NFL Week 10 discussion

[jeff061]

This isn't baseball. There is more to football than numbers. And far more variables.

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

I wouldn't have guessed the likelihood for getting a TD from your own 30 with two minutes left would be over 50%.

Originally Posted by Groundhog

I always find it surprising how efficently some teams run a 2-minute drill, especially just before the half. You see them sputter on offense all half, and then suddenly a no-huddle, all-pass 2-minute drill has them putting points on the board.

It's 30%, for some reason I remembered it wrong despite reading it just minutes ago. Still it's a fairly impressive number.

[Antmeister]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Even before reading that, I didn't think it was a particularly stupid decision. Like it says, you make those 2 yards and you win the game. It's easier to gain 2 yards than it is to stop a Peyton Manning 2-minute drill IMO.

If it works, you're a genius, if it doesn't, you're crucified.

I'm fascinated by this. I don't have a dog in this fight, but if any other coach would have done this, no one would have looked at it this way. New England had the ball on their side of the field, was leading by more than a field goal, already had two picks off Manning and would have possibly had to have made Manning go 60+ yards with one timeout (and could have been none if they didn't pass two times beforehand). Regardless, wouldn't you take your chances on defense since Indianapolis needed that touchdown and was most likely going to be one-dimensional for a majority of the drive?

[bhlloy]

Plus you guys are missing a big variable IMO in that the two minute warning and change of possession would have cancelled each other out and the Colts only had one time out left - plus a punt would have taken at least another 5 seconds off the clock. I'm not sure how the WP would be affected taking those two things into account but I'm pretty confident that the % of teams that have to drive 60+ yards in 1:50 and can only stop the clock once is not as high as 30%. I still think it's a dumb decision, but it is an interesting read.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Even before reading that, I didn't think it was a particularly stupid decision. Like it says, you make those 2 yards and you win the game. It's easier to gain 2 yards than it is to stop a Peyton Manning 2-minute drill IMO.

If it works, you're a genius, if it doesn't, you're crucified.

The Colts still had a timeout left so even if they made it they would have still needed another first down to win the game.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Antmeister

I'm fascinated by this. I don't have a dog in this fight, but if any other coach would have done this, no one would have looked at it this way. New England had the ball on their side of the field, was leading by more than a field goal, already had two picks off Manning and would have possibly had to have made Manning go 60+ yards with one timeout (and could have been none if they didn't pass two times beforehand). Regardless, wouldn't you take your chances on defense since Indianapolis needed that touchdown and was most likely going to be one-dimensional for a majority of the drive?

If I were coaching I'd have punted it away and trusted my defense, yes. At the same time, if I were watching the game and the Patriots punted it, I'd consider it a pretty good chance that Manning drives his team the length of the field and wins the game. If they didn't I'd actually be surprised to be honest.

So I see where he was coming from is all. If it was the Redskins that attempted that play, I'd probably be LOL'ing along with everyone else though, so I guess prestige does play a part in me thinking the way I do about that decision.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

The Colts still had a timeout left so even if they made it they would have still needed another first down to win the game.

Sure, but you've run it down so far that you'd be punting out of bounds and then basically just defending against a hail mary.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Sure, but you've run it down so far that you'd be punting out of bounds and then basically just defending against a hail mary.

Same as the Eagles gme, they would have about 30 seconds. Enough time for 4 plays and maybe 5.

[molson]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Exactly if you dont have enough confidence in your defense to stop them from going 60-80 yards with 1 timeout left why the hell not just let them score and go for the game winning FG. Something about that whole thing didnt make sense.

Just finished watching the game - I was really surprised they didn't let them score on that first play, that's the only way going for it on 4th down makes sense.

As someone else said, if they punt there, I expect Manning to win the game, and I expect him to take all of the clock with him. I figured this way, even if they don't get the 4th down, then I definitely like Brady's chances with 1:45 or whatever when they only need a field goal.

Ah well, I think going for it on 4th and short is a good move more often than football coaches actually do it. The game's not over if they get that two years, but at worst, Manning just has a couple second left and zero timeouts.

[larrymcg421]

There's nothing wrong with the decision to go for it on 4th and 2. If they make it, they win. That's a high percentage chance with Tom Brady.

The problem is (as has been pointed out above) that they didn't leave themselves any time on the clock. Now I don't agree that you let them score from the 30. But they tackled Addai twice at or near the 1 yard line.

It's sort of the reverse of the situation I described earlier with Maurice-Jones Drew. Here you are weighing your chances of stopping the Colts three straight times when they only need one yard versus giving Tom Brady 1 minute or so to get into FG range. I think almost anyone would take the latter. Once Addai got inside the 5, the only defense they should have been playing was to try and strip the ball.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Hmm, I wonder if Belichick was using this handy device tonight

[stevew]

I don't get how teams will let the opposition nickle and dime them down the field. If I trust my offense, I would play very aggressive defense inside the last 2-3 minutes. If for some reason you do get burnt deep, the TD would hopefully only take a little bit of time off the clock.

Instead you're content to let them get 4 yards here, 12 there, 10 there....pretty soon they are in your red zone, and you will get the ball back with no time on the clock. Better to dial that shit up, and if you get burnt deep, so beit.

[Karlifornia]

Yeah, I liked the call by Belichick. I was just surprised by it, as NFL coaches are renowned for their conservative decisions.

As far as the improvement of offenses in the two minute drill, I think it has something to do with adrenaline, and knowing that "this is it". When you feel like you're about to fall off something tall, your reflexes go into overdrive, and you focus solely on one thing: Not dying. I think anyone gets anything done more efficiently when urgency is involved.

[fantom1979]

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

There's nothing wrong with the decision to go for it on 4th and 2. If they make it, they win. That's a high percentage chance with Tom Brady.

The problem is (as has been pointed out above) that they didn't leave themselves any time on the clock. Now I don't agree that you let them score from the 30. But they tackled Addai twice at or near the 1 yard line.

This is pretty much how I saw it. The call was ballsy, but not even the first time he's done it this season. It worked last time, and he was a genius.

The real mistakes were using the timeouts unnecessarily (something that seems to be becoming more of a habit) and tackling Addai at the one. Pats let Addai score and they've got a bunch of time to get an indoor field goal.

[Dr. Sak]

Both the Steelers and the Pats lost

Too bad the Eagles suck

[Chubby]

hahaha what a shithead, trying to be a "genius" cost him the game

[ISiddiqui]

I'm just amused by Belichek's stupidity cost them the game. Giving Peyton Manning the ball at that spot in that context is ridiculously dumb. It's funny that Manning has turned into the QB that can win in any way (kind of like what Brady's rep is/was).

[Arles]

I agree that it was a poor decision. As said above, if you punt the 2 min warning goes over the change of possession and Peyton is forced to start from his 35 (needing a TD) with 1 TO. Given he had picks in 2 of the 3-4 prior possessions, I think the odds are fairly good that NE stops them.

But even if you are thinking about going on 4th and 2, you need to run the ball on 3rd and 2. The Colts had struggled stopping the run and even if you just get one yard on 3rd and 2 - it opens a ton of options on 4th. Plus, you will get to the 2 min warning before the 4th down. Then, if it's 4th and 1, you can do a QB sneak, FB dive, HB run or even a high percentage pass. At 4th and 2, most people thought the Pats would pass. I think that also cuts down on the % for success.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Running a route that barely crosses the first down line with no potential for a challenge also cuts down that success percentage.

To refine the point, I actually have NO problem with going for it on fourth down, its all the surrounding decisions that were fucked up that made it an issue.

[Kodos]

"I'm gonna have to start cheatin' again."

[jbergey22]

Am I missing something in that article? If the Patriots would make it 60 percent of the time on 4th on 2(still seems high but whatever) and a team scores 30 percent of the time from the field position the article states they would have started at. Doesnt that mean punting was the right play? (70 percent chance of success vs 60 percent chance of success)

I love how they give the Colts more credit for having a great offense but disregard the Patriots strong defense.

OK now I see what I missed. They are claiming that percentage jumps to 53 percent when a team needs a TD to win or tie.(I would love to know what all is in this). No way in hell do teams starting in their own territory score over half the time when the game is on the line in 2 or less minutes. How many times did it not happen yesterday?

Besides in the first half the Patriots were down 10 and went into the 2 minute drill and were stopped 3 and out.

My numbers say Patriots were 45/55(since this is what the NFL average on 2 point conversions is) to make the 1st down and 60/40 to stop the Colts. Bellichek gave the Colts a 15 percent better chance of winning IMO. Screw these numbers I have no idea where they came from or what they consist of.

If any these numbers are really true Id have a hard time believing every team wouldnt just play every down like it was a 2 minute drill since apparently you have a 23 percent better chance of getting a TD.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Where did your numbers come from?

The numbers you are trying to attack are actually pretty cut and dry, I'm not sure where your confusion comes from. The only real way to attack those numbers is that they are all NFL-average and not Colts/Pats specific, but considering that both the Colts and Pats are strong offensively that would only tilt the discussion towards going for it.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Where did your numbers come from?

The numbers you are trying to attack are actually pretty cut and dry, I'm not sure where your confusion comes from. The only real way to attack those numbers is that they are all NFL-average and not Colts/Pats specific, but considering that both the Colts and Pats are strong offensively that would only tilt the discussion towards going for it.

45 percent is the league average of making 2 point conversions. Much more of an indicator of that type of situation than any common 4th and 2 when the game isnt on the line.

They come up with 53 percent as the chance the Colts score a TD there? Where did that come from? They are trying to say that inside of 2 minutes there is a 23 percent better chance of scoring a td from that same part of the field? Im not buying that.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

They come up with 53 percent as the chance the Colts score a TD there? Where did that come from? They are trying to say that inside of 2 minutes there is a 23 percent better chance of scoring from that same part of the field? Im not buying that.

They are saying that, statistically, with two minutes left and down by 4 to 7 points, teams score a touchdown 53 percent of the time when starting from the 28 yard line. I'm not sure you are allowed to not buy it, its a statistic.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

They are saying that, statistically, with two minutes left and down by 4 to 7 points, teams score a touchdown 53 percent of the time when starting from the 28 yard line. I'm not sure you are allowed to not buy it, its a statistic.

And what is the sample size? Its pretty important when making claims that a team has a 23 percent better chance of scoring in more difficult situations other than that that of a normal situation.

If Nick Punto starts next year 6 for 12 that doesnt make him a .500 hitter.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

He's saying they have a 23 percent better chance of scoring from the NE 28 than from the IND 34 with 2:00 and the game within a touchdown.

Thanks for the point about small sample size, I imagine his sample size is larger than Nick Punto's. He explicitly states that his fourth down research is based on larger sample sizes than previous studies, I imagine with the lack of statistical research in the NFL you could probably imagine that he has the largest sample size available.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

He's saying they have a 23 percent better chance of scoring from the NE 28 than from the IND 34 with 2:00 and the game within a touchdown.

Thanks for the point about small sample size, I imagine his sample size is larger than Nick Punto's. He explicitly states that his fourth down research is based on larger sample sizes than previous studies, I imagine with the lack of statistical research in the NFL you could probably imagine that he has the largest sample size available.

"A punt from the 28 typically nets 38 yards, starting the Colts at their own 34. Teams historically get the TD 30% of the time in that situation. So the punt gives the Pats about a 0.70 WP."

Im fine with the 4th down research. Id use 2 point conversions as a percentage because I doubt the Colts are worried about a deep threat when the game is being decided on that play. Im sure the Colts would have been fine with the Pats chucking one 40 yards down the field in that situaton.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Yes, that's what I said. 53% from the NE 28, 30% from the IND 34.

[Arles]

I think the best course to win would have been:

1. With 2:11 left, run the ball on 3rd and 2. If you get the first, great. If you get a yard, it makes the 4th down easier. Even if you get stuffed, you hit the 2 minute warning and can think about what to do on 4th (save your own TO and take away the 2 min warning from Manning).

2. If you didn't get it on 3rd, it's 4th down at the 2 Min warning. If it's 4th and 1, I can see maybe going for it. But I would probably still punt if it's more than inches. So, after the punt and change of possession, Manning probably has to go 65-70 yards with 1 TO and 1:50ish left.

The key to me is not running on 3rd and 2. I think you have to draw up a quick hit power run on that play with multiple TEs and try to get atleast a yard if you are thinking about on going on 4th down.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Yes, that's what I said. 53% from the NE 28, 30% from the IND 34.

Oh ok, sorry I was confused on the 53 percent part. I was thinking they meant from the Indy 34 which made no sense at all.

So if we run the numbers with 45 percent converstion rate instead of 60 does that still make it the correct call?

I realize the stats on 4th downs are correct however its much different converting a 4th and 2 down 10 at your own 28 rather that the situation we seen last night. Being the game was being decided on that play the colts had to be very aggressive much like stopping a 2 point conversion.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

You may have a point that not all 4th and 2s are equivalent, but I'm not sure that using 2 point conversions is the right way to attack it. I definitely understand your point, but goal line defense vs. open field defense (even if a downfield attack is unlikely) are two very different beasts.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by Arles

I think the best course to win would have been:

1. With 2:11 left, run the ball on 3rd and 2. If you get the first, great. If you get a yard, it makes the 4th down easier. Even if you get stuffed, you hit the 2 minute warning and can think about what to do on 4th (save your own TO and take away the 2 min warning from Manning).

2. If you didn't get it on 3rd, it's 4th down at the 2 Min warning. If it's 4th and 1, I can see maybe going for it. But I would probably still punt if it's more than inches. So, after the punt and change of possession, Manning probably has to go 65-70 yards with 1 TO and 1:50ish left.

The key to me is not running on 3rd and 2. I think you have to draw up a quick hit power run on that play with multiple TEs and try to get atleast a yard if you are thinking about on going on 4th down.

The fact that it played out as it did makes me think that the decision to go for it was impulsive and not well thought out. If the plan was always to go for it, a run on third down is a no brainer.

[Arles]

IMO, a run on third down is a no brainer even if you intend to punt. You want to take the 2 min warning or Indy's last TO out of the picture. It's just too risky to pass when everyone on Indy will be jumping the short route. The clock is just as much of a factor as yardage and the risk of an incomplete pass is killer on 3rd and 2.

[Noop]

It was not a stupid decision but I am glad the Patriots lost.

[Young Drachma]

Who'll Drink from the Hampton Cup on Sunday? : New York Jets Week 10

I was wondering what Maurice Jones-Drew was carrying after the game. This explains it.

[Radii]

ESPN on in the background while I'm working, the following ticker item just ran by:

"Breaking News: Former Chiefs RB Larry Johnson expected to sign today with Bengals"

[DataKing]

'Monday Night Football' analyst Jon Gruden agrees to multiyear contract extension with ESPN - ESPN

Sweet. I have to say, while he's prone to exaggeration, I've really enjoyed listening to Gruden during games this year.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Radii

ESPN on in the background while I'm working, the following ticker item just ran by:

"Breaking News: Former Chiefs RB Larry Johnson expected to sign today with Bengals"

Source: Johnson expects to sign with Bengals - ESPN

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by DataKing

Sweet. I have to say, while he's prone to exaggeration, I've really enjoyed listening to Gruden during games this year.

He exaggerates roughly 5000 times a broadcast.

[Kodos]

Good for him. Gotta believe being an announcer is a sweeter gig than coaching. Has to be a lot less stress involved.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Radii

ESPN on in the background while I'm working, the following ticker item just ran by:

"Breaking News: Former Chiefs RB Larry Johnson expected to sign today with Bengals"

NOOOOOOO!

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Im fine with the 4th down research. Id use 2 point conversions as a percentage because I doubt the Colts are worried about a deep threat when the game is being decided on that play. Im sure the Colts would have been fine with the Pats chucking one 40 yards down the field in that situaton.

With 2 pt conversions the pass defense only has to cover about 10 yards and has the back of the endzone on its side. The Colts had to defend the entire field. I don't think the 2-pt conversion rate is really applicable here.

[Big Fo]

I just caught TB-MIA highlights for the first time, what an awful pick for Henne to throw up six with so little time remaining. At least he recovered and had a few good ones on the winning drive shortly after and Ricky's 20+ yard run was huge.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Daimyo

With 2 pt conversions the pass defense only has to cover about 10 yards and has the back of the endzone on its side. The Colts had to defend the entire field. I don't think the 2-pt conversion rate is really applicable here.

I would gather that a lot of 2-point conversions are done when the offense is in a state of panic (a la onside kicks) and the defense has a nice cushion. It's one of those things were the offense needs a TD, 2-point, onside kick and another TD to tie.

For example, if Dallas had gone for 2 against GB yesterday when the score was 17-6 and less than a minute left (as Troy Aikman recommended) - it's a completely different situation than the Colts/Pats play. The Packers wouldn't have cared all that much on D as they still would have needed 2 additional scores in a minute. That's not going to be the same level of defensive intensity/focus as the Colts D would have on the 4th and 2.

Again, it's like looking at %s for a 3rd and 5 when the team is tied in the fourth or when it is down by 3 TDs late in the game. It's a much different situation. I'd be more interested in 2-point conversions that would tie or take the lead than the chance one works when the offense is down 14+ points. I'm not sure how to separate these factors when looking at the percentages being thrown around today.

[Daimyo]

The thing that really stuck out to me about the end of the Colts-Pats game was how disorganized New England looked in the final drive and their lack of confidence. In that situation they should have come out composed and confident. You get the ball on your opponents 20-yard line with a 6 point lead and 2:30 left in the game and you're at least an 80% favorite to win. Good teams thrive in those situations.

Instead New England came out looking scared and disorganized, like they were the underdogs. How do you call two timeouts on that drive if you're New England? How do you not run up the middle on 3rd-and-2 if you know you're in a 4 down situation and you're trying to run out the clock? How do you run only 2-yard routes on 3rd and 4th down when you need 2 yards for the first down?

I don't question the decision to go for it on 4th-and-2. It was almost certainly the play with the highest expected value. But I do question just about everything else about that possession.

[jbergey22]

Sorry Browns fans but why exactly is this game on Monday Night? I cant think of a worse football game to end the week. I cant see this being anything other than a 21+ point Ravens win.

[Abe Sargent]

Have they shown the Dog Pound yet to see what happened with the protest?

[CleBrownsfan]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Sorry Browns fans but why exactly is this game on Monday Night? I cant think of a worse football game to end the week. I cant see this being anything other than a 21+ point Ravens win.

I'm embarrassed that we get to "show case" this debacle tonight

[tucker rocky]

Wrestling might be more entertaining than this steaming pile of a MNF game.