Belichick made the correct decision, according to AdvancedNFLStats.com

[Awsi Dooger]

This is similar opinion to what I've posted in other threads, here and in the Lounge and on other sites. It's a glaring case of conventional wisdom proposing one truth, while knowledge of math and probability screams that the minority opinion is actually correct. I was forced to understand bottom line realities like this, or be swallowed by Las Vegas sportsbooks.

It would be interesting to read Nate Silver's view, although he's more of a baseball guy, not football.

BTW, I think AdvancedNFLStats.com is actually underreporting the advantage of going for it. They adjust the typical NFL percentage upward in terms of Manning's likelihood to score a TD, but they don't boost Brady's odds of converting the 4th and 2. I estimated 1/3 favorite in the other threads and I'll stick with that, although it might be a touch high. This site is using 60% as a generic number, which is too low considering it's Brady/Moss/Welker:

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/11/belichicks-4th-down-decision-vs-colts.html

"With 2:00 left and the Colts with only one timeout, a successful conversion wins the game for all practical purposes. A 4th and 2 conversion would be successful 60% of the time. Historically, in a situation with 2:00 left and needing a TD to either win or tie, teams get the TD 53% of the time from that field position. The total WP for the 4th down conversion attempt would therefore be:

(0.60 * 1) + (0.40 * (1-0.53)) = 0.79 WP

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.

Statistically, the better decision would be to go for it, and by a good amount. However, these numbers are baselines for the league as a whole. You'd have to expect the Colts had a better than a 30% chance of scoring from their 34, and an accordingly higher chance to score from the Pats' 28. But any adjustment in their likelihood of scoring from either field position increases the advantage of going for it. You can play with the numbers any way you like, but it's pretty hard to come up with a realistic combination of numbers that make punting the better option. At best, you could make it a wash."

[JonLP24]

1. Interesting website

I don't have anything to add to the OP but I was trying to bring up something as far as the 'exciting' or 'comeback' games to show and nothing happens. :shrug:

I have a cheap PC so that may be it. There is a large white space from the top of the page where it says "LIVE WIN PROBABILITY GRAPHS FOR ALL GAMES" to "WIN PROBABILITY GRAPHS" and the feature I'm attempting to use so I figure the list is there? Anyways it seems interesting.

About your OP, ESPN is all over Belichick tonight and probably will be on Sports debate/shouting shows tomorrow.

[JonLP24]

2. I figured it out

I was expecting Arizona's 9-6 victory over Dallas in 2002 to be the most exciting game of the year for Arizona. That was a game Adrian Wilson single handedly won (before he was the known player he is today). Also Quincy Carter for just one play ran the option and failed miserably.

The reason why that year and that game is significant is because they started 4-2 and their fourth victory came over Dallas which was unusual for Arizona to have a winning record that early in the season. They had a key game against San Francisco who was also 4-2 so it was a game to decide the winner, however Terrell Owens ate the D alive in the first half. They took a 31-7 lead however Arizona led a furious comeback but fell short 28-38, that game is #14(out of 16) on the excitement list.

However Arizona fell to 4-3 and eventually 5-11. The first 4 wins are among the top 6 for the most exciting games of the year.

I appreciate the website. Very interesting stuff.

[Auggie]

3. The consequences of being wrong outweigh the stats, IMO.

Or something like that. I understand the hypothesis, but in not succeeding it made it far easier for the Colts to win. This was a loss against another playoff team in the same conference and could have huge implications for New England come January.

[JonLP24]

4. He made a good point in another thread

In the 2006-07 AFC Championship game New England punted to Peyton Manning with over 2 minutes left up 34-31 and he subsequently drove the Colts 80 yards to win 38-34 and that was against a veteran defense that is much better then what the Pats have today.

[trumad]

5. Manning was on fire at the end of the game

and the Pat's tongues were hanging out of their mouth.

80 yards----30 yards----it wouldn't have mattered either way.

[JonLP24]

6. Yep

The fact Manning(only player to throw 40,000 yards in a decade) is on the other team is the only reason he makes that decision imo. If it was any other QB I'm sure Belichick would take his chances with a punt.

[trumad]

7. Well--- I understand the decison---doesn't mean I condone it.

[JonLP24]

8. Same here

I posted the same thing earlier: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=9126706&mesg_id=9127354

This was before I found out Belichick was probability correct.

[Auggie]

11. I still would have punted -- Manning also threw 2 INTs in the game.

[JonLP24]

13. One of those throws came out wrong

You could see it got away from him the second he threw it -- does not happen very often when it comes to Manning. I believe he also had over 300+ passing yards at the point as well but similar situation in AFC Championship Pats punted with a better defense and still couldn't stop Manning from driving 80 yards. Anyways like Awsi said Walker was running across the middle of the field which Brady should have targeted. However Faulk is a good third(or fourth in this case) down back.

[Auggie]

27. It still came out wrong,

and who knows, could have happened again on the ensuing drive. My issue is this was too big a game for the Pats to make it so easy for the Colts to beat them. I would have punted and blitzed the hell out of Manning. Yeah, maybe he'd still beat me in the end. But at least I'd make him earn it.

[JonLP24]

30. Blitzing would've been a huge mistake

The Cardinals that live by the blitz got burned badly by Peyton. Teams don't often blitz Manning because of his play recognition abilities and knowledge of where the players are and adjust the play at that. He has a 97.2 QB rating against the blitz so a little mix is good but best to rush 4 and leave everyone else in coverage.

I don't agree with the call but with 400+ total offense I can understand why Belichick with Brady-Moss-Walker would go for it to end the game rather then give Peyton another crack at it, plus they could have stopped him when he was at 30.

[DaveinMD]

9. completely agree

if the Patriots punt, the Colts score anyhow. If the Patriots make the first down, the game is over. Teams should hardly ever punt.

[trumad]

10. Teams should hardly ever punt?

You're kidding right....

Field position is probably the most important thing in the NFL. You win the field position game and you most likely win the game.

[DaveinMD]

14. If teams didn't punt

especially on 4th and less than 5 they'd make the first down more than half the time and keep drives going. That would far outweigh the benefits of 40 yards of field position.

[trumad]

17. Keep the drive going to what?

maybe a 3 and out?

No way do you risk giving up field position like that....

[DaveinMD]

18. in this situation

if they convert that first down the game is over and the Patriots win. With their offense, the odds were in their favor. I love the move.

[trumad]

23. Again...

30 yards----80 yards....

But I get it... I see the reasoning but.....

[DaveinMD]

33. not just 30 yards

its also keeping the ball v that 80 yards. If they convert the game is over.

[Auggie]

12. But it's not a given the Colts score in that situation

[DaveinMD]

15. not a given

but highly likely. BB certainly thought so.

[Auggie]

24. I'd love to see a poll what other coaches would have done

My bet is an overwhelming majority would have punted.

As you say DaveinMD, BB certainly thought is was the right thing to do. We have to respect that he makes that decision, right or wrong.

[DaveinMD]

of course

and the majority are wedded to orthodoxy. Doesn't make it right.

[trumad]

16. I agree

Look--- instead of 30 yards to score---they would have had to go at least 80 depending on how good the punt was....

The punt could have been shanked---or returned 30 yards.... .

Bill B. simply did not have confidence in his defense to stop the hot Manning. I don't think it was arrogance at all.... he rolled the dice and came up craps.

Would I have punted... yeah---- but with Payton QB'ing and as hot as he was at the end.... 2 minutes is eternity.

Shit---with one minute left in the Phins game---Miami's 24 year old QB, Chad Henne, took Miami from their 16 yard line to the Buc's 28....they kicked a field goal and won.

[Upton]

22. I've been glancing

over some of these posts, and this is already at least the second time you've managed to insert the results of the Dolphin game into a topic that has very little if anything to do with them. :eyes:

Times must be tough when you're whoopin' it up about a victory over the 1 win Bucs..:crazy:

[trumad]

25. Niners 4-5 with the easiest schedule in the league.

I'd think you'd keep your smack talking to a minimum.

But you're a Douche and you can't help yourself.

[Upton]

29. Hey..

how come Pennington and Henne are both named Chad? Seems rather odd and a little too coincidental for me.

Oh, and did you know that Chad Henne took the Phins downfield in the last minute for a winning FG!! :rofl:

[TZ]

37. Do the Chads leave their fans hanging though?

:)

[trumad]

39. Is that all you got?

Silly boy...

4-5 with the easiest schedule in the league and the only smack you have is someones first name.

That's why you're Douche two. Not quite Douche one--- but most likely the illegitimate twin.

[JonLP24]

19. 'rarely'?

I personally feel coaches should go for it on 4th and 1 a little more often but several factors have to play into that to make it acceptable but not rarely punt. You're giving your opponent good field position and increasing their chance of scoring.

[DaveinMD]

20. By rarely

basically any 4 and 5 or under. There is lots of statistical analysis that shows going far it in these situations would be more beneficial over time than punting in those spots.

[JonLP24]

21. It's about 75% for a 4th and 1

Dips to around 60% on a 4th and 2 and 50% on 4th and 3. You also have to factor in position on the field to be sure your not going to give automatic points if you fail. It's also harder to convert in the red zone, smaller area to defend.

I can understand the logic there to go for it and I agree more often on 4th and 1 but field position must play a factor as well.

[trumad]

28. You'll very rarely find a team going for it on thier side of the field.

Oh sure ---if they're in a 2 minute drill and they have no choice...

But not like Bill B did yesterday and certainly not in the middle of a game.

[JonLP24]

36. I was just giving the numbers for down and distance

I wouldn't punt inside their territory mid game because that ensures at least FG attempt for the other team barring any penalties or turnovers. Rarely is true but there are teams that do go for it. In the few Jets games I watched they often did, in fact they 10/13 going for it on 4th down. Also Arizona tends to go for it on 4th & 1 somewhat like they did twice yesterday, once in the first and second qtr but both times they were in field goal range.

My point is they should try it a little more based on the numbers -- but never inside their 50(not talking about last night's game--under the circumstances and if I was the coach I would have punted but would be nail biting the whole time with Peyton with the ball)

[trumad]

26. Not on your own 30 yard line.

[DaveinMD]

31. they convert, they win

I like the move. The percentages of them making those two yards were higher than the percentages of them stopping Peyton Manning from scoring with two minutes left in my book.

[trumad]

35. Look I'm not disagreeing with you---

I understand the call in that situation...

My debate with you involves a situation where it's mid game and there isn't any urgency. You always punt when you're on your own 30.

[Captain Hilts]

52. Me too. nt

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[Iggo]

34. The scoreboard would indicate otherwise.

35-34.

[Telly Savalas]

47. By that logic it was a bad decision to start Brady over the backup.

He decided to start Brady and look at the final score. Bad decision.

[Arkana]

38. He made the right decision--the defense was completely gassed

and we'd have looked even dumber if we'd kicked it away and Peyton had just driven it right back down the field.

[Captain Hilts]

53. Correct. nt

[Awsi Dooger]

40. I doubt he would have made the same choice against any other QB

That's the intriguing aspect.

IMO, regardless of the math, Belichick wouldn't have made the same choice against Chad Henne or even Drew Brees. The Saints haven't proven anything, beyond the first half of one season. You don't concede anything to them from 70 yards away. This decision was applicable to the Indianapolis Colts and Peyton Manning, a long demonstrated ability to drive the field and steal victories, including that AFC Title Game against the Pats in 2006. And what is it now, something like 20 regular season wins in a row?

Anyone who asserts it was unquestionably a stupid call has a poor grasp of value. I see it in sportsbooks all the time, guys who thrill to give themselves one chance while allowing the sportsbooks to have multiple opportunities. Then they are baffled when their 3 or 4 team parlay didn't hit.

Punting the ball limits you to one chance, stopping the Colts. Going for it enables two opportunities, making the first down to end the game, or stopping the Colts from the 28. Obviously it's a diminished chance to stop a team from 30 yards and not 70 but it's very foolish to downplay the value of that second chance, i.e. going for the first down. In this case it's even more dramatic because a first down all but ends the game, while a punt allows 2 full minutes and a time out.

The media has conditioned us to believe the cautious route is proper. That's hardly the case. As DaveInMD posted, punts are over utilized in general. That's actually more true in college than the NFL. Superior teams should avoid punts on 4th and short much more frequently, particularly beyond their own red zone and it's most absurd in opponent territory. I literally used to scream when Larry Coker punted from inside the opponent's territory on 4th and short, when he was a huge favorite with superior manpower. He led the nation in punting from inside the plus 40, several seasons in a row. Once he punted from the Duke 32 on 4th and 2 with a lead of less than a TD and a couple of minutes remaining. It was the epitome of strategic ignorance. Duke drove the field and nearly pulled out the major upset, which would have been an all time Canes embarrassment.

Football stats are still in their infancy, particularly in the mainstream media. In a decade or two, a choice like Belichick's will be better understood because the known numbers will be more well known, and support it.

Someone on another site made a valid point, that you could run on 3rd down to burn a Colts time out if you were planning to go for it on 4th down already. But your best chance, the trump card option, is Tom Brady making 2 yards. It's a simple case of the correct choice that didn't pan out. Happens all the time.

[JonLP24]

41. I agree

If it comes to any other QB he punts the ball like I said up thread. Manning is a very dangerous QB and to go for the win and keep the ball out of his hand makes sense.

The Colts have won 17 straight regular season games I believe.

[RagAss]

42. Archie Manning was terrified the Pats were going for it...

This from Gary Danielson who spoke to Archie after the game....

So what does that tell you?

[Awsi Dooger]

43. One of the reasons late comebacks are successful is 4 downs instead of 3

That's often overlooked, when commentators rave about high number of TDs late in a game as opposed to earlier. Kick the ball to Manning at the 2 minute warning, down by 6, and he has 4 downs every series, instead of 3 during the bulk of the game. That's why you can't merely look at the game as a whole and say New England stopped the Colts a majority of the time and therefore a punt is the correct decision. They didn't stop 4 downs.

[Awsi Dooger]

44. Brady had converted more than 76% on 4th and 2 or less

ESPN Stats & Information dug through the archives and found that entering Sunday's game, the Patriots had converted a fourth-and-2 or shorter 68 out of 89 times (76.4 percent) since 2001, Brady's first year as a starter.

That aligns with my initial estimate of 1/3 favoritism on making the first down. You might nudge it lower based on Colts on the road a higher caliber of opponent than typical among that sample of 89, but it's also true that Brady did not have Moss and Welker until 2007. If so, the 76.4% could have been higher.

[bluedigger]

45. Excellent discussion, sportsfans.

I still feel like crap.

[Jack Rabbit]

46. Lies, damn lies and statistics

It'll get you every time.

[Telly Savalas]

48. Typically when someone is using statistics to propagate bullshit

it's not too difficult to counter with other statistics that dispel the bullshit.

[Awsi Dooger]

50. The counterers use ignorant bullshit

Conventional wisdom bullshit. That's the difference.

This play call was an excellent litmus test of football knowledge and understanding of probability, or lack of same.

[Iggo]

49. In retrospect, it's completely obvious he made the wrong call.

Why is this even an issue?

[Captain Hilts]

51. NEdefense had just let Indy run the length of the field twice. Let them score quick as possible.

Then get the ball back.

It's not the bad decision a lot of folks think it was.

[BlooInBloo]

54. I was ok with either decision...

Both have perfectly reasonable rationales. I'm not sure why people seem to think that in every situation, there is only 1 possible rational choice.