Bill Belichick is a moron...

[AdamJT13]

I get the decision to go for it because you don't think you can stop the Colts. But if you have that little faith in your defense, isn't the next move after you fail to convert is let the Colts have a TD on the first play? You might as well give your offense 1:40+ to go down the field to kick the field goal.

If you determine that your odds of driving for the winning field goal are greater than the chances of stopping the Colts from scoring a touchdown, then yes, that would be the right choice. But again, most coaches don't want to be the one who plays those percentages and loses. The criticism likely would be far worse than what Belichick is facing.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Is the math here supposed to be used to predict what is going to happen or is the math used as a summation of what has happened in the past? You are allowed to interpolate between data points in most cases, but you are rarely allowed to extrapolate out from a data point. This to me is similar. I think it is poor use of this math to think that it will truly predicate what may happen. There is a fine line between the two and in these tense situations I would not rely on these numbers at all for a high risk gamble.

I agree.

I figure 4th and 2 is about the equivalent of going for a 2 point conversion. So the percentage is about 50%.

What are the percentages that the Colts can drive 70 yards and score a TD in less than 2 minutes.

I really believe that is probably at about 10%. Now, scoring a TD for the Colts in less than 2 minutes from the 29 yard line is probably closer to 60%.

He didn't play the numbers because he played them so poorly that it's easy to conclude that his ego and arrogance got in the way.

Put it this way, if that's the way he plays numbers, I certainly don't want him investing my finances.




YAKUZA

 

[InmanRoshi]

What are the percentages that the Colts can drive 70 yards and score a TD in less than 2 minutes.

I really believe that is probably at about 10%.

Hey everyone, here is a number I just pulled from my rear end.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I agree.

I figure 4th and 2 is about the equivalent of going for a 2 point conversion. So the percentage is about 50%.

What are the percentages that the Colts can drive 70 yards and score a TD in less than 2 minutes.

I really believe that is probably at about 10%. Now, scoring a TD for the Colts in less than 2 minutes from the 29 yard line is probably closer to 60%.

Huh? They'd already driven 80 yards in 2 minutes twice in the same quarter. Other teams do it, on average, in that situation, about 30% of the time. I don't see any way that one can reasonably suggest that the odds are only 10%. And Belichick, who knows both these teams and the situation at that moment way better than we do, obviously disagreed with you too.

He didn't play the numbers because he played them so poorly that it's easy to conclude that his ego and arrogance got in the way.

I don't get this either. Everybody's saying he made the decision out of arrogance. I think he made it out of abject terror. Terror of giving Peyton the ball with that much time left.

There's another piece of this that folks are missing. By doing what he did, once they miss the 4th-and-2, there's a greater chance that the Colts will score quickly and leave time for the Pats to go down and kick a game-winning FG. In fact, the biggest mistake the Pats made in the entire game was tackling Addai at the 1 yard line. Let him score and you have more than a minute for your FG drive.

 

[BAZ]

Hey everyone, here is a number I just pulled from my rear end.

Cool. Pull out a Dorito next.

 

[kmd24]

I really believe that is probably at about 10%. Now, scoring a TD for the Colts in less than 2 minutes from the 29 yard line is probably closer to 60%.

This is totally inconsistent with statistics, which say the average team is not even twice as likely (53% vs. 30%) to score given the additional yards. And yet you think the Colts, who are better than the average team in the two minute drill, are 6 times as likely to score given the additional yardage?

 

[AdamJT13]

One other thing, the percentages quoted for the Patriots' "winning percentage" (79 percent for going for it, 70 percent for punting) aren't actually that. Those are the Patriots' NOT FALLING BEHIND percentages -- the chances of the keeping the Colts scoring from a TD to take the lead. Clearly, a certain percentage of those times when they would fall behind would be when the Colts scored with 10 seconds, 20 seconds, 30 seconds, 40 seconds, etc., left in the game. And a certain percentage of those times, the Patriots would be able to drive for the winning field goal. And given that the Colts likely would leave more time with a short field than when needing to drive a longer distance, that would increase the advantages of going for it instead of punting.

 

[jimmy40]

We had the All time leading Rusher and one of the best O-lines ever, if we can't make a yard on Two straight plays we didn't deserve to win, I don't like Barry at all but I had no problem with this.

Switzer was an idiot.

 

[jimmy40]

so then Mumbles must also be an idiot

remember, both have SBs so you cannot use that argument against Switzer. He also has national titles in college. His pedigree is almost as good as Mumbles'.

I know all about Switzer and he was an idiot.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

This is totally inconsistent with statistics, which say the average team is not even twice as likely (53% vs. 30%) to score given the additional yards. And yet you think the Colts, who are better than the average team in the two minute drill, are 6 times as likely to score given the additional yardage?

Statisticians have shown that you're better NEVER PUNTING in the NFL and just going for every 4th down.

It's not that I don't see the logic behind the stats, but I do believe there is something missing with that, just like a coach who would never punt because they are just 'going with the numbers.'

Belichick 'playing the numbers' is ridiculous. I think he thought he could catch the Colts off guard, and there was a lot of ego and arrogance involved.

Punt the ball away and force the opponent to go 70 yards to score a TD with only 2 minutes left in the game. And remember, get inside a minute and if somebody false starts, that's a 10 second run off. More bad things can happen for the Colts as they have further to go, which is good for the Pats.

Hey, if it was a FG game I could see. But up by a TD? Forget about it.



YAKUZA

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Huh? They'd already driven 80 yards in 2 minutes twice in the same quarter. Other teams do it, on average, in that situation, about 30% of the time. I don't see any way that one can reasonably suggest that the odds are only 10%. And Belichick, who knows both these teams and the situation at that moment way better than we do, obviously disagreed with you too.

Okay.

Like I said, a 4th and 2 in this situation is almost like a 2 point conversion. So let's say that NFL teams on average convert that 4th and 2 about 55% of the time.

And you're telling us that teams can drive down and score a TD in less than 2 minutes from about 70 yards out about 30% of the time.

The stats still work better to punt the ball away.

I guess by the logic we like to use, the next time a team has a 4th and 2 and is up by 6 points and decides to punt away on 4th and 2, they must be an idiot.






YAKUZA

 

[The Great Number 8]

If you determine that your odds of driving for the winning field goal are greater than the chances of stopping the Colts from scoring a touchdown, then yes, that would be the right choice. But again, most coaches don't want to be the one who plays those percentages and loses. The criticism likely would be far worse than what Belichick is facing.

I'd agree with that. But as I said, if you don't think you can stop them from 70 yards, you must be much more certain you can't stop them from 29 yards. If you miss on the conversion, your only goal should be to get the ball back. If you're going to risk it, and face the criticism, you might as well go all in.

If anything, they should have let Addai score with 1:15 left on his 14 yard run. Once there down that close to the end zone, it had to be a better option to let them score

 

[AdamJT13]

Okay.

Like I said, a 4th and 2 in this situation is almost like a 2 point conversion. So let's say that NFL teams on average convert that 4th and 2 about 55% of the time.

And you're telling us that teams can drive down and score a TD in less than 2 minutes from about 70 yards out about 30% of the time.

The stats still work better to punt the ball away.

Except that teams don't score touchdowns 100 percent of the time from the opponents' 29. It's barely over half. Not to mention that if the Colts did score a TD and left more than a few seconds on the clock, the Patriots still would have time to try driving for a winning field goal.

Every mathematical analysis has shown that the odds of the Patriots winning were better by going for it than if they had punted -- at least barring a 61-yard punt downed at the 1 (about as likely as the Colts simply returning the punt to the Pats' 29). It's OK to disagree with playing those odds, but you can't just make up percentages and pretend that the math says something different.

 

[joseephuss]

If they Pats were that scared that the Colts could move the ball and score on them with ease then they probably have changed their whole approach to their final drive. They could have been more conservative and never passed the ball on third down or they could have been more aggressive on first and second down and thrown passes far enough down field to get first downs. It really was not just about that 4th play, but the whole sequence. They burned a time out on first down and then their last time out just before the 4th down play.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Except that teams don't score touchdowns 100 percent of the time from the opponents' 29. It's barely over half. Not to mention that if the Colts did score a TD and left more than a few seconds on the clock, the Patriots still would have time to try driving for a winning field goal.

Every mathematical analysis has shown that the odds of the Patriots winning were better by going for it than if they had punted -- at least barring a 61-yard punt downed at the 1 (about as likely as the Colts simply returning the punt to the Pats' 29). It's OK to disagree with playing those odds, but you can't just make up percentages and pretend that the math says something different.

And like I posted earlier, every statistician that has researched the NFL says that your chances of winning in the NFL are greater in you NEVER punt the ball.

I'm all for statistics and probability in the NFL, but I do think often times when using stats (even when I use them), that there are some things missing that factor in those stats. I usually admit to as many as I can. I just can't help but think that there's something missing here because any football player will tell you that it's harder to drive 70 yards in 2 minutes than it is to stop a 4th and 2...at home.

Thus, like the stats guys who say you should NEVER punt, I think there's some things that are missing here.

The only coach that really played the stats beautifully this past weekend was Jack Del Rio by having MJD take a knee at the 1 yard line despite losing. Hooray for him.






YAKUZA

 

[Vtwin]

Well, I'm not the one that said probabilities don't matter. Why do people go for the XP when the 2 point conversion scores more points?

Classic internet tap dancing.

You took my statment that the probabilities don't matter in this specific situation and extrapolate that to mean that probabilities never matter.

I did not say that probabilities have no place in the decision making process while coaching an NFL game.

Heck, they even played a role in this instance as far as the play call on both sides.

To use them to make a case that this was a good decision?

Nah.

 

[AdamJT13]

And like I posted earlier, every statistician that has researched the NFL says that your chances of winning in the NFL are greater in you NEVER punt the ball.

Not true. There are plenty of times when the percentages say it's better to punt the ball. But teams would be better off if they went for it on fourth down much more often than they do -- in the right situations.

I'm all for statistics and probability in the NFL, but I do think often times when using stats (even when I use them), that there are some things missing that factor in those stats. I usually admit to as many as I can. I just can't help but think that there's something missing here because any football player will tell you that it's harder to drive 70 yards in 2 minutes than it is to stop a 4th and 2...at home.

And that's exactly what the percentages said -- a 30 percent chance of driving 66 yards, compared to a 40 percent chance of stopping the fourth-and-2.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Not true. There are plenty of times when the percentages say it's better to punt the ball. But teams would be better off if they went for it on fourth down much more often than they do -- in the right situations.

You may claim it's not true, but that's what the statisticians point out to. I believe the latest example came from NFLN's Top Ten 'Football Myths' show. Taking a look at every play from every game over the last 3 years, a Cal Berkley Statistician Professor has determined that you should never punt. Now, while that is a bad thing if it's 4th and 26, one also has to consider the rewards of going for it on 4th and 5. But even still, the stats say you should never ever punt because the balance of never punting supposedly increases your win percentage.

Somehow I'm not quite buying it.

I love the stats in football as much as anybody, but there's a need to understand that some thing may be missing and that even Football Outsiders has gotten to the point where they have said 'we don't know' because there are too many contradicting statistical factors.

I look at it this way, had Belichick just punted the ball away, NOBODY outside of a few diehard statisticians who probably believe you should never punt would question his decision. Regardless if the Pats still had lost the game.







YAKUZA