Sunday Night Football Punt/Go For It poll

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I'll assume with that reply you figured it out.

I figured out that you're trying to build an argument no one here is trying to make so I'm not going to waste my time with it.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I figured out that you're trying to build an argument no one here is trying to make so I'm not going to waste my time with it.

Did you or did you not show a stat the teams are successful 60 percent of the time on 4th and 2? If you show a stat and I refute it for obvious reasons I would think its arguable in this situation considering percantage is part of the debate.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I figured out that you're trying to build an argument no one here is trying to make so I'm not going to waste my time with it.

He isn't making an argument, he is questioning whether your statistic is applicable in this situation. It is a fair question.

[SteveMax58]

Originally Posted by TroyF

73% win if you go
64% win if you punt.

I can buy your odds...but lost in all of this to me, and I'm curious if you've considered it in your %...is the amount of time left in both scenarios.

Even failing 4th & 2 doesnt assure a loss. It just adds the "moment of truth" a bit quicker in the game...which benefits the team with the lead IMO.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Did you or did you not show a stat the teams are successful 60 percent of the time on 4th and 2? If you show a stat and I refute it for obvious reasons I would think its arguable in this situation considering percantage is part of the debate.

Still, the percentage HAS to be higher than a 2-pt conversion for obvious reasons. Maybe not as high as the league average for 4th and 2s, but definitely above the 2pt percentage. When you did your calculation using the 2pt percentages, it was a 50-50 call.

This also doesn't take into account the Pats offense vs. Colts defense, which I would think would further push the odds in the Pats favor.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Did you or did you not show a stat the teams are successful 60 percent of the time on 4th and 2? If you show a stat and I refute it for obvious reasons I would think its arguable in this situation considering percantage is part of the debate.

Here's the facts.

The Pats have the number 1 offense in the NFL by a comfortable margin.

The Colts have the number 10 defense.

On average, teams convert 4th and 2 60% of the time.

The Pats would have a higher likelihood of converting 4th and 2 than your average team while the Colts aren't much better than league average.


Now, your argument is they have a 45% chance based on 2 point tries, which severely limits what an offense can run since everything has to be done within 10 yards.

If you seriously think the Colts would have let Moss run down the sidelines without being covered, regardless of what the situation was, I personally think that's crazy. I also wouldn't put it past the Pats, of all teams, to try Moss 15-20 yards downfield in that situation.

The situation was a 4th and 2, not a 2 point try. Yet somehow you want to stick with 45% because 60% is skewed by teams down by 14 going for it against a prevent defense.

[jbergey22]

I will give you the Pats have the best offense or top 3 in the league and the colts are slightly above average which would increase the percentages. However the Moss running down the field does NOT matter to them at that point. They get 2 yards or a 72 yard TD its over either way so they are willing to take their chances and let them have that knowing that play isnt in the Pats best interest.

You also should take a little away for being on the road inside a dome. Yes the Colts fans arent as loud as most however in that situation they come to life.

I might be willing to go with Ronnie Dobbs 50-55 percent but I cant see them being successful 60 percent of the time in that situation.

Its whatever as its opinion. Id like to see stats fit the situation a little bit better like we can do with baseball stats but its probably not possible for football so arguments basically go unresolved.

[Chief Rum]

I don't think quality of offense as deterrmined by regular factors is truly applicable here. Yes, the Pats have the best offense, and the Colts are 10th in defense, but these rankings are put together from statistical information that arises out of situations completely inapplicable to 4th and 2 situations. The vast, vast majority of football plays are, of course, not in 4th and 2 situations.

For instance, Minnesota and New York are not ranked as highly as the Pats' O, but you better believe if I need two yards, I'm going to give it to a Brandon Jacobs or an Adrian Peterson before I let the Pats' O give it a shot (although, heck, Brady to Welker is about as automatic as a short pass would get, I would think).

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I might be willing to go with Ronnie Dobbs 50-55 percent but I cant see them being successful 60 percent of the time in that situation.

FWIW I think it's much higher than you do; I was simply saying that it HAS to be higher than the 50-50 you came up with, which means it was the right decision.

[Atocep]

Pro-football-reference.com blog » Belichick, Peyton Manning, and 4th down decisions

Another take, which takes more into account that Joe Posnanski's article did and still sets it at 60%.

[path12]

I thought it was the worst call since Mornihweg deferred the OT kickoff. Surprised how many of you feel differently.

[Radii]

I just don't think its reasonable at all to compare the play to a 2 point conversion.

We've all seen cases where the surprise long pass on 4th down works like a charm, and I'm sure the Pats and Colts coaches have seen it too and account for it. Even if the Pats had no intention of going for a long pass all they had to do was run play action(or something else that develops more slowly than the play that was run) and send a receiver streaking down the field and you've done something to open up the field and give you more options than are possible on a 2 point conversion. Its just not a reasonable comparison at all.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by path12

I thought it was the worst call since Mornihweg deferred the OT kickoff. Surprised how many of you feel differently.

I didn't like it in real time, but the link to an EV Calc suggesting that going for it gave the Pats a ~10% greater chance of winning appeals to the poker player and math geek in me in a deeply comforting way.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Conventional wisdom is not always wise and numbers don't lie.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Radii

I just don't think its reasonable at all to compare the play to a 2 point conversion.

We've all seen cases where the surprise long pass on 4th down works like a charm, and I'm sure the Pats and Colts coaches have seen it too and account for it. Even if the Pats had no intention of going for a long pass all they had to do was run play action(or something else that develops more slowly than the play that was run) and send a receiver streaking down the field and you've done something to open up the field and give you more options than are possible on a 2 point conversion. Its just not a reasonable comparison at all.

Exactly. You said it right there. It does work like a charm because defenses are going all out to stop what they feel is the biggest threat. Its wasnt in the Colts worst interest to have Brady chuck a 30-50 yard pass downfield. They had to feel the odds were better of that pass being incomplete than giving them a 5 yard cushion and hoping something strange happened.

Sure there is more space to cover however do you really think in a must make situation New England wanted to throw a 50 yard bomb or a 15 yard comeback route? The odds were them throwing a 5 yard pass and that is what they played it as and that is what happened. Keep in mind, Brady made the good toss, Faulk made the catch and they gained less than 2 yards. How do you suppose this happened?

[jeff061]

They aren't rolling dice. There are numerous variables in play in any given game of football that those numbers don't take into account.

[wade moore]

The biggest flaw with bergey's 2-point conversion comparison is that a 2-point conversion is from the 3 yard line. That extra yard, in those situations, plays a pretty significant role.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by wade moore

The biggest flaw with bergey's 2-point conversion comparison is that a 2-point conversion is from the 3 yard line. That extra yard, in those situations, plays a pretty significant role.

Its from the 2 in the NFL. It may be the 3 in college or high school though I cant remember.

Two-point conversion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by jeff061

They aren't rolling dice. There are numerous variables in play in any given game of football that those numbers don't take into account.

Very true.

I am finding this conversation very interesting though. Even at setting the numbers as bad as a possibly could against Bellichek it still isnt a bad decision which surprised me. It seemed so stupid as an unbias fan but someone made a good point that the colts fans were likely hoping for a punt prior to the snap. They have a better gut feeling on outcomes over outsiders.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by jeff061

They aren't rolling dice. There are numerous variables in play in any given game of football that those numbers don't take into account.

Of course this is true. But statistics are useful to determine expected value of a play. Do you think baseball statistics are useless? Sure, there are fewer variables than in football but still plenty of variables in play.

The presidential election had a shit-ton of variables around it, but Nate Silver was able to predict the outcome nearly perfectly. With enough data, large amounts of variables can become predictable.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Its from the 2 in the NFL. It may be the 3 in college or high school though I cant remember.

Two-point conversion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Huh - I stand corrected.

Everyone else is still right that there is a huge difference between defending 12 yards and defending 72 yards.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Huh - I stand corrected.

Everyone else is still right that there is a huge difference between defending 12 yards and defending 72 yards.

This is true as well and exactly what I was saying. In this situation they didnt need to defend the other 72 yards. The game was over if they got 2 yards. Its not like it was a tie game when they did this, they were losing, two yards means game over so you eliminate thier lower percentage plays and play aggressively on their high percentage plays.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

This is true as well and exactly what I was saying. In this situation they didnt need to defend the other 72 yards. The game was over if they got 2 yards. Its not like it was a tie game when they did this, they were losing two yards means game over so you eliminate thier lower percentage plays and play aggressively on their high percentage plays.

Ok, let's take a different approach here.

Go to 3:35 of this video :




Now. Watch that. Watch Bethea run with a WR past the 40.

Now tell me with a straight face that the Colts only cared about the 2 yard play - I dare you.

[Samdari]

I find it amusing that Barry Switzer did something very similar to this and was universally reviled for it. But then, it was everyone. Because its Belichik, people are trying to defend what is obviously an indefensible decision.

Even if you believe you have a 60% chance to make the 4th down, you are telling your defense you believe they have a less than 40% chance of stopping the Colts from scoring a TD from 70 yards away. Telling half your team you don't believe in them is not the right message to send.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

... so it's obviously indefensible because it will hurt feelings, when it is actually the right move as far as best chance to win the game?

[jeff061]

To be fair, I don't see to many Patriots fans defending him, he's certainly being universally slammed up here.

Boston.com - Football - Sports

Sums it up.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

... and the poll on boston.com is running 55-45 against the call. It's the mouthbreathers at the Globe and WEEI who are universally slamming him.

[jeff061]

"As a former defender on that team, I would've cared less about the result of that fourth-down attempt. The decision to go for it would be enough to make my blood boil for weeks. Bill Belichick sent a message to his defense. He felt that his chances were better to go for it on his own 28-yard line than to punt it away and make Peyton Manning have to drive the majority of the field to win the game." -- Tedy Bruschi, writing for ESPNBoston.com

Freshly retired Bruschi.

Mouth breathers my ass, people throwing the number crunching out there miss the point, multiple points actually, entirely.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

I'm sorry, but I really think this is bullshit. If the defense's hurt feelings cost the team anything the rest of the way they aren't a good enough defense to win anyway.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Samdari

I find it amusing that Barry Switzer did something very similar to this and was universally reviled for it. But then, it was everyone. Because its Belichik, people are trying to defend what is obviously an indefensible decision.

Even if you believe you have a 60% chance to make the 4th down, you are telling your defense you believe they have a less than 40% chance of stopping the Colts from scoring a TD from 70 yards away. Telling half your team you don't believe in them is not the right message to send.

I don't have any desire to try to 'defend Belichik'. My first point in this thread actually has nothing to do with defending him, and in fact I pretty much said he made the wrong call on third down by not running it.

This is actually a subject that has been talked about a bunch prior to last night that NFL coaches statistically should go for it more often on 4th down than they do, but choose not to because it is the 'safe' play, not the 'smart' play.

In fact I think Belichik was completely wrong last night in his play calling, but where he messed up was not running it on third down to set them up for a better decision on what to do on 4th down and possibly an easier time getting the 4th down.

I think people are trying to paint this brush too much in a light of "Is Belichik a genius or idiot". For me this has nothing to do with that. If anything, I do appreciate Belichik feeling he has enough job security to make the gutsy call there, but as I said, he screwed up the play before and not the one that everyone is lambasting him for.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by jeff061

Freshly retired Bruschi.

Mouth breathers my ass, people throwing the number crunching out there miss the point, multiple points actually, entirely.

Incidentally, I did not intend to call you or any other regular person a mouthbreather. That was intended towards the Shaughnassies/Borgeses/Callahans of the world. My apologies if you thought it was an insult to you.

The same people who insist that J.D. Drew is a terrible baseball player. This conversation (not this one per se, but the conversation around this issue) reminds me of that one a lot.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

... so it's obviously indefensible because it will hurt feelings, when it is actually the right move as far as best chance to win the game?

I think people are applying irrelevant statistics to support the god they have created in Belichik. People are throwing numbers around that are not remotely relevant. What percentage of drives starting on the opponents 30 do the Patriots give up TD's on? What percentage of drives starting on their own 30 do the Colts score TDs on? Both numbers are far less than 40% - the play is to punt.

If you don't think Belichik telling his defense he does not trust them will hurt the team in the long run, noone can prove differently. I think it will, and that is far more harmful than punting and having the Colts score a TD would have been. I put more stock in Bruschi's quote than in any of the numbers people are making up here.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Haven't read this in ages, but I'm assuming it still has relevance (although the play last night would certainly be the extreme example).

Easterbrook: Stop punting! - ESPN Page 2

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Belichik

As Alan said, this isn't about Belichick. Belichick lost the game last night, just not in the way that you are arguing. Though I'm sure I will fail to convince you of that.

[Arles]

As I said in the other thread, I don't think the "go on fourth" call is terrible in and of itself. I just hate the plays before and after. IF they did always want to go on 4th (as Belichik says), you must run on 3rd down. That move atleast takes one time-stopping option away (2 min warning or final TO). It also probably gets it a little closer on fourth (assuming they don't convert). At 4th and 0.5-1.5, you have so many more options (including a quick-snap sneak).

Second, the way they handled the Addai run was terrible as well. Make Addai pull a Westbrook/MJD and take a knee - he should not have been tackled. Belichik should have told his defense that.

Had New England played the situation properly from the 3rd down play on, I think they probably convert. Even if they don't, if they handle the Addai run correctly - Brady probably has enough time to get a FG chance. I probably would have punted either way, but the execution/play call before and after are what bothers me more than the 4th call.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Now. Watch that. Watch Bethea run with a WR past the 40.

Now tell me with a straight face that the Colts only cared about the 2 yard play - I dare you.

Single covering with a safety to make sure he isn't completely wide open isn't caring a ton. I liken this situation to a guy on 3rd with one out in the bottom of the 9th in a tie game. Just because you have three outfielders doesn't mean you are worried about a deep fly ball. The outfielders and infielders are in, but everyone isn't going to be jammed into the infield.

A wide open receiver 30 yards downfield is still a pretty easy pass (esp for Brady). But single covering the only deep route with a safety isn't normal behavior (it's akin to bringing the outfielders in a bit). They were just defending it enough to make sure it wasn't an easy pass-catch. A vast majority of their focus was on the short stuff.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Ok, let's take a different approach here.

Go to 3:35 of this video :



Now. Watch that. Watch Bethea run with a WR past the 40.

Now tell me with a straight face that the Colts only cared about the 2 yard play - I dare you.

Wade-You call a defense for the situation. They were likely playing Max tight bump something similiar to what they would call for a 2 point conversion. A normal 3rd and 2 play or something to that effect at that part of the field if they were playing tight coverage like that they would have 2 safetys deep one of which would help on Moss. Where in that video do you see a safety deep shading to Moss's side of the field?

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

As Alan said, this isn't about Belichick. Belichick lost the game last night, just not in the way that you are arguing. Though I'm sure I will fail to convince you of that.

I laugh at you implying someone else is in this discussion with a hard headed attitude and cannot be convinced of the opposing view.

Obviously the crux of the argument as to whether the percentage play was to punt or go for it is the difference in chance that Indy would score from the 29 vs the chance that Indy would score from their own 30 (roughly where they'd be if NE had punted). If you make the % chance that Indy would score from their own 30 high enough, obviously the percentage play is to go for it. And clearly the two sides of the argument here are not going to come to agreement on what that percentage is. I find the >60% number unbelievably absurd, others oviously assume it's correct.

Not that I think these will settle it (even though it shows NE giving up TDs on 13% of their drives against) but I found some great stats:

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2009 DRIVE STATS

I continue to marvel at football outsiders.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Arles

I just hate the plays before and after. IF they did always want to go on 4th (as Belichik says), you must run on 3rd down.

I hated the go for it call, but agree this is far worse. There are just way too many good reasons to run there if you know you're going for it on 4th. I actually don't believe they had decided that, as evidenced by the punt team running out and this atrocious play call.

[path12]

Regardless of percentage quibbles, the fact that this was a hugely important game from a tiebreak standpoint for the playoffs means that you don't fuck around with 2 minutes left.

Yes, Peyton Manning is a great QB (and one of my favorite players) -- but make him drive the whole damn field to beat you in a game that could help determine home field advantage in the playoffs, not 40 yards.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Have to run - just wanted to point out the the percentage that Indy scores from their own 30 was 30%, not >60%.

From an emotional standpoint while watching, I felt it was pretty high.

The reference you laughed at is that weren't not talking about how fucking smart Belichick is despite you wanting it to be that way. We're talking about surprising data on the validity of going for it on fourth down against the conventional wisdom.

[Arles]

Normal 4th down/2 point conversion rates are also tough to use here. A lot of those plays are done when the offense is in "panic mode" and down a ton (like onside kicks). I would gather there are a lot more 4th down attempts when a team is down multiple TDs (and defense is more prevent) than when it's truly a game changing moment for both teams.

For the most part, I would bet that the level of intensity for most 4th downs/2 pointers is lower for the defense than what the Colts had on that play. You'd almost have to look at 4th and 2s (or 2 pts) that involved games within a TD to get a better look at the chance there. Equating a 4th and 2 when the offense is down 20 isn't the same as that situation last night.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

We're talking about surprising data on the validity of going for it on fourth down against the conventional wisdom.

The data that shows making it wins the game for you somewhere between 45-60% of the time and punting wins it 70% of the time?

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Arles

Normal 4th down/2 point conversion rates are also tough to use here.

As are "net punting averages" 38 yards being bandied about here. That average includes many attempts to place the ball or touchbacks. Trying to punt without regard to the opponent's end zone probably produces a higher average.

[stevew]

I don't really get the logic of stopping Addai at the 1 yard line with 1:15 left.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Arles

Single covering with a safety to make sure he isn't completely wide open isn't caring a ton. I liken this situation to a guy on 3rd with one out in the bottom of the 9th in a tie game. Just because you have three outfielders doesn't mean you are worried about a deep fly ball. The outfielders and infielders are in, but everyone isn't going to be jammed into the infield.

A wide open receiver 30 yards downfield is still a pretty easy pass (esp for Brady). But single covering the only deep route with a safety isn't normal behavior (it's akin to bringing the outfielders in a bit). They were just defending it enough to make sure it wasn't an easy pass-catch. A vast majority of their focus was on the short stuff.

You said it better than I. Thanks!

[Atocep]

I missed the game last night so I didn't get to see the play live, but I did read a headline last night when I got home that basically said 'belichick screws up and the pats lose' which excited me quite a bit because I'm not a fan of the pats. I wouldn't even try to deny hatred toward both. However, when I saw the actual play and then read the intelligent discussion on the topic this morning I actually gained some respect for Belichick, which pisses me off.

Is it really hard to grasp the concept of Belichick making the right call, but the Colts defender making a great play? The right call is not going to work 100% of the time in any situation. I respect Belichick for playing to win a game and putting his team in the highest percentage chance to do so while ignoring the potential media backlash and message board postings. As much as it pains me to say it, this is a good example of why Belichick is a hall of fame coach. He's not afraid to fail.

[SteveMax58]

Originally Posted by Arles

Had New England played the situation properly from the 3rd down play on, I think they probably convert. Even if they don't, if they handle the Addai run correctly - Brady probably has enough time to get a FG chance. I probably would have punted either way, but the execution/play call before and after are what bothers me more than the 4th call.

+1...this sums up what I was basically trying to say much better... especially the bolded part.

[jbergey22]

Well if that was truely the right call as the numbers seem to suggest, going for it on anything less than 3 yards seems like the right move. I always wondered how a team would do if they never punted. Head coaches must be confused on the actual percentages if the success rate is 60 percent on 4th and 2 youd think we'd see more teams going for it. Or is it that the numbers are inflated by the meaningless 4th and 2's that are converted late in decided games

[TroyF]

Just a couple of points from me:

1) I hate Beli. Hate him. Think he's a dirtbag. I loved how he was called "brilliant" the year the Pats beat the Broncos when he did the only thing that made sense and Deltha O'Neal cost the Broncos the football game. (A game Beli was outcoached from the first snap to the last by the way)

I still think it's the right call.

2) Percentages tell me it's the right call.

3) Even if you are a sending a safety out to cover someone deep, a defender is still taken out of the play. It's a lot tougher to do that on a two point conversion than on a 4th and 2 with the entire field in front of you.

4) Peyton Manning and the Colts traveled the 29 yards they needed quicker than you could bat your eyes. Do we really think an extra 35 yards would have meant he wouldn't have got the ball in the end zone?

5) To me the question is very, very simple. I have a chance to get 2 yards with Tom Brady and win the game 100% of the time or I give the ball back to a locked in Peyton Manning with over 2 minutes left on the clock.

I'll take my chances with Brady. Sorry, I do. I hate Beli, but I think he made the right call.

Samdari,

the funny thing is, if he'd made the call, Beli would be considered a genius and I'd be sitting here saying it wasn't a genius call, it was the right call and he's the only guy with the guts to make it.

While talking about this, I go to the 49ers/Bears game the other night, for a little different play situation The Niners decided not to go for a long FG and punt the ball at the 35 with a 4th and 6. The guy punted it in the end zone. The Bears drove down the field and had a chance to win. If that's me and I don't trust my kicker, I'm going for the first down. Every. Single. Time.