Comments on: Going For It

By: Unabated to the QB, Week 10: What was Bill Belichick Thinking? « No Pun Intended

Mon, 21 Dec 2009 03:14:15 +0000

[...] where close to (if not) a majority of sportswriters have supported the decision. Joe Posnanski was behind it (obvs…if he weren’t, I wouldn’t be), citing The New York Times’s statistics. Three of the [...]

By: Asymmetry « No Time to Read

Asymmetry « No Time to Read — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:52:52 +0000

[...] think his argument against not-punting, in this specific play, is stronger than, for example, Joe Posnanski’s and Gregg Easterbrook’s posts about the statistical analyses that generally supported [...]

By: Jason Lisk

Jason Lisk — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:42:42 +0000

I’m stunned . . . stunned . . . that nobody is harping about the dreadfully bad fourth down call made by a Super Bowl winning head coach, which showed no faith in either his offense or defense, and directly cost his team a game.

Of course, I’m talking about Mike Tomlin’s decision to punt from the KC 38, and give up an outright chance to basically win the game in exchange for 18 yards.

A decision is only as good or bad as the result, or so I’ve heard. Yet no single media member has questioned the fact that he traded 18 yards and lost the game without ever getting the ball back? Where was Peter King this week?

By: Jeremy the Math Guy

Jeremy the Math Guy — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:30:51 +0000

Bill Powell @85: You are confusing the *right* decision with the *winning* decision. These are not the same thing. The winning decision is the one that happens to succeed. The right decision is the one that has the greatest probability of succeeding.

Here’s an example. I pick a card out of a deck and you have to guess whether or not it is the seven of diamonds. The right decision is to guess, “no, it’s not the seven of diamonds.” Surprise! It’s the seven of diamonds! Does that mean you made the wrong guess? No, you made the right guess, it just happened to lose. It’s impossible to always make the winning decision, simply because it’s impossible to foresee the future.

Belichick’s decision was a losing one, but that doesn’t mean it was wrong. (Now, if he had had a crystal ball and knew that they wouldn’t make it on fourth down, *then* it would be a wrong decision.)

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:08:32 +0000

I’m a Giants fan. The day the Giants beat those smug machine like Pats in the Super Bowl was one of my favorite sports related days of my life.

That said, the call on 4th and 2 gave me a whole new appreciation for Bellichek. He’s got dedication, daring, pride, pluck, spirit, grit, mettle, and G-U-T-S, *guts*. Why, Ted Striker’s got more guts in his little finger than most of us have in our large intestine, including the colon!

By: Keith

Keith — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:33:49 +0000

You mention a couple of times in your analysis is that the game is over if they convert that 4th down. I would disagree as the Colts had 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning left to stop the clock. Can you please add this into your equations?

By: Sam

Sam — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:59:32 +0000

I agree with Bellicheat’s decision both based on percentages, and on the way the game had been played during the 4th quarter. However, if as a coach, you do not trust your running game to get those yards on 3rd or 4th down, it makes it much easier defense, since they can sit on the pass.
Also, the timeout use and decision to pass on both 3rd and 4th down suggest to me that Belichek didn’t think about going for it on 4th and 2, until it was already 4th down. If he had planned ahead to trust his offense in a 4th and short situation, a run on 3rd seems like the better and more likely play call.

By: Jackie Boy

Jackie Boy — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:42:00 +0000

This Pats’ loss reminded me of some of the tough losses the Colts suffered at the hands of the Pats in past years. I’d say the passing of the torch is complete. Manning is the new sheriff. Colts are the better team (that is unless the Pats beat them in the playoffs). As it stands now, only a fool would argue the Pats are the better team.

By: Josh in DC

Josh in DC — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:07:00 +0000

People can — and do — quibble with the exact percentages that the stat geeks have come up with, but they haven’t offered their own guesses about what the true percentages might be. To me: it’s two yards. I would guess there’s a 65 percent chance of converting those two yards. That the Pats failed doesn’t make me wrong — I didn’t say 100 percent.

Also, having argued this with a number of friends, one of the frequent fallacies is believing there’s a 100 percent chance that Manning scores from 30 yards out but the odds fall precipitously to (one smart friend said) 30 percent or so when it becomes a 60-yard field. That’s a preposterous argument to me.

By: Nitpicker

Nitpicker — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:58:01 +0000

@Matt #121 – the game wouldn’t technically be over but they’d simply punt on the 4th down there and give the Colts the ball back with limited time left. Your numbers are close but not entirely correct in terms of the time it takes to run plays, so after all of the plays and the one timeout and the delay of game penalty and the punt the Colts would get the ball back around their own 30 or so with under 30 seconds left and no timeouts.