Nov 16
Belichick going for it on 4th and 2
Last night I was asleep for the amazing finish of the NE-Indy game and I woke up to see articles about Belichick taking a terrible gamble and going for in on 4th and 2 from his own 28 up 6 points with 2 minutes left. I immediately loved the decision. I wish the Eagles would fire Andy Reid immediately and hire anyone that at least can contemplate looking at the game statistically.
Traditional NFL and MLB people are woefully bad at looking at statistics to make in game decisions. There is a saying that it is better to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally and nowhere to we see more followers of this misguided cliche than in these two sports. Belichick is one of the VERY few coaches that actually gets it and is willing to take the heat. His success is not an accident. Pretty much no matter how you play with the numbers, the Pats should go for it on 4th and 2 there when a first down ends the game. I’m not really going to get into the numbers but you all can look it up, it’s pretty clear.
On a day when Andy Reid made some of the most PATHETICALLY CONSERVATIVE Field Goal decisions I’ve ever seen, it was good to see one coach taking a stand against utterly mindless adherence to misguided “football knowledge”
Andy Reid is the absolute worst.
November 16th, 2009 at 9:54 am
you mean you wouldnt kick a field goal from the one inch line down two touchdowns? ugh
November 16th, 2009 at 9:57 am
This made me laugh because for a brief second I thought you were going to disagree with me. Andy Reid’s decisions are truly pathetic.
November 16th, 2009 at 11:56 am
I feel you on Andy Reid, whose career head coaching numbers are far better than his game-day coaching ability, in which he clearly ranks right at the bottom of the league’s head coaches. That, and in when to throw the red flag for a booth review, at which Reid, too, is the worst in the NFL.
That said, I would be interested in understanding what the heck statistics you’re talking about with the Pats game. Because I know the Pats have made it 76% of the time on 3rd or 4th and 2 yards or less to go over the past few seasons, and I still think that was just about the most indefensibly horrible coaching call I can remember. I bet even Andy Reid was laughing when he saw that. I mean, if you’re only up two or something such that even a field goal by the Colts will win it for them, then maybe there is more reason to push it on 4th down here. But to be up by 6, such that only a touchdown by the Colts in two minutes will win, there’s just no rationale I can think of that even begins to explain how you can make a decision like that.
I would decribe it as a flavor of Bill Belichick’s hubris finally catching up with him just a little bit.
November 16th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Totally agree on Reid, totally disagree on the statistical argument, though I do agree that Reid was probably laughing at Belichick’s call because he is too dumb to even consider such a decision. For one look at the stats go here:
http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009/11/belichicks-4th-down-decision-vs-colts.html
November 16th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
steve, can you give your thoughts on ohio state’s coach jim tressel? he’s been taking TONS of heat this year from OSU fans.
November 16th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
I’m not into college football at all but if you give specific examples of what he’s taken heat for I’d be happy to offer my opinion
November 16th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
as for belichicks play call, i’m not sure. i’m not sure if the numbers have been thought about enough. his call seems comparable to playing AA on the bubble of a satellite when you’re already guaranteed to fold your way to a seat. it reminds me a lot of that. he’s basically telling his defense that they suck, and his offense that they’re super heroes. don’t these world class defensive players have the ability to stop a team from going 70 yards (if they simply punt the ball away) and getting a TD with 2 minutes left?
November 16th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
gambler2k4,
Exactly, that poker analogy (as they always do) sums it up perfectly. You can’t go with the percentages there. You just CAN’T go for it on 4th down at your 28 there. Those stats don’t take into account common sense. No other coaches would have even considered going for it there. He made a bad call and it didn’t work. End of story.
November 16th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Ummmm, how is it at all like playing AA on the bubble when ur guaranteed to fold your way to a seat?
And the whole “world class defensive players” argument holds no weight- obviously all NFL players are world-class athletes. so in that realm, though, the pats defense are in the lower echelon, plus they were tired. As the stats showed, the colts had at LEAST a 35 percent chance of winning even from the 70 yard drive (had they punted). If you can fold your way to a seat, you have way more than a 65 percent chance of winning that seat. Have you ever seen Peyton manning in the 2 minute drill? Not to mention the fact that the Pats get 2 yards usually with their eyes closed?
November 16th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Wait, isn’t the call implying that the defense is great because even if they miss, they can stop the Colts? I have always thought that punting is more likely to show lack of faith in both your own offense and defense.
November 16th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
I think Debt is making fun or gambler2k4 :(
November 17th, 2009 at 1:18 am
I’m curious at what yard line Belichick would punt on 4th and 2. It’s kind of like calculating his range.
November 17th, 2009 at 5:04 am
I realize that math isnt the only thing to consider here, but here is some rough/quick math on the situation:
The average 2 pt conversion rate in the nfl is between 50-55%. The patriots were in fact 66.7% in 2008. And even if the patriots had a small sample size of 2 pt conversions in 2008, they are still clearly better than avg (50-55%) so lets put their 2 pt conversion percentage at 60%. However, scoring a 2 pt conversion is done with a short field (the goal line as a very significant extra defender). This 2 yard conversion in the game was attempted with a full field. Let’s add a small 3 % chance increase of conversion to it because of the full field. So the patriots have a 63% chance of winning the game immediately by going for it. However on the 37% of the time that they fail the conversion here is what can happen:
Peyton scores, they kick the extra pt and colts win 69% (colts red zone percentage is 59.4% however Peyton gets 4 downs to work with here so lets say 70% chance of scoring a TD)
Peyton scores, they kick the extra pt and patriots respond with a score of their own: 1%(this is a small chance obv with the time situation)
peyton scores, they miss the extra pt tie game (anything can happen now in overtime, so lets say 50% chance of pats win here, so moot point)
Peyton fails to score a td : 30%
So the patriots win in 31% of these scenarios. Therefore this adds another 11.5% chance of pats winning by going for it.
74.5 % of winning by going for it on 4th and 2.
Now do you think if they punted and peyton had to drive 70ish yards with a timeout and 2 mins left he would score less than 26.5% of the time? thats the real question i guess.
(disclaimer, this math is really sloppy and with a lot of assumptions, but its just another way of thinking about it)
November 17th, 2009 at 5:12 am
The 2 pt conversion number on the patriots of 66.7% last year (which we didnt use anyway, but did take into consideration) was with a matt cassel led offense.
Also, peyton has to drive them 28 yards which is 8 yards more than the red zone data takes into account. This probably skews the number even more to something like 21% of the time where peyton has to score after a punt instead of 26.5. This is all guesswork of course.
November 17th, 2009 at 5:14 am
err, i meant 25.5% not 26.5 whoops
November 18th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
i think so far i’ve had the only intelligent answer.
November 19th, 2009 at 4:41 am
What’s even funnier about this situation is that it probably would even be a better idea to take an intentional safety in this spot rather than punt the ball away.
November 19th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
how good is “football” if they’re carrying the ball in their hands… They don’t bother to call it “American Football” anymore? I liked the comment once in “60 minutes” where they were showing about football in Europe. The commentator said something like “This game they call here a “football” :) whereas its only the USA that ball carrying in hands and throwing it calls it “Football”. Funny.