Poll

[KillerKat]

I said he should've went for it at the very moment. Instead we played for a fuging tie. Not a win. A mother fuging tie.

[csx]

A tie is almost certainly equivalent to a loss. Rivera should be fired on the basis of this singular decision. A head coach who doesn't understand the numbers is a worthless coach.

SO OF fuging COURSE YOU GO FOR THE WIN AND IF YOU LOSE OH WELL AT LEAST YOU TRIED TO WIN WHEN YOU HAD THE CHANCE

WHaT?

[Guild]

I see the probability point you are trying to make. But as close as this division looks like it may end up being I do believe taking the tie is greater. The flawed logic in this 4th and 1 argument is there is no guarantee we would have scored a touchdown. The fact that Dalton had already thrown two picks and is prone to folding under pressure makes me believe that the odds of kicking a field goal AND getting the ball back were higher than the probability of converting on 4th and 1 AND scoring a touchdown. (Multiplication rule)

 

I would say the chances of converting fourth and one (or two) is greater than the opposing kicker missing a 36 yard field goal.  Attempting the fourth and one (or two) had a significantly better increase in chance of winning the game versus attempting or even making the field goal we scored instead.

[Guild]

WHaT?

Insane emotional reaction.  Forgive my venting.

[Toolbox]

Damn if you do and damn if you don't

[CPcavedweller]

I would say the chances of converting fourth and one (or two) is greater than the opposing kicker missing a 36 yard field goal. Attempting the fourth and one (or two) had a significantly better increase in chance of winning the game versus attempting or even making the field goal we scored instead.

But you are leaving out the fact we still had 20 yards to the endzone. Average the Bengels redzone defense and our redzone TD% and you get a relatively unlikely probability. That we score a touchdown. When dealing with probability you also must multiply the probability of converting the 4th down by the probability of scoring a TD. That's the only way I know how to break that down. And honestly, while I think they should be separated , in the context of the argument you can't.

[Jangler]

[L-TownCat]

At this point knowing that the game ends in a tie removes all doubt and chance.  Its not a loss nor a win but its definitely not a loss.  In a game where wins and losses are paramount we essentially just walked away from the game without a conclusion.  

 

On the other hand, to go for it means to take away the guarantee of a tie and open back up the possibility of a loss.  No thanks I'll take the "not a loss" and go about my day.  We have 10 more chances to win or lose and I'm focused on the next one.

[Icege]

It amazes me how many posters saying, "at least we tried to win!" if Rivera went for it on 4th & 1 are the same ass clowns that foam at the mouth over a player making a bad play.

At least they were trying to win, right?

[Icege]

Hindsight bias, also known as the knew-it-all-along effect or creeping determinism, is the inclination, after an event has occurred, to see the event as having been predictable, despite there having been little or no objective basis for predicting it, prior to its occurrence. It is a multifaceted phenomenon that can affect different stages of designs, processes, contexts, and situations. Hindsight bias may cause memory distortion, where the recollection and reconstruction of content can lead to false theoretical outcomes. It has been suggested that the effect can cause extreme methodological problems while trying to analyze, understand, and interpret results in experimental studies. A basic example of the hindsight bias is when, after viewing the outcome of a potentially unforeseeable event, a person believes he or she "knew it all along". Such examples are present in the writings of historians describing outcomes of battles, physicians recalling clinical trials, and in judicial systems trying to attribute responsibility and predictability of accidents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

Thank j00

[PantherFanOne]

If we had gone for it and not made it,we would have lost the game and the Huddle would have been lite up with "Fire Rivera" posts.

 

[ricardo22compleano]

Too risky! What if we dident get it?

[PantherFanOne]

I would say the chances of converting fourth and one (or two) is greater than the opposing kicker missing a 36 yard field goal.  Attempting the fourth and one (or two) had a significantly better increase in chance of winning the game versus attempting or even making the field goal we scored instead.

 

When Ron decided not to go for it on a long  one and one half  yd third down that would have cost us the game if we hadn't made it, there was no way knowing that the Bengals would be in position to try a thirty six yd field goal later.

If it had only been a yard we needed ,he said that he would have gone for it and I would be complaining if he hadn't but since it was longer than a yard,i feel he made the correct call.

All the naysayers complaing this tie was a loss,need to check and they will realize it was actually a half win,something that could work in our favor come playoff time. 

[teeray]

It was 2 yards not one.

If they say 4th and 1 it is about 1.9999999 yards.

I don't know. I understand the idea of going for it, and if it was less than a yard it is a an easier decision.

As far as we were from a 1st I don't hate the decision