Well, now I know why our football team can't beat Florida. Spiking the ball with the lead isn't a very good strategy. I think we need to tell Coach not to do that!
Or leaving receivers unguarded not once but twice lol
That game still kills me.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well, now I know why our football team can't beat Florida. Spiking the ball with the lead isn't a very good strategy. I think we need to tell Coach not to do that!
Did it say how many actually went to overtime... that is the real question.https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordp...-points-the-first-comprehensive-cbb-analysis/
Of the 52 teams that committed a foul, six lost the game for a winning percentage of 88.46%. Of the 391 teams that did not foul, 33 lost the game for a winning percentage of 91.56%. Both a two sample t-test of proportion and a Chi-squared test fail to reject the null hypothesis that there is a difference in winning percentage between the two strategies. In this sample, teams that did not foul won slightly more often. For the less statistically inclined, this means that there is no significant difference between the two strategies.
That means that in 2009-2010, teams that were down three points at the end of the game scored the necessary points at rates that did not differ based on which strategy the leading team pursued.
Did Mississippi state foul us on purpose while up 3 in the sec title game that year?https://harvardsportsanalysis.wordp...-points-the-first-comprehensive-cbb-analysis/
Of the 52 teams that committed a foul, six lost the game for a winning percentage of 88.46%. Of the 391 teams that did not foul, 33 lost the game for a winning percentage of 91.56%. Both a two sample t-test of proportion and a Chi-squared test fail to reject the null hypothesis that there is a difference in winning percentage between the two strategies. In this sample, teams that did not foul won slightly more often. For the less statistically inclined, this means that there is no significant difference between the two strategies.
That means that in 2009-2010, teams that were down three points at the end of the game scored the necessary points at rates that did not differ based on which strategy the leading team pursued.
Yes, after the in bounds side out about 3/4 court, Bledsoe brought the ball across half court and blew past Barry Stewart, who swipes at the ball from behind and fouls Bledsoe.Did Mississippi state foul us on purpose while up 3 in the sec title game that year?
No biggie unless the shot is made and the foul is called; It is the referee's discretion to determine whether the shooter was fouled "in the act of shooting" or not. Imagine giving up a 4 point play and losing the game when you were up by 3 and couldn't lose in regulation. This is the type of thing that can get a coach fired. Play defense and let the chips fall where they may.Really tough defense along the 3 point arc, and if you foul during the process, it no biggie.
Did it say how many actually went to overtime... that is the real question.
W L OT Win% Cases
Foul 122 5 11 92.0 138
Defend 598 2 76 93.5 676
So less chance of overtime. BUT a much larger chance of losing in regulation. WITH foiling.This is from Kenpom:
Code:W L OT Win% Cases Foul 122 5 11 92.0 138 Defend 598 2 76 93.5 676
48 of the 87 overtime games (55%) were won by the team coming back to tie it. Using that figure for OT games, the defenders win 93.4% of the time and foulers win 92.3% of the time.
I think spiking the ball is good strategy. Most normally means that you have just scored a TD!Why would a team leading, spike the ball to stop the clock? I guess you do not watch much football.
Do you mean kneeling and burning time?This. But I also don’t like how football teams can win with 1.5+ minutes left by spiking the ball. Just not my style.
Of course that’s what I meant. Not sure why this thread got resurrected. But anyone with a brain knew what I meant and critiquing my football terminology when I don’t like the sport is a very poor argument to make and even dumber than the simple misuse of a word when what I was saying was clear as dayDo you mean kneeling and burning time?
Not being a D. Just confused because alimony the ball stops the clock and burns a down and if you’re trying to stop the clock then you are behind...and trying to score so downs matter.