I disagree that they only had 30-40% chance to go 70 yards, but let's go with it. I'll use the midpoints of your numbers. Chances the Patriots win if they go for it: 55% chance to make it in the 45% chance they don't make it, they win 15% of the time (6.75% of total) In total, going for it gives the Patriots a 61.75% chance to win. Chances the Patriots win if they don't go for it: 65% So even assuming the huge spread (85% for 30 yards vs 35% for 70 yards), it's a pretty even decision with a slight edge to punting. My estimates would be: 55% chance of 2pt conversion seems reasonable 80% chance of going 30 yds 50% chance of going 70 yds (given that they had done it twice already in the quarter) Using those numbers, you have 64% chance to win going for it, vs 50% chance to win not going for it. So that's where the difference of opinion comes from it - how likely we think the Colts could have gone 70 yards vs 30 yards. (thanks for answering the question!)
What a dumb call. With that decision, Belichick essentially: 1. Told his defense he had no confidence in them 2. Put the entire game on one risky, historically low percentage in the NFL play 3. Put all the pressure on the team that was leading by a score with two minutes left in the fourth quarter. No punt on your own 28 is beyond stupid.
This seems all like a really long way to avoid answering the question. It's weird that you accused me and f4p of assuming that the Colts are guaranteed to go down 70 yards (which neither of us did - we accounted for the percentages of each scenario), yet here, you make the assumption that the Colts automatically drive 30 yards if the Patriots don't make it. There was plenty of time here for the Colts style of offense. Even when not trying to score super quickly, they twice drove 80 yards in 2 minutes in the 4th quarter alone - if the Colts are guaranteed to go 30 yards, there's a pretty damn good chance that they can go 30 yards twice, and then another 10 games.
we are. you don't seem to be taking into account the chance the patriots would convert. you say the patriots D was doing it's job all game, but they gave up a 79 yd, 2:04 drive with 14 minutes to go, then gave up a 79 yd, 1:48 drive with 3 minutes to go. obviously, the odds that manning goes 70 yds in 2 minutes are not insignificant. in fact, at this point, they seem to be quite favorable (and given the final drive, there doesn't seem to be much to indicate the pats D had anything left in the tank). and given that tom brady had 375 passing yards and a 111 passer rating, the odds he gets 2 yards can't be low. and if you think the pats defense is so awesome, you certainly can't consider the 30 yard drive a 100% certainty. even being conservative for my argument, if it was 90% and the odds of stopping brady were 40%, that's a 36% chance you lose by going for it and then you just have to put odds on a manning 70 yd drive. i'm going with at least 50% and considering my 36% was pretty generious, going for it seems to be the best decision.
I think this is pretty high for any team in that given situation, even if they had been able to do it earlier in the game. It wasn't like the Colts were driving at will. The Pats defense had stopped them earlier in the game. Also, the Colts offense had stopped themselves earlier in that very quarter. I respect your argument.... but I don't think the Colts had a 50-50 chance of driving the length of the field to win the game. And once the Pats didn't get the first down (which was not a given), they basically gave them a > than 80% chance to win the game (which you agree on). I also don't like the premise of the Pats thinking their defense was not going to be able to win the game for them. I know their offense getting 2 yards seems like no big deal, but it is. Its a bigger deal that they think their defense can't stop a team from going 70 yards on them.
A 30 yard drive AFTER your defense was left for dead, makes it easier than just any run of the mill "30 yard" drive. You cannot discount what that defense was thinking after the Pats went for it there. Also, the only reason you go for it on 4th and 2 (which is not an easy conversion) is if you think your defense has absolutely no shot at stopping Peyton Manning with a full length of the field. Its not that I think the Pats defense is "awesome"... I just don't think its as terrible as some are making it out to be. I especially don't think its bad enough to consider that they'd have absolutely no chance of stopping the colts on a 70 yard drive.
Interesting. IMO, the hardest thing to estimate is #3. 50% is definitely the upper limit if one is reasonable. Don't you think that's a bit of a stretch? Either way, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. The shock still hasn't worn off.
I have to say I'm also a little curious as to why Nick, The Drake, Shaud, etc, are all assuming that a punt will result with the Colts getting the ball at the 30. Even assuming that the snap is good and that the punt isn't blocked (neither of which is ever a given), the punt could be shanked or there could be even a decent return to the 40-50 yd line. So the the probabilities shift even more when you realize that punting doesn't automatically equal the Colts getting the ball at their 30.
Well I said about the 30 or 40. I mean I can't break down every single possible scenario or I would be typing all night. I think they would have a better chance at pinning them farther if they had punted the ball than going for it obviously.
That's why they devote an entire team of coaches and entire squads of players for special teams. To execute plays such as punting the ball effectively. Hell, I'd have more confidence in them executing a punt play effectively more times than them being able to convert a short pass for a 4th and 2. If you're going to discount punting like that, because "anything" could possibly happen, then why punt at all? At any point in the game?
Hmmm, I wonder if there is a group of coaches and players that usually practice gaining yards together. I agree with you here, I would guess that the odds of a successful punt (ie downed around the 20-30) are better than converting the 4-2. I just think you can't assume you'll get it there when it seems like most people are. There is a non-zero change (just pulling a number out of you-know-where, I would guess 10-15%) that the Colts end up with it closer to the 50 than the 30. Good old straw man, nice to meet you. Clearly I never said anything about the decision being good or bad, nor all punting decisions being good or bad. Therefore punting must be terrible!
Even if the Colts get it at the 50, the patriots are in a better position than if they get stopped on 4th. Anyhow, I don't know what else to say beyond Rokkit's 3 bullet points in the the post I quoted. The only positive I could see for NE is that now the loss becomes about Belichek's miscue instead of Manning's clutchness, but still...I think a lot of posters here are forgetting how difficult converting a 4th and 2 really is. I mean, why give one play so much power in deciding the game's outcome?
They should have do the punt, you can put the Colts on a 3rd and out, the previous week, the texans needed a 3rd and out from the colts, and they got it, the pats could do it. that play its equal like you are down by 7 and with almost no time in the clock you score a touchdown, and you go for 2 for winning, instead of going for the tie and going to OT, I think its the same risk. the spot of the ball is very controversial, I dont know if the refs would overturn the call. and when addai ran to the 1 yard line I would let them score quickly, so I could have more time to go for a FG, instead of a long pass.
I can't fault the Pat too much for going for it. They actually did get it. But I'm still in absolute shock.
Now I know why LT played extra motivated yesterday. Before the game he found a box which had a pregnacy test marked positive from his wife. As many of you don't know, LT's wife had been pregnant before in 2005 but had a miscarridge. Im so happy for him right now. 22 years from now, the Chargers will be selecting Ladainian Tomlinson Jr. 5 overall.
