4th and 2 from your own 28, you're up by 6 and there's less than 2 minutes to go...

[FedEx227]

That link does have me thinking, but my reliance on conventional football wisdom is fucking with me....controlling me.......must not think outside of box.....must repeat "JT The Brick" choke quotes.

The New York Times did a numbers look at the call and it was interesting.

While I'm a HUGE baseball stat guy, football stats just don't do it for me because there are so many other things that can go into scoring the football.

Baseball is great from a stat standpoint because it's essentially pitcher vs. batter. Football on the other hand... has so many other aspects in terms of fumbles, INTs, dropped passes, misran routes, penalties, missed tackles, etc. that it's hard to really do a whole lot of numbers crunching with it.

Yes, statistically BB made the right call, but you won't find anyone that sees it that cut and dry.

 

[NAHSTE]

The New York Times did a numbers look at the call and it was interesting.

While I'm a HUGE baseball stat guy, football stats just don't do it for me because there are so many other things that can go into scoring the football.

Baseball is great from a stat standpoint because it's essentially pitcher vs. batter. Football on the other hand... has so many other aspects in terms of fumbles, INTs, dropped passes, misran routes, penalties, missed tackles, etc. that it's hard to really do a whole lot of numbers crunching with it.

Yes, statistically BB made the right call, but you won't find anyone that sees it that cut and dry.

Yeah those crazy fielders never affect anything.

 

[padman59]

OK number-crunching geeks, fap on this:

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



EDIT: I'm skeptical.......

The caveat at the end is what's most important. Those stats don't take into account how the Colts/Pats were playing in that particular game. If you play out that scenario 100 times between randomly picked teams, those predictions might hold true.

 

[Bear Pand]

This same Advanced NFL stats website also said that the Colts had a 69% chance of winning the game. Statistically NE wasted their time even showing up.

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/week-10-game-probabilities/

You can't easily predict things in the NFL, especially things like what % of the time a team is gonna win or what % of the time a team is gonna score if they get the ball. Especially when the model they used to analyze Belichick's decision uses "numbers [that] are baselines for the league as a whole."

 

[Scorask]

If you actually think that Peyton Manning's chances of leading the Colts into the endzone from 70 yards out are just as good as 30 yards out then you are a mental midget.

Colts had 1 timeout left. If anything, cover the sidelines and force Manning to go to Clark or whoever over the middle so the clock is against them. Run the ball on 3rd, let the 2 min warning expire, and punt it. They have 1 chance to stop the clock and go 70 yards and get into the end zone.

I don't care if Reed Rothchild is playing quarterback for the other team, you punt the ball and make them work for the win instead of losing the game on your own.

I must be a mental midget because I swear I saw the Colts go 79 yards in 1:49 minutes the possession they had before that! Not to mention Peyton ran a no huddle on them the whole drive. Now factor in the Pats possesion that they failed to get the 1st down on 4th and 2 only lasted about 15 seconds. The D was gassed and was about to get gassed again. I still don't mind the call, would have been better if it worked out but it didn't.

And yes, IMO, Peyton was going to score wherever they got the ball, Pats 30 yard line, Colts 30 yard line, it didn't make much of a difference! Which leads me back to the my point that the Pats best Defense was keeping their Offense on the field!

 

[Boss AZ]

So Peyton scores every time he has the ball? Nice....

 

[Senser81]

You can't easily predict things in the NFL, especially things like what % of the time a team is gonna win or what % of the time a team is gonna score if they get the ball. Especially when the model they used to analyze Belichick's decision uses "numbers [that] are baselines for the league as a whole."

Yeah, thats the problem with the statistical analysis. Disregarding the "general baseline" concept, what they are also forgetting is the fact that the Colts had to overcome both the Pats D and the clock on that last drive. The stats disregard the human element in that a team under pressure (i.e. time running out and needing a TD) will have a greater chance of screwing up. The Colts going 70 yards in 2 minutes in the 2nd quarter is a different situation than the Colts NEEDING to go 70 yards in 2 minutes at the end of the game.

 

[DSpydr84]

Yeah, thats the problem with the statistical analysis. Disregarding the "general baseline" concept, what they are also forgetting is the fact that the Colts had to overcome both the Pats D and the clock on that last drive. The stats disregard the human element in that a team under pressure (i.e. time running out and needing a TD) will have a greater chance of screwing up. The Colts going 70 yards in 2 minutes in the 2nd quarter is a different situation than the Colts NEEDING to go 70 yards in 2 minutes at the end of the game.

I'm not saying he couldn't have done it, because I also believe in making your defense go out there and win the game for you. But how many times have we seen Manning do this kind of thing? Look at the Miami game earlier this year when he drove down the field effortlessly taking NO time off the clock on multiple drives. He did it against Tampa Bay on Monday Night a few years ago. He did it to Belichick's Patriots in a playoff game. Again, I'm not saying it was guaranteed, but it makes sense to give yourself one more chance to pick up the two yards and keep him off the field entirely.

The defense was tired, Manning was hot, and they had two minutes with a timeout to spare. In that situation, maybe two yards on offense IS easier than stopping a 70-yard drive. Maybe Belichick DID give his team the best opportunity to win. But we'll never know for sure.

 

[FedEx227]

Yeah those crazy fielders never affect anything.

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. :doh: Of course fielders affect the game but not on the same statistical level that the pitcher vs. batter battle does.

Once the ball is hit, it's essentially fielder vs. batted ball. They still affect the game, but that part is almost unmeasurable. Most everything in the pitcher vs. batter battle is quantifiable,especially now with pitch f/X.

That was the point of my post, that baseball is way more quantifiable than football, basketball or any of the other major sports because the biggest statistical impact of the game occurs in essentially a one on one battle.

 

[Senser81]

Once the ball is hit, it's essentially fielder vs. batted ball. They still affect the game, but that part is almost unmeasurable.

Unless its Derek Jeter being the fielder, because we know when its fielder vs. batted ball, the batted ball usually wins. Batted ball >>>> Derek Jeter

 

[FedEx227]

EXACTLY! Now you're getting it.

Truth be told we're getting very close to really being able to measure defense. There's a system in place pretty soon to track the speed, trajectory of batted balls, fielder positioning, etc.

 

[Scorask]

I'm not saying he couldn't have done it, because I also believe in making your defense go out there and win the game for you. But how many times have we seen Manning do this kind of thing? Look at the Miami game earlier this year when he drove down the field effortlessly taking NO time off the clock on multiple drives. He did it against Tampa Bay on Monday Night a few years ago. He did it to Belichick's Patriots in a playoff game. Again, I'm not saying it was guaranteed, but it makes sense to give yourself one more chance to pick up the two yards and keep him off the field entirely.

The defense was tired, Manning was hot, and they had two minutes with a timeout to spare. In that situation, maybe two yards on offense IS easier than stopping a 70-yard drive. Maybe Belichick DID give his team the best opportunity to win. But we'll never know for sure.

THIS.........

 

[Senser81]

THIS.........

????

I find this thread to be amazing in that it ends the debate of Tom Brady being better than Peyton Manning. Manning is obviously better than Brady, and, in addition to being the greatest QB of all-time, he is quite possibly the greatest player in NFL history regardless of position. He is a real-life version of Bo Jackson in Tecmo Bowl. Manning is guaranteed to score a TD from 70 yards away with less than 2 minutes on the clock...WOW!

 

[FedEx227]

You just can't stop him, why even bother?

This is amazing because most of the NE people are saying that you couldn't stop him while the Manning supports (like myself) say it's ridiculous to assume that from 70 yards out with less than 2 minutes remaining he was going to score.

 

[Woy]

So now Belichick has made two bad football-related moves.

This and also making Charlie Weis and Eric Mangini head coaches.

 

[TDAUG]

????

I find this thread to be amazing in that it ends the debate of Tom Brady being better than Peyton Manning.

Damn!

I was looking forward to many more years of that debate.

 

[Scorask]

????

I find this thread to be amazing in that it ends the debate of Tom Brady being better than Peyton Manning. Manning is obviously better than Brady, and, in addition to being the greatest QB of all-time, he is quite possibly the greatest player in NFL history regardless of position. He is a real-life version of Bo Jackson in Tecmo Bowl. Manning is guaranteed to score a TD from 70 yards away with less than 2 minutes on the clock...WOW!

You just can't stop him, why even bother?

This is amazing because most of the NE people are saying that you couldn't stop him while the Manning supports (like myself) say it's ridiculous to assume that from 70 yards out with less than 2 minutes remaining he was going to score.

If my opinion was that the Pats D would have stopped Manning, you both would have argued that Manning is Manning and he most likely would have scored, lol. Either way, IMO, coming back from being 17 point's down, momentum on their side, not only because of a 80 yard TD drive on their last possession, but also forcing the Pats to a 3 and out, I believe they would have scored. I could be wrong, but thats my opinion. Me saying the Colts would score is as ridiculous as you guys saying they wouldn't isn't it?

So now Belichick has made two bad football-related moves.

This and also making Charlie Weis and Eric Mangini head coaches.

Wouldn't that be 3 moves?

 

[FedEx227]

If my opinion was that the Pats D would have stopped Manning, you both would have argued that Manning is Manning and he most likely would have scored, lol. Either way, IMO, coming back from being 17 point's down, momentum on their side, not only because of a 80 yard TD drive on their last possession, but also forcing the Pats to a 3 and out, I believe they would have scored. I could be wrong, but thats my opinion. Me saying the Colts would score is as ridiculous as you guys saying they wouldn't isn't it?

We're being sarcastic. You can never do that with ANY player or any team. So many things can go into a 70 yard drive with 2 minutes there is no way to say "Well screw it, he's probably going to score anyway".

 

[Senser81]

If my opinion was that the Pats D would have stopped Manning, you both would have argued that Manning is Manning and he most likely would have scored, lol. Either way, IMO, coming back from being 17 point's down, momentum on their side, not only because of a 80 yard TD drive on their last possession, but also forcing the Pats to a 3 and out, I believe they would have scored. I could be wrong, but thats my opinion. Me saying the Colts would score is as ridiculous as you guys saying they wouldn't isn't it?

No, thats not the point. The point is that you make the Colts earn their game-winning TD. If the Colts go 70+ yards in under 2 minutes, then they deserve to win. The Patriots didn't make the Colts earn anything, they practically gave the game to the Colts.

 

[padman59]

If my opinion was that the Pats D would have stopped Manning, you both would have argued that Manning is Manning and he most likely would have scored, lol. Either way, IMO, coming back from being 17 point's down, momentum on their side, not only because of a 80 yard TD drive on their last possession, but also forcing the Pats to a 3 and out, I believe they would have scored. I could be wrong, but thats my opinion. Me saying the Colts would score is as ridiculous as you guys saying they wouldn't isn't it?



Wouldn't that be 3 moves?

More like 4 (including Crennel) and possibly 5 if McDaniels doesn't pan out.