Author Topic: Jets sign Randy Bullock  (Read 5806 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SixFeetDeep

  • Global Moderator
  • Don Maynard
  • *****
  • Posts: 36211
  • uttah disastuh
Jets sign Randy Bullock
« on: November 10, 2015, 12:36:01 PM »
Complete and utter bunkum...
My dad always says he's undefeated at tailgating

Maybe it's not I who doesn't know what he's talking about

Heismanberg

  • Global Moderator
  • Curtis Martin
  • *****
  • Posts: 48960
  • SAUCE
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2015, 12:36:49 PM »
Fat kicker ftw
He shook my hand breed tub and walked away

guinness77

  • Shaun Ellis
  • *******
  • Posts: 9429
  • Honkey chops
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2015, 12:40:29 PM »
He's no Ryan Quigley!

MBGreen

  • Indian Death Lock
  • Administrator
  • Curtis Martin
  • *****
  • Posts: 45772
  • Chest hair for miles and miles.
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2015, 12:41:16 PM »
Keith Bulluck was pretty good.


Quote from: bojanglesman
"Hello good sir GM, may we pretty please have your throwaway centers and gords please??!?  I'll suck yo'dick!"

Derek Smalls

  • Mark Gastineau
  • *********
  • Posts: 19657
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2015, 12:43:31 PM »
Folk to IR. Unfortunate, but I think it's the right move.

bojanglesman

  • Don Maynard
  • *************
  • Posts: 38886
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2015, 12:51:43 PM »
Bullock got cut after missing 2 PATs this preseason.  The rest of his career is pretty stellar.  I'm surprised they cut him.

guinness77

  • Shaun Ellis
  • *******
  • Posts: 9429
  • Honkey chops
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2015, 12:54:03 PM »
Bullock got cut after missing 2 PATs this preseason.  The rest of his career is pretty stellar.  I'm surprised they cut him.

Kickers = what have you done for me lately

Italian Seafood

  • Al Toon
  • ********
  • Posts: 10722
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #7 on: November 10, 2015, 01:27:22 PM »
I still think going for it on 4th & 3 might have won us the game. It was a +4 and the margin of victory was 5, of course the play calling from there on might have been slightly different but we could have easily been tied if Jax went for 2 down 2.
So it turns out, Italian Seafood was right an everyone can go freak themselves.

MexJetinBcn

  • Vinny Testaverde
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #8 on: November 10, 2015, 02:59:46 PM »
I still think going for it on 4th & 3 might have won us the game. It was a +4 and the margin of victory was 5, of course the play calling from there on might have been slightly different but we could have easily been tied if Jax went for 2 down 2.

There are some moneyballers that argue that teams would be better off if they went for it in almost every 4th down.

Italian Seafood

  • Al Toon
  • ********
  • Posts: 10722
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #9 on: November 10, 2015, 03:13:46 PM »
There are some moneyballers that argue that teams would be better off if they went for it in almost every 4th down.

I believe that. In this case we were inside the 10, and being in the crowd unaware anything was wrong with Folk, I still thought it was a good, ballsy call that paid off. If you don't make it you have them backed up.
So it turns out, Italian Seafood was right an everyone can go freak themselves.

Johnny English

  • Administrator
  • Don Maynard
  • *****
  • Posts: 35866
  • Effort. Technique. Violence.
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #10 on: November 10, 2015, 03:16:06 PM »
There are some moneyballers that argue that teams would be better off if they went for it in almost every 4th down.

We've got one of the worst 4D conversion rates in the league this season (admittedly small sample size). We would convert some, but we'd also be handing over good field position way too often.

There might be a sweet spot between the opposition 35 and halfway where there's an argument for it but I don't like it at all as a blanket strategy.
A cross-dressing limey poofter

Derek Smalls

  • Mark Gastineau
  • *********
  • Posts: 19657
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #11 on: November 10, 2015, 03:20:20 PM »
I still really like Bowles, but he's way too conservative sometimes. I'm hoping this is a 1st-year coaching thing that he'll get out of his system, but it's another week of strange clock management decisions.

I was hoping going for it on 4th-and-3 would turn the light on for Bowles to be a little more aggressive, but not yet.

Honestly, once Folk went down, I would have had no problem going for 2 every time. How often is Quigley going to make a 33-yard kick? 75%? I'd argue it would be +EV to go for it as long as we can convert on 40% of our 2-point conversions.

MexJetinBcn

  • Vinny Testaverde
  • *****
  • Posts: 1870
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #12 on: November 10, 2015, 03:22:22 PM »
This is an interesting article on the subject, not the only one...

http://static.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/garber_greg/1453717.html

Johnny English

  • Administrator
  • Don Maynard
  • *****
  • Posts: 35866
  • Effort. Technique. Violence.
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2015, 03:49:20 PM »
This is an interesting article on the subject, not the only one...

http://static.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/garber_greg/1453717.html

It's mildly interesting but if I'm reading it correctly, he is by his own admission only talking about the likelihood of converting and not about the net impact of not converting. I can see a clear argument for not kicking on fourth and goal with five to go, because you only have to convert half of the time (assuming a 100% conversion rate on all kicks in that situation) to be in net positive. The crucial thing there though is the impact of failure, which is pretty much negligible.

The idea that it would ever be a good idea to give control of the ball to the opposition in scoring territory is something that could only exist inside the theoretical world of an economist's head.
A cross-dressing limey poofter

Italian Seafood

  • Al Toon
  • ********
  • Posts: 10722
Re: Jets sign Randy Bullock
« Reply #14 on: November 10, 2015, 03:55:18 PM »
Game situation and risk/reward have to be the considerations, not the long term net result. I liked our call because we were inside the 10 and it was a makeable 4th & 3.

You can be successful on a bunch of 2-point conversions when you're up or down big and come out ahead mathematically in the long run, but the one you need in a tight game could cost you. Kicking the extra point is still the higher percentage play, even with Quigley from 33 yards we were 4 for 4.
So it turns out, Italian Seafood was right an everyone can go freak themselves.