One of these times, the mistake of scoring instead of taking a knee....

 

Let me guess... you bet on the UNDER.

 

 

      Do you think Westbrooke phoned Greene after the game and called him a dumbass or congratulted him or both?

                    

For us spread better's the knee shit usually sucks, but I have no problem w/ Westbrook taking a knee (I had him in my fantasy league) or Manning taking a dive at the 3...Regardless of spread it shows those of us who wager on spreads/teams that the team  who did this is somewhat competent and wants the win...Maybe if 3 min's remained it might not always be the wisest play, but I want a hot team wanting to cut your throat and if they play smart ball or not I still like the "cut-throat attitude"

I have no problem w/ a jacked up team rubbing it in, and I also have no problem w/ a smart team killing clock to insure the beatdown!!!!

This is LAUGHABLE...

I gotta ask if you didn't care about a spread/total then WTF do you care about the late TD???  Yes NE had 40 sec's or so 2 score 2 td's well I doubt it unless the playoff team has the Texans def who doesn't understand deep-ball and end of game strategy(probably why Houston isn't in the playoffs) ... I love that Rexy ran the score up on NE, they had no shot of winning down 14, but I guess in the magical world they could've tied it (did they, NO Chance) so Rexy playing cutthroat and demolishing a team somehow counted against them/him....Yes anything can happen on any given sunday, but down 14 w/ 50 sec's left is a beatdown in my books I only wish teams would win and give the other team a shot only to CRUSH their dreams and demoralize the Fans

This topic seems to have no relevance since if you wanna bet on a 2% trend then more power to ya, but I will take the team intent on blowing you out every-game...If I lose 2% of the time well I will live w/ that, and since I like a teams chances while they continue to play I say score and RUB THE SHIT IN...OK NE  had a 2% chance of onsides and TD, well Rexy's attitude is FUCK'EM!!! Rip their hearts out even that much more

I completely agree with you that falling down is the right play, but you do realize that your percentages agree with Moo and not with your 95%/96% comment, right?

.35*.1*.1 = .35% chance of losing or a 99.65% chance of losing.

sorry I obviously meant 99.65% chance of winning at the end of that post.

They went from 100% winning the game, to 98% winning the game.

This is something you can't quantify with actual numbers.

Therefore, you should probably stop asserting it.

Why would someone bring up this topic UNLESS they lost money, and this Vanzack guy must of lost money betting the under therefore he is trying to get his best Vince Lombardi impression on by telling us being up 14 with a 1 minute and a half is wrong 

yeah you're right; I had the OVER and chalked it up as an "L"... bad, bad beat for UNDER backers for sure

i cant believe i have to agree 100% with vanballsak

You honestly can't be this dumb.  The coach is paid to think like an accountant.  The players do what the coach tells them to do.

The fact that they won doesn't make it the right decision.  It's two different things.  It's not even debatable. 

100% agree with vanzack. 

Let me restate for those that have no reading comprehension skills:

1.  I had no bet on the total.  Unlike typical mouthbreatihing morons at covers, I have something called "objectivity" (look it up in a dictionary)

2.  One day, scoring when you dont have to will cost a team a big game, and then it will be a big deal, and everyone will adjust.  Remember the Pisarchik (Giants Eagles) play?  Nobody used to take a knee to kill a game, they would run up the middle.  Guess what happened after that game?  Im sure if we were on covers before that game everyone would explain to me the value of running vs kneeling, and how the odds of fumbling and returing that fumble were astronomical. 

Keep debating, but there really isnt a debate here.  They went from 100% winner to <100% by choice.  Not sure how anyone could take that side, but there are plenty of morons at covers who would argue that the sky isnt blue, so Im not surprised.

Yes he clearily should have slid down then as soon you give yourself up the ball is down and they can't hit you from behind.  He gave the Pats a slight chance to come back and tie or win the game which is just one aspect of it.  Although that was a slight chance to happen the biggest problem I had with it was that it gives your defense a chance to get injured.  What if Reevis turns an ankle covering a Wr or a safty tries for a big hit and knocks out cromartie covering a player. 

You slid down and have a definite win vs scorring a meaningless TD and a chance the Pats score or even an injury to one of your key players for next week.

You can play the 'what if' game with everything. What if Greene slid down and fumbled the ball or what if Greene slid down at the one and blows out his knee in doing so? What if. Blah, blah.

that people continue to hold to an indefensible position just blows my mind.  some of you cats must have slept your way through school.

1.  if you take a knee, nothing can go wrong.

2.  if you don't take a knee, many things can go wrong.

To eliminate ANY probability of losing, you choose #1.

Once again, it is not a what if game.

It is a probability game.  You do what gives you the best probability to win.  They had one action that would give them 100% chance to win, and one that would give them <100%.

You are like someone trying to justify a blackjack player hitting a 16 against a 6 because the guy got a 5 to make 21. 

What is so hard to understand about that?

Van, sometimes, I cant believe you even want to argue with the clowns here at covers, I really cant.  There are a few guys here, maybe about 20 max I can deal with.

It is a character flaw.

I had the under for the game at 45, had under 2nd half at 23.5

      I saw a friend of mine double on 5 once but he was drunk.

That is sick.