchdown, how many ended with both team getting the ball. As the only games that would have a potential altered outcome are the games that ended in a single drive following a touchdown. (and if the outcomes would still have a favor to the coin toss winner with the data from games, this rule change still would not be a "solution" to OT).

I understand he has access to a lot of data, but I distrust statements where I can't see the data being put in the sim. There are some videos I want where while in the video they don't go over the data used, but they link to where they obtained it, allowing you to see it.

[eschatological]

I think it's fair to say the model is suspect for playoff-caliber games. The model lines up with the overall trend, which is why they were fine with OT rules as they were for the playoffs, but it seems clear that playoff caliber offenses have a massive advantage going first.

What that tells me is that A) 2 TDs on 2 drives is more likely in the playoff format under the new rules, B) a 2 pt conversion by the 2nd team is also more likely, and more likely to succeed. As the success of the offenses rise in TD conversion rate, the fairer the new rules are, because the old rules would skew heavily towards the first team.

I'm more than willing to concede that with the average team, shit like this doesn't matter.

As a Bills fan, btw, I didn't care about this rule change. We should have won it in regulation. And if we had won the toss in OT and marched down for the win, we wouldn't have declined it out of moral fortitude, either.

[Darththeo]

I think it's fair to say the model is suspect for playoff-caliber games. The model lines up with the overall trend, which is why they were fine with OT rules as they were for the playoffs, but it seems clear that playoff caliber offenses have a massive advantage going first.

What that tells me is that A) 2 TDs on 2 drives is more likely in the playoff format under the new rules, B) a 2 pt conversion by the 2nd team is also more likely, and more likely to succeed. As the success of the offenses rise in TD conversion rate, the fairer the new rules are, because the old rules would skew heavily towards the first team.

I'm more than willing to concede that with the average team, shit like this doesn't matter.

As a Bills fan, btw, I didn't care about this rule change. We should have won it in regulation. And if we had won the toss in OT and marched down for the win, we wouldn't have declined it out of moral fortitude, either.

I wouldn't say 53% is a heavy favored to going first.

As for your A, ... duh, something going from impossible to possible is obvious more likely odds. And B ... that is a two point conversation is 50/50. While they could lead to victory, I don't see it coming up that often. I can see teams tying and hoping for a stop (teams don't tend to things that based on odds. It statistically makes sense to ALWAYS go for it on 4th down and ALWAYS go for 2 pt conversation, but we don't see teams doing it.)

[Faltemer]

I wouldn't say 53% is a heavy favored to going first.

53% is including ties. The team going first only loses 41% of the time. If you took the 10 ties and distributed 5 each to wins and losses the team going first jumps to 56%. A 12% edge is pretty big. And frankly I think these numbers are bogged down by the fact that you can tie so teams play for that. And that in the regular season it might be two bad teams tying in regulation leading to less one drive TDs. There isn’t a ton of playoff data but I think it is indicative of how the stats would lean even if just ties were removed.

[Darththeo]

53% is including ties. The team going first only loses 41% of the time. If you took the 10 ties and distributed 5 each to wins and losses the team going first jumps to 56%. A 12% edge is pretty big. And frankly I think these numbers are bogged down by the fact that you can tie so teams play for that. And that in the regular season it might be two bad teams tying in regulation leading to less one drive TDs. There isn’t a ton of playoff data but I think it is indicative of how the stats would lean even if just ties were removed.

And there is the fact a regular season loss doesn't have the same meaning as a loss in the post season. While a loss can be a big deal, it isn't always in the regular season. While a loss in the post season means your season is over.

So we can't even be sure that the losses that the coin flip winner had would necessarily remain losses under playoff scenarios. Win or go home changes coaching decisions and players attitudes.

[Faltemer]

"Former Seahawks’ Pro-Bowl linebacker Bobby Wagner is signing a five-year, $50 million deal worth up to $65 million with the Los Angeles Rams, per league sources. Wagner is staying in the NFC West."

- - - Updated - - -

And there is the fact a regular season loss doesn't have the same meaning as a loss in the post season. While a loss can be a big deal, it isn't always in the regular season. While a loss in the post season means your season is over.

So we can't even be sure that the losses that the coin flip winner had would necessarily remain losses under playoff scenarios. Win or go home changes coaching decisions and players attitudes.

Wouldn't these indicate that winning the coin flip was an even bigger deal? Which means any change to alleviate that is a good thing.

[Darththeo]

Wouldn't these indicate that winning the coin flip was an even bigger deal? Which means any change to alleviate that is a good thing.

Which the best way to do that is to remove the sudden death aspect from overtime and the autowin.

Either a full additional quarter or a modification of the college rule.

I am not opposed to changing overtime. I am opposed to measures that don't actually solve the problems with overtime.

[Faltemer]

Which the best way to do that is to remove the sudden death aspect from overtime and the autowin.

Either a full additional quarter or a modification of the college rule.

I am not opposed to changing overtime. I am opposed to measures that don't actually solve the problems with overtime.

Ok thats fair, but considering how the NFL operates this is about the best we can hope for.

[eschatological]

I wouldn't say 53% is a heavy favored to going first.

As for your A, ... duh, something going from impossible to possible is obvious more likely odds. And B ... that is a two point conversation is 50/50. While they could lead to victory, I don't see it coming up that often. I can see teams tying and hoping for a stop (teams don't tend to things that based on odds. It statistically makes sense to ALWAYS go for it on 4th down and ALWAYS go for 2 pt conversation, but we don't see teams doing it.)

50/50 for 2 point conversions is the average across the league. Again, with playoff quality caliber teams, that'll rise, imo.

- - - Updated - - -

Which the best way to do that is to remove the sudden death aspect from overtime and the autowin.

Either a full additional quarter or a modification of the college rule.

I am not opposed to changing overtime. I am opposed to measures that don't actually solve the problems with overtime.

I mean, the college rule is easily the best option, but I don't think it would have ever gone to the NFL. The defensive purists would be apopleptic.

[Darththeo]

Ok thats fair, but considering how the NFL operates this is about the best we can hope for.

Yeah, which is pretty standard procedure for the NFL.

Expecting the NFL to make the best changes first is like expecting the sun not to rise.

[Faltemer]

I mean, the college rule is easily the best option, but I don't think it would have ever gone to the NFL. The defensive purists would be apopleptic.

"In the NFL, 52.7 percent of teams winning the overtime coin toss (and receiving) win the game at some point in overtime, according to Ross Tucker of SiriusXM NFL Radio. In college football, the team that wins the coin toss (and defers) wins 54.9 percent of the time."

[Darththeo]

I mean, the college rule is easily the best option, but I don't think it would have ever gone to the NFL. The defensive purists would be apopleptic.

I think the best we can hope for is that the sudden death aspect of the overtime is removed and they just play another 15 minutes for each over time period.

But, I don't think the players will go for that.

- - - Updated - - -

"In the NFL, 52.7 percent of teams winning the overtime coin toss (and receiving) win the game at some point in overtime, according to Ross Tucker of SiriusXM NFL Radio. In college football, the team that wins the coin toss (and defers) wins 54.9 percent of the time."

The likelihood of getting a system where we will get EXACTLY 50-50 is pretty much impossible.

And there is a wider range in the quality of college teams than NFL teams.

[Faltemer]

And there is a wider range in the quality of college teams than NFL teams.

If 2 teams make it to OT though odds are pretty good they are fairly evenly matched.

[Logwyn]

If 2 teams make it to OT though odds are pretty good they are fairly evenly matched.

Or both are really grossly incompodent.

- - - Updated - - -

I’ve never once seen anyone satisfied with the change from any points ending OT to a TD ending OT — i certainly wasn’t. It was always a half measure, acceptable because it was better than no change but it never “felt” fair or like a permanently satisfactory fix.

Should be you both get the ball starting at the opponent's 30-yard line. If neither team fails to score any points both teams get an L for tom-foolery.

[ProphetFlume]

I think the best we can hope for is that the sudden death aspect of the overtime is removed and they just play another 15 minutes for each over time period.

Does it have to be 15? Why not 10 or 8. Probably because lowering it means one team could conceivably run the clock with a single possession and score at the end. But then that brings us to each team getting a shot.

[Darththeo]

Does it have to be 15? Why not 10 or 8. Probably because lowering it means one team could conceivably run the clock with a single possession and score at the end. But then that brings us to each team getting a shot.

Which could in theory happen with the current rules. The current OT for regular season is a 10 minute additional period and there have been a good number of 10 minute drives or even 8 plus minute drives. Hell, a drive that goes over 5 minutes drains most of the clock and reduces the time available for your opponent.

[draynay]

I'd laugh if the guaranteed possession for the second team was a single untimed down because team 1 ran out the clock.

[xskarma]

Patriots traded for WR DeVante Parker from the Dolphins. Parker + a 2022 5th for a 2023 3rd.

He used to kill us when we played the Dolphins even if he was having a meh year, so I'm cool with this.


This also means the Patriots are now mostly set for the draft, I think, with at least reasonable players pencilled in at pretty much every position, except maybe Left Guard. But they should be able to just draft who they feel is the best player at that point in the draft and not have actual needs.

So far pretty happy with how this off season is turning out. Not spectacular, but just all round solid moves. Draft will be the real story though. We need another good one to build up depth and future stars, on both sides of the ball.