When it happened I agreed with Bill Belichick's call to go for it

[TD Ryan2 316]

Isn't that all that matters?

 

yes.

 

you can hit a 17 in Blackjack and maybe end up with 21 and even though your results were good, you still didn't make the right decision from a probability standpoint.

 

 

you don't know what the results would have been if they punted.

the percentages suggest that going for it had a better chance to win the game.

[parrot 789]

Isn't that all that matters?

 

No, it's not all that matters, because at the time the decision is being made that information is not available, so it's not a fair criteria to use in evaluating decision making.

 

When a team loses the coin-flip do you think they made a bad call?

[KSB2424 3,148]

Burke is a football-crazed, math-inclined single father who works for a military contractor. Three years ago, he found himself with nothing to do once he put his children to bed. “I was pretty bored,’’ Burke said. He used software leftover from grad school to create a simulation tool that could solve football arguments for his friends at work

 

I love people that manipulate numbers and can predict the future. Especially bored single fathers that are "mathmatically inclined" What a source.

 

I think it was Mark Twain that said: "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

 

Anyone that knows statistics understands that predicting future football games, espcically outcomes, of a singular event, with every single factor different than the one before it, is impossible to do with any kind of accuracy. It's simply something that should be looked at for shits and giggles.

 

Cards are finite. An Ace is a Ace is an Ace. A coin is finite with only two outcomes. Whether in 1909, 1959 or 2009. The Patriots middle linebacker is not finite. Peyton Manning is not the same person one week as he is another.

[parrot 789]

ZEUS Computer Program Supports Belichick’s Fourth-Down Bid

 

The results of Scenarios #1 and #2 clearly point in favor of Belichick’s decision, although not by nearly as wide a margin as we might have expected. Additionally, the analysis in Scenario #3 really cements the case for “going for it.” Applying this benchmark and comparing it with the far different characteristics of the Patriots and the Colts makes the call all the more clear.

 

Thumbs up to Belichick on a courageous and correct call last night.

[KYSteel 0]

No, it's not all that matters, because at the time the decision is being made that information is not available, so it's not a fair criteria to use in evaluating decision making.

 

When a team loses the coin-flip do you think they made a bad call?

 

Well... yes. A coin flip is all luck though.

 

I'm not saying the "wrong" call was made because Indy may well have won anyways, but I'm having a hard time trying to see how an arguement can be made that its was the "right" call when it didnt work.

[parrot 789]

Well... yes. A coin flip is all luck though.

 

I'm not saying the "wrong" call was made because Indy may well have won anyways, but I'm having a hard time trying to see how an arguement can be made that its was the "right" call when it didnt work.

 

Well I can't really go there, because I think we got screwed on the spot and therefore it actually did work.

 

A good call isn't always the right call. If I'm faced with 60/40 odds, I should take the 60 every time, but four out of ten times I will be wrong. That's the very nature of probability.

[KYSteel 0]

Well I can't really go there, because I think we got screwed on the spot and therefore it actually did work.

 

A good call isn't always the right call. If I'm faced with 60/40 odds, I should take the 60 every time, but four out of ten times I will be wrong. That's the very nature of probability.

 

FWIW I thought he got the yards also.

[KSB2424 3,148]

I just ran Colts versus Pats in Madden 10 times. Peyton scored from his own 30 5 times. Therefore it is a 50/50 shot that the Colts would have scored if they punted in that game. I have the proof. It's a fact.

[parrot 789]

I just ran Colts versus Pats in Madden 10 times. Peyton scored from his own 30 5 times. Therefore it is a 50/50 shot that the Colts would have scored if they punted in that game. I have the proof.

 

How many times does he score from the Pats thirty, and how many times do the Pats convert the fourth and two?

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

Congrats. You wrote one of the dumbest things ever posted here. No small feat there.

 

Congrats. You quoted only half a post.

 

The difference is I've actually offered some reasoning as to why it is the smart play, supported by generally accepted numbers and probabilities.

 

If you truely believe that no one has offered up reasoning as to why it was a dumb call, you either havn't been reading or are just plain stupid.

 

The percentages argument has also been repeatedly shot to shit in terms of being the only factor to consider. I understand its fun to twist statistics to support your argument but its already been pointed out that using 4th and 2 percentages gathered from many different game situations is only a loose guideline for this particular situation.

[Larry David 20]

I too agreed with the play at the time. Then again, I also agreed with the Edsel, new coke and moving Jay Leno to 10:00.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

ZEUS Computer Program Supports Belichick’s Fourth-Down Bid

 

While this program does factor in the indivdual teams strengths and weaknesses, it doesn't seem to factor in emotion, the heightened adrenalin for both teams due to the circumstance of the situation being nearly do or die in nature, the increased crowd noise, as well as the momentum swing that failing to convnert would provide.

 

and while it considered each teams strengths and weaknesses, its doing so based on what they have previously done this season. It doesn't factor in that 1 team might be having an unusually good defensive or offensive game that night.

 

If all you want to do is look at %'s and probabilities then Belichick made an ok call. A good call if you want to go by this article.

 

But again, math is not the only thing involved in football. If it were then I'll say it again, replace the players with robots and play a game of chance.

[parrot 789]

Congrats. You quoted only half a post.

If you truely believe that no one has offered up reasoning as to why it was a dumb call, you either havn't been reading or are just plain stupid.

 

The percentages argument has also been repeatedly shot to shit in terms of being the only facot to consider. I understand its fun to twist statistics to support your argument but its already been pointed out that using 4th and 2 percentages gathered from many different game situations is only a loose guideline for this particular situation.

 

Sorry, but as much as you guys would like it to, repeatedly crying "IT WAS DUMB!" doesn't amount to shooting anything to sh!t in my book.

 

The percentages take into account all these different factors and scenarios, you don't seem to grasp that. The statistics are base on real game results played by real players, just like in the Pats/Colts game. Teams get up for fourth down. There are lots of important fourth down attempts with wins and losses riding on them. The only thing so unique about this one is where it occurred. Some are successful, some are not. They are generally successful more than 50% of the time. The Patriots have a very good offense so I would expect them to be successful at an even higher rate. There was nothing wrong with trying to get that two yards in that situation as opposed to punting the ball back to Manning and the Colts. If you don't think the Colts had at least a 50/50 chance to march 70 yards and score, you must have slept through the fourth quarter. Or you're just a fucking idiot, which is seeming more and more like the case all the time.

[edjr 6,580]

ZEUS Computer Program Supports Belichick’s Fourth-Down Bid

 

[parrot 789]

and while it considered each teams strengths and weaknesses, its doing so based on what they have previously done this season. It doesn't factor in that 1 team might be having an unusually good defensive or offensive game that night.

 

You mean like how the Pats had hung 475 yards of offense on them to that point and were averaging 6.6 yards per play?

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

You mean like how the Pats had hung 475 yards of offense on them to that point and were averagine 6.6 yards per play?

 

I wasn't saying specifically for this game. Obviously that calculator you linked gets used for many games and many scenarios. I was just giving examples of outside factors to consider.

 

Again, most of us who say it was a dumb decision are providing a ton of reasons why. So Im not sure why you continue to act as if we are simply crying "dumb call".

 

Most of the supporters are simply crying "the stats support it".

 

Thats fine, if you want to believe that the stats translate 100% and if you wan't to believe that the math is all that matters then be my guest. All those 4th and 2's from the opponents 40 yard line during the 1st and 2nd quarters that go on during a season have alot of translation to the situation we saw Sunday night.

 

Seriously, robot players is where its at. Every play could be called based on percentages and math. There wouldn't be a need for coaches either

[kmbryant09 1]

Sorry, but as much as you guys would like it to, repeatedly crying "IT WAS DUMB!" doesn't amount to shooting anything to sh!t in my book.

 

The percentages take into account all these different factors and scenarios, you don't seem to grasp that. The statistics are base on real game results played by real players, just like in the Pats/Colts game. Teams get up for fourth down. There are lots of important fourth down attempts with wins and losses riding on them. The only thing so unique about this one is where it occurred. Some are successful, some are not. They are generally successful more than 50% of the time. The Patriots have a very good offense so I would expect them to be successful at an even higher rate. There was nothing wrong with trying to get that two yards in that situation as opposed to punting the ball back to Manning and the Colts. If you don't think the Colts had at least a 50/50 chance to march 70 yards and score, you must have slept through the fourth quarter. Or you're just a fucking idiot, which is seeming more and more like the case all the time.

And you must have slept through the Pats' offensive 2nd half possessions, particularly late in the game, particulary the near pick-6 on 3rd and 2...if you truly believe the Pats had a 50+% chance of making that conversion.

 

Again, machines and stats and probabilities can only account for so much...As WW put it, emotion, adrenaline, the rivalry aspect, being on the road, crowd noise, nearly losing the game on 3rd down, etc....NONE of that is in the #'s.

[parrot 789]

I wasn't saying specifically for this game.

 

You weren't?

 

It doesn't factor in that 1 team might be having an unusually good defensive or offensive game that night.

 

I don't think you know what you're saying at this point.

 

The only reason I've seen given for it being dumb was that it failed. That's poor reasoning IMO.

[KSB2424 3,148]

you're just a fucking idiot

Awesome. Disagree and this is what you get.

 

but..but...but...a prediction (a guess based on faulty probables) is the same thing as fact or truth.

 

This was a gut call. Belichick made a call (against conventional wisdom) and lost. Whatever. It's not that big of a deal.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

You weren't?

I don't think you know what you're saying at this point.

 

The only reason I've seen given for it being dumb was that it failed. That's poor reasoning IMO.

 

i guess you have never heard of hypothetical situations.

 

considering i used the words "1 team MIGHT BE having" and "THAT night", you couldn't tell I was offering possible factors not accounted for by your simulator?

 

 

and you know what? Since you claim the only reasoning you have seen for it being dumb is that the call failed, I will post a list of quotes for you.

 

I wasn't sure one person could be so stupid but you have proven me quite wrong.

 

quotes incoming.

[parrot 789]

And you must have slept through the Pats' offensive 2nd half possessions, particularly late in the game, particulary the near pick-6 on 3rd and 2...if you truly believe the Pats had a 50+% chance of making that conversion.

 

I've already stated my opinion that their offensive woes in the second half were more a product of getting overly conservative than anything, but let me do a little math for you; it was fourth and two, that means they had moved eight yards on the previous three plays. That's an average of 2.6 yards per play. They needed two to get the first down. So even with them admittedly struggling, and throwing an incomplete pass in there, they were still getting more than what they needed on average.

 

Again, machines and stats and probabilities can only account for so much...As WW put it, emotion, adrenaline, the rivalry aspect, being on the road, crowd noise, nearly losing the game on 3rd down, etc....NONE of that is in the #'s.

 

The Patriots have emotion, adreanline, and the rivalry aspect as well. No saying whose side those came down on. Being on the road is what it is, you have to deal with it. To be afraid to try and win the game rather than not losing simply because you're on the road and have certain conditions working against is bassackwards thinking in my mind. Yeah let's just punt the ball back to Peyton because he's at home, that seems like a great choice.

[jgcrawfish 232]

The amount of stupidity in this thread by people who support Belicheat shocks me. I don't care what the ZEUS computer says. Fock, i don't focking care if focking ZEUS himself descended from Olympus and told Belicheat to go for it, it was dumb focking call. No computer can simulate how bad the Colts wanted that one play. For all the stats that get spewed, not one takes into account this particular situation. Again, this isn't a 4th down QB sneak from 1/2 a yrd away on your opponents 35 yrd line, where the only repercussion is that the offense gets a new set of downs. This is 2 minutes, game on the line, you lose if you don't stop these guys...and it's 2 yrds. There is no computer that factors in the magnitude of the moment and I'd be the amount of statistical data that factors in a team that's leading going for it on 4th and 2 to try and close out a game is such a small subset that you can't even trend it. Bottom line is this, Belicheat gambled and lost, and you each of you that support him look like a fool for supporting the string of poor coaching decisions he made that cost his team.

[nobody 2,671]

Even if you take all the percentages and skew them in such a way that makes a punt favorable to account for all these vague, hand-waving reasons why the Pats should have punted, it's still a very marginal decision, and most of the time still in favor of going for it. I don't think anyone here is saying that punting is a bad option, only that going for it doesn't deserve the backlash that it's getting.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

Here you go, Parrot. I stopped quoting posts halfway down page 3 as I realized this would get quite lengthy.

 

Please note these are quotes of people giving reasons for why it was a bad call and not simply saying "this call sucked" as you claim they have.

 

I have even bolded key parts for you.

 

Your chances of winning with Peyton needing 60-80 yrds are bad enough, but your chances of winning with Peyton needing 28 yrds are pathetic. You punt that ball and you give your defense a chance to bring it home. You don't tell the defense "Hey, you guys were good enough for 58 minutes, but I don't think you can cut it from here on out".

 

 

Had the ball been on the 50 yard line... maybe you have an argument to go for it (I would still punt it) but when you have the ball inside your own 30 yard line, you risk giving Peyton Manning an incredibly short field and opening up the Colts entire playbook which is something alot of people don't even consider.

 

 

The first mistake you are making is to think that the % of converting on 4th and 2 matters in this situation.

 

When the ball is on your own 28 yard line, a 50% chance of turning the ball over on downs is about 50% too high.

 

A % like that matters when you're trying to decide wether to go for it on their 40 yard line or to punt it away.

 

If you kick the ball away, maybe Manning marches 70 or 80 yards down the field and scores a TD on you. But at least you show confidence in your defense to stop him over a long field and better yet, show some confidence in your coaching.

 

 

Ok, first off, I never said decent, that's your words, don't put them in my mouth. My point was in a decision between giving Peyton a short field to work with or a long field to work with, you take the long field. Leaguewide the 4th down conversion % is 53%. The Patriots usually have a higher % than that, but not all % are equal, and playing against Indy probably tilts that % downward a bit. I'm critical of coaches who play it too safe, who punt from their opponents 40 yrd line and net 20 yrs if they're lucky. But playing in shadow of your own goal posts changes all that. I punt and make Peyton earn it, rather than give it to him. And as said before, if Peyton has 60-70 yrds to go, and the 2 min warning has expired already, and only has 1 TD, it's a pass fest, and bad things happen more on pass plays than on run plays. Giving the Colts the ball at the 28 with 2 mins left gave them the whole playbook, and killed the Pats chances to stop anything.

 

 

The calll was not gutsy but nutsy. The issue isn't about the odds of making it. The issue is that if you don't make it, you are very likely to lose a game you are now leading with two minutes to play. Belichick seems to have turned into a narcissist who has come to believe that he is in fact a Genius and a Special Person. He doesn't think the usual rules apply to him, so he can cheat superfluously, forever tarnishing his legend with his tacky illegal videos. He thinks all his ideas are good just because they are his. He thinks all his play calls are smart--because he is smart. That call was one of the worst I have ever witnessed. If you're afraid to punt and give Manning the ball at his own 30, why risk giving it to him at your own 30? The fact that he has succeeded with this before is irrelevant. I have less of a problem with Bill's indulging himself early in the game. In the 1st quarter, you can go for it on 4th and 20 at your own 1 and, while it might be dumb, it will not cost you the game. It is impossible to give away the game in the 1st quarter.

 

 

 

This times a thousand. That draw for Addai couldn't have happened with 70 yards to go. Given that everyone besides Wayne was either dropping balls all night (Collie, Garcon) or effectively contained (Clark) AND that Manning had already been baited into a pair of picks, I don't know how you don't punt that ball. You cannot put your team in jeopardy like that when you have the lead.

 

 

Percentages don't matter, at all. Percentages measure past performance, and just like in stock market commercials, are not a guarantee of future results. If you think that a % that features stats which are more often than not collected from plays where the game is not on the line are relevant to a do-or-die situation like that, well, then you're just as insignificant as the stats to which you cleave. I'm sorry, but but team A successfully converting a 4th and 1/2 a yard on the opponents 45 yrd line in the 1st quarter because they realize the futility of a punt from there is irrelevant to 4th and 2 on your own 28 when you're ahead and the game is on the line for your opponent. There's a distinct different, the Colts HAD to have that play, the Pats didn't. Every play the Colts played on that drive was a "must win" type play, with a 4 pt lead, the Pats were playing with house money. It's not the same, no matter what you and your ridiculous stats say.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

So you think they'd just do it again? Would there be another 31-yard PI penalty, too? Would the Patriots perhaps think about doing a little more to jam Collie so he can't keep getting open? Would there be no more pressure on Manning and his receivers since the clock would be reading 20 seconds, 19 seconds, 18 seconds at the end of that drive? Would the Patriots not do anything differently?

 

The past doesn't matter here except for some very broad trending. Manning had two very good, fast, length-of-field TD drives. If you're guaranteeing that he'd have another, you must really think your team sucks.

 

 

You guys need to think this over as you try to compare this to the league-wide 4th down percentage.....

 

I don't have the stats in front of me, but you have to imagine a huge, huge, huge percentage of the 4th down league-wide success statistics are 4th and inches where the QB easily sneaks the inches.

 

That wasn't the case here.....

 

You have to think the second-biggest situation (although surely not close to the first) is scrub team starters down 37-10 in the dwindling minutes against 2nd and 3rd teamers successfully converting fourth downs....

 

That wasn't the case here....

 

These two situations, which make up the majority of your fourth-down statistics, skew your fourth-down success rate considerably....

You picked off Peyton twice, you've made him punt the ball more times than I've seen Indi put all year long....

 

Make him go 80 yards with one time out. One bad snap, one INT, one sack even..... ends the game....

 

Not being able to go 70-80 yards in less than 2 minutes against your Super Bowl caliber defense also ends the game.

 

 

And each time you post something like this, you get less and less credibility. You are dead set on your "my statistics support my argument" theme, but in fact, they don't. Again, a 53% 4th down season conversion rate matters not when you're playing your arch-rival and you have their backs against the wall. Again, the Pats didn't have to have that play, but Indy did. If you want stats, go back to the one they showed last night, about how the last three meetings were won by the team that trailed in the 4th quarter. All the urgency, all the fear was with Indy. I've admitted that if I were a coach, I'd like to think I'd be the kind that didn't want to play it safe. I'd shun the punt as much as possible. But in this case I go and tell my kicker I'll give him $1000 out of my own pocket if he can kick the ball to the Colts endzone and a $1000 for each second of hangtime over 4 seconds. The point being, boom this thing away and give the Colts as much green in front of them as you can get.

 

 

I like to also factor in the human element since football is a game played by men.

 

Unless your statistical samples only include 4th and 2 situations against the Colts with the same exact personel on the field in the same high pressure situation... they become nothing more than a loose guideline.

 

 

Factor in crowd noise and the fact that the Colts could completely sell out to the 30-yard line (or should of been)... For the Colts, a 3 yard completion was the worst scenario; make them throw the low-percentage long ball..... if they have the time and they hit it for a TD, you're still better off then you were with the 3-yard completion....

 

This particular situation was low percentage

So we just can't look at the NFL 4th-down success rates and make a decision.... There were just too many factors.

This wasn't your normal 4th and inches QB sneak....

 

Much higher percentage was your defensive stoppage of Indi which they had previously done many times under circumstances much, much more favorable than 80 yards in less than 2 minutes, one timeout, and HAVING to get the touchdown.....

 

 

It's a fairly marginal decision. People can spout off percentages, but they are at best used as a guide. The Pats and Colts have never been in this exact same situation so all you can do is estimate the chances of things going down. I don't think going either way would be especially horrible or great. Based on my assessment, I give the slight edge to going for it. I mean you have to figure they have a pretty good shot at getting 2 yards.

 

I've also added a few quotes of the Belichick-decision supporters making up statistics. As well as a quote by TD Ryan saying that no one is addressing the statistics when at least 4 or 5 of the above quotes state why simply using 4th and 2 statistics is a poor idea.

since 2001, from 4th and 2 or less the Patriots have a success rate 76.2% when going for it.

 

No way did they have a better than 23.8% chance of stopping Manning had they punted, not the way they were playing and the way he is playing.

 

why would results from back in 2001 matter for 2009 with very different teams on the field?

 

so you're losing and you resort to personal attacks?

 

very weak.

please address the percentages.

please tell me what Manning's odds of marching down and scoring in the 2 minute drill are.

 

If you believe those odds are WORSE than 50%, then I understand your thinking and we'll agree to disagree.

If you do NOT believe those odds are WORSE than 50%, then I don't understand why you're defending your position.

 

hold on... carry the 2, move the zero, invert the square root...

 

OK.

I've got it in there.

 

STILL comes out to a 64.2% chance Manning marches down the field to win it.

 

Belichick's best odds to win are going for it on 4th down.

 

 

 

HTH

[TD Ryan2 316]

Even if you take all the percentages and skew them in such a way that makes a punt favorable to account for all these vague, hand-waving reasons why the Pats should have punted, it's still a very marginal decision, and most of the time still in favor of going for it. I don't think anyone here is saying that punting is a bad option, only that going for it doesn't deserve the backlash that it's getting.

 

nobody gets it.

[parrot 789]

i guess you have never heard of hypothetical situations.

 

considering i used the words "1 team MIGHT BE having" and "THAT night", you couldn't tell I was offering possible factors not accounted for by your simulator?

 

Pretty stupid factor to throw out there, seeing as how it only lends more weight to the decision to go for it. HTH

[parrot 789]

Even if you take all the percentages and skew them in such a way that makes a punt favorable to account for all these vague, hand-waving reasons why the Pats should have punted, it's still a very marginal decision, and most of the time still in favor of going for it. I don't think anyone here is saying that punting is a bad option, only that going for it doesn't deserve the backlash that it's getting.

 

[nobody 2,671]

What I don't get is how the statistics need to be thrown out because they don't quite exactly fit the situation (which has merit to a point), but all the made up excuses such as adrenlin and the Colts messing up somehow prove that it's a no-brainer to punt.

 

This is a fact there is some percentage chance that the Pats will make that first. There is some percentage chance the Pats will stop the Colts from there own 30 and there is some percentage chance that the Pats will stop the Colts from going 70 yards to score. By the way since we are considering all the intangibles like adrenalin and the Colts botching a snap and whatnot, why aren't we considering the Pats shanking a punt or the Colts getting a decent return, but now, of course, you'll want to use statistics.

 

The bottom line is Belichick needs to guesstimate these percentages and come up with a decision. That's how the mind works automatically. He's not over there with a calculator doing the math. And any sort of reasonable percentages you want to assign to the relevant events make this a marginal "go for it" situation with a punt being a fine option as well. Dude doesn't need to be roasted over it.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

Pretty stupid factor to throw out there, seeing as how it only lends more weight to the decision to go for it. HTH

 

again, you've missed my point.

 

i listed those other factors to show why simple statistics are not enough to always go by. I did it to show why your calculator only tells part of the story.

 

okay, so 1 out of the several factors i listed doesn't lend itself to the Patriots Colts incident. Its still a valid factor in the general idea that we should consider more than just statistics.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

What I don't get is how the statistics need to be thrown out because they don't quite exactly fit the situation (which has merit to a point), but all the made up excuses such as adrenlin and the Colts messing up somehow prove that it's a no-brainer to punt.

 

The stats don't need to be thrown out, but you have a few people in this thread claiming that the percentages are all that matters.

 

I think most intelligent football fans realize there is much more to the game than simple statistics.

[nobody 2,671]

Also, even though I think the situation is a slight go for it, if I knew that the backlash would be this bad if I didn't make it, I'd just punt. That's how marginal this decision is. It's close enough, that I wouldn't want to deal with the headache of having to deal with the tuesday morning quarterbacks telling me what a horrible decision it was when it was basically a coin flip in my opinion.

[nobody 2,671]

I think most intelligent football fans realize there is much more to the game than simple statistics.

 

 

I agree, and I think most people here would. That's why I'm saying that if you look at a situation and you do your best to assign percentages to the three events that are most important, in most cases, you still go for it, and when you don't it's still pretty close.

 

Now if you want to argue that they'll only make the 4th and two 20% of the time, we can argue that, but I think most people would say they'll make it around 50% of the time, and most people wouldn't put more than a 50% point advantage between trying to score from 30 yards out versus 70 yards out.

 

Personally I say 50% of making the 4th and 2. An 80% chance of scoring from 30 yards out and a 40% chance of scoring from 70 yards out. Guess what, with me assigning percentages out of my ass, that's a straight coin flip.

 

If Belicheat is slobbing Brady's knob extra hard today then maybe he thinks they have a 70% chance of making the 4th, which makes going for it a no brainer.

 

It's not really statistics so much as game theory.

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

By the way since we are considering all the intangibles like adrenalin and the Colts botching a snap and whatnot, why aren't we considering the Pats shanking a punt or the Colts getting a decent return, but now, of course, you'll want to use statistics.

 

I know I'm just 1 of many people saying this was a bad coaching mistake but for what its worth, I don't want to use statistics at all. For either side of the argument. Its fine if you want to throw some numbers out there as PART of an arguement but what has really gotten to me is the amount of people saying it was the right call to go for it because its a 50/50 chance of converting and nothing else matters.

 

Here is how I look at it.

 

Its 4th down with 2 yards to go. We are at our own 28 yard line, up by 6 points with 2 minutes left in the game.

 

If we punt the ball, The Colts probably have to drive 70 or 80 yards down the field and score a touchdown. They only have 1 timeout remaining so we know they will be passing the ball. Peyton Manning is a great QB but we have stopped their offense several times tonight and even picked Manning off twice! We can trust our defense to bend but not break.

 

If we go for it on 4th down and fail to convert, we give the Colts the ball and they only have to drive 28 yards to score. They have 2 minutes to do so with 1 timeout. With that kind of time and that short of a field, their entire playbook will be open so we won't be able to play any type of prevent.

 

If we go for it on 4th down and convert, our chances of winning the game are very high. They still have 1 timeout and there are 2 minutes left so we need to get 1 more first down but even if they get the ball back they will have very little time.

 

 

 

 

 

going for it on 4th and 2 equates to a coin flip to win or lose the game. I have a feeling you will say that punting the ball and making the Colts go 80 yards is also a coin flip but to me, once you punt the ball you bring alot more into the equation. Coaching your defense, calling the best plays, make the right personel substitutions etc... plus you know they have to pass which makes your job as the defensive coordinator a bit easier.

[KYSteel 0]

How can "It didnt work" not be a good reason against the call?

 

You only get 1 try(well actually they had 1 on third down too and guess what? That didnt work either)

 

Its not well this seems to be a good idea we will try this and if it doesn't work... oh well, we'll try again. No if it doesnt work you are putting yourself in an almost sure bet to lose.

[parrot 789]

The stats don't need to be thrown out, but you have a few people in this thread claiming that the percentages are all that matters.

 

I think most intelligent football fans realize there is much more to the game than simple statistics.

 

Maybe you should start by contemplating the differences between statistics and percentages. Statistics are past results. Percentages are the odds of a particular outcome. Percentages are partially based on statistics but can also take into account other factors despite your insistence otherwise. I like that Patriots going for it in that situations against the Colts, partially because of prior trends (i.e. 'statistics), partially because of how our offense matched up and performed against their defense to that point, and largely because of #18 standing on the other sideline. Against a better defensive team without Peyton Manning I probably wouldn't like the call. If they had been playing a team like the Ravens or Jets it would have been a stupid decision. Against the Colts, it's not.

[nobody 2,671]

I know I'm just 1 of many people saying this was a bad coaching mistake but for what its worth, I don't want to use statistics at all. For either side of the argument. Its fine if you want to throw some numbers out there as PART of an arguement but what has really gotten to me is the amount of people saying it was the right call to go for it because its a 50/50 chance of converting and nothing else matters.

 

Here is how I look at it.

 

Its 4th down with 2 yards to go. We are at our own 28 yard line, up by 6 points with 2 minutes left in the game.

 

If we punt the ball, The Colts probably have to drive 70 or 80 yards down the field and score a touchdown. They only have 1 timeout remaining so we know they will be passing the ball. Peyton Manning is a great QB but we have stopped their offense several times tonight and even picked Manning off twice! We can trust our defense to bend but not break.

 

If we go for it on 4th down and fail to convert, we give the Colts the ball and they only have to drive 28 yards to score. They have 2 minutes to do so with 1 timeout. With that kind of time and that short of a field, their entire playbook will be open so we won't be able to play any type of prevent.

 

If we go for it on 4th down and convert, our chances of winning the game are very high. They still have 1 timeout and there are 2 minutes left so we need to get 1 more first down but even if they get the ball back they will have very little time.

without using any percentages i still think you punt the ball and trust your defense to bend and not break with a long field behind them rather than flipping a coin to win or lose the game.

 

It's a coin flip either way is my whole point. If the Pats punt they have about a 60% chance of winning the game in my opinion. If they go for it, they have about a 60% chance of winning the game in my opinion. It sounds like you think it's a foregone conclusion that the Colts put up a TD if the Pats don't convert. That's obviously not true since they still need to go 30 yards and like you said, the Pats defense stopped them several times and even picked off Manning twice.

[nobody 2,671]

How can "It didnt work" not be a good reason against the call?

 

You only get 1 try(well actually they had 1 on third down too and guess what? That didnt work either)

 

Its not well this seems to be a good idea we will try this and if it doesn't work... oh well, we'll try again. No if it doesnt work you are putting yourself in an almost sure bet to lose.

 

 

So when a team is down by 6 with 1 seocnd on the clock 40 yards from a TD, and they throw a hail mary that fails, you are saying it's the wrong call because it didn't work.

 

What if a team is at the 5 yard line with 1 second left down by 1 and they kick a field goal and miss. Was kicking the field goal the wrong call because they missed?

[mo' scores moe 0]

Hey, look on the bright side: now Belichek has something in common with another Super Bowl winning coach by going for a 4th

down play around their own 30 and gagging on it like a novice hooker. BOZO, THE SWITZER! "WE GOT A JOB TO DO AND WE'RE GONNA DO IT, BABY!!!"

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

Maybe you should start by contemplating the differences between statistics and percentages. Statistics are past results. Percentages are the odds of a particular outcome. Percentages are partially based on statistics but can also take into account other factors despite your insistence otherwise. I like that Patriots going for it in that situations against the Colts, partially because of prior trends (i.e. 'statistics), partially because of how our offense matched up and performed against their defense to that point, and largely because of #18 standing on the other sideline. Against a better defensive team without Peyton Manning I probably wouldn't like the call. If they had been playing a team like the Ravens or Jets it would have been a stupid decision. Against the Colts, it's not.

 

i am well aware of the difference between statistics and percentages (and the similarities). I ahve to point to both because the Belichick supporters have cited both.

 

also, I like the comments you made at the end here. I am glad to see a reason to go for it beyond "the numbers say you should"

 

you have to understand, 90% of what bothers me about the support for the call is that many people claim the decision gets made based on %'s alone. And NO, numbers DO NOT factor in the human element.