# NFL Week 10 - Thursday Night Games Are Upon Us
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374
**Category:** The Game Room
**Created:** [November 12, 2009, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374 "2009-11-12T22:33:16Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 7
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/121 "2009-11-16T15:10:13Z")
> [@VarlosZ](#):
>
> Come on, you must know what the problem with this is. You can’t just judge a decision based on what \*did \*happen. You have to consider what could have happened. Taking your approach leads to absurd conclusions. If a guy wakes up, walks out the door on his way to work, then immediately gets flattened by an out of control bus, then, according to your logic, he was an idiot for even getting out of bed.
No, my logic is that if he walks in front of a speeding bus he’s an idiot. And saying “well, maybe the bus would have gone around him,” is a pretty weak argument for supporting his decision to do something reckless with a high likelihood of disaster.
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/122 "2009-11-16T15:13:33Z")
Going for it was equivalent to moving out of the way of the bus. Punting, in this case, would have been akin to trying to jump over the bus.
---
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/123 "2009-11-16T15:13:47Z")
> [@borschevsky](#):
>
> Are you serious? You’re saying that it’s a bad decision because it didn’t work? I guess Brady shouldn’t have thrown those touchdowns to Moss, since the Pats lose 100% of the time that he throws those exact passes.
Yes, that’s exactly what I am saying. Bu t now you (and RNATB) are acting like I’m picking some arbitrary independent variable as an index of success instead of a game decision where the potential for disaster was clear to everyone, and which had a direct, undeniable connection to the outcome.
---
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/124 "2009-11-16T15:15:29Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#):
>
> Going for it was equivalent to moving out of the way of the bus. Punting, in this case, would have been akin to trying to jump over the bus.
This is poorly aligned with what actually happened.
---
### Author:  [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/125 "2009-11-16T15:19:47Z")
> [@cricetus](#):
>
> No, my logic is that if he walks in front of a speeding bus he’s an idiot. And saying “well, maybe the bus would have gone around him,” is a pretty weak argument for supporting his decision to do something reckless with a high likelihood of disaster.
You need to prove that the likelihood of disaster is as high as you claim. Equating not punting with drunk driving is a poor, short-sighted analogy.
---
### Author:  [@VarlosZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VarlosZ)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/126 "2009-11-16T15:20:38Z")
Look, “It didn’t work, therefore it was a bad decision” only makes sense if we know the outcome of the decision before we make it. Since we don’t, all we can do is try to make the decision that gives us the best chance of winning. Are you honestly saying that there is no chance going for it there gave the Patriots a better chance to win than punting, _given that when the decision was made, the play might succeed and might fail?_
---
### Author:  [@borschevsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/borschevsky)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/127 "2009-11-16T15:21:41Z")
> [@cricetus](#):
>
> Yes, that’s exactly what I am saying. Bu t now you (and RNATB) are acting like I’m picking some arbitrary independent variable as an index of success instead of a game decision where the potential for disaster was clear to everyone, and which had a direct, undeniable connection to the outcome.
No, what we’re saying is that you can’t use information from after the decision was made to critique the decision itself.
---
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/128 "2009-11-16T15:25:13Z")
Um, yes you can. In fact, it’s the most important factor in evaluating a decision. Wish certain ex presidents had thought of it.
---
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/129 "2009-11-16T15:26:59Z")
> [@VarlosZ](#):
>
> Look, “It didn’t work, therefore it was a bad decision” only makes sense if we know the outcome of the decision before we make it.
It would have been a bad decision anyway.
---
### Author:  [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/130 "2009-11-16T15:27:32Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#):
>
> See **storyteller** ’s post - it’s only an unconventional call because football coaches don’t understand mathematics. Belichick was, in fact, playing the percentages, especially given the relative strengths of his team.
Yes, one could argue that plausibly, and people here have. But you don’t need to go the “you’re only criticizing it because it didn’t work.” IIRC, Collinsworth was questioning it as it happened.
FWIW, I tend to think it’s 50/50 either way. I was okay with going for it, but thought it was a lame playcall.
As for Gregg Easterbrook … I have too few brain cells to lose more by smashing my head against a keyboard while reading his column.
---
### Author:  [@VarlosZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VarlosZ)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/131 "2009-11-16T15:28:13Z")
> [@cricetus](#):
>
> It would have been a bad decision anyway.
Great! Now please explain why.
ETA: Please explain why, _using only information available at the time the decision was made_.
---
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/132 "2009-11-16T15:30:07Z")
> [@Munch](#):
>
> You need to prove that the likelihood of disaster is as high as you claim. Equating not punting with drunk driving is a poor, short-sighted analogy.
I think it’s a fair analogy given the “percentages” argument vs. a wiser risk vs. reward assessment.
---
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/133 "2009-11-16T15:32:12Z")
> [@VarlosZ](#):
>
> Great! Now please explain why.
>
> ETA: Please explain why, _using only information available at the time the decision was made_.
Because if you don’t convert the down you give a good offense a short field and a hella lotta mo.
---
### Author:  [@borschevsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/borschevsky)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/134 "2009-11-16T15:33:44Z")
> [@cricetus](#):
>
> Um, yes you can. In fact, it’s the most important factor in evaluating a decision. Wish certain ex presidents had thought of it.
You’re saying that Belichick shouldn’t have gone for it with 2:08 left in the game, because the Colts scored a touchdown with 13 seconds left in the game. At the time he made the decision, Belichick didn’t know whether they’d get the first down or not, so he has to look at the probabilities, as several people have described above in the thread.
---
### Author:  [@VarlosZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VarlosZ)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/135 "2009-11-16T15:36:13Z")
> [@cricetus](#):
>
> Because if you don’t convert the down you give a good offense a short field and a hella lotta mo.
Yes, _but you can’t stop there_. If you only include what might go wrong in your analysis, then every course of action is incorrect.
So far, you have failed to consider (or even acknowledge) the possibility of a good outcome – this is especially egregious since the good outcome _is more likely than the bad outcome_, and would yield an infinitely good result (i.e., a virtually assured victory).
---
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/136 "2009-11-16T15:39:07Z")
> [@borschevsky](#):
>
> You’re saying that Belichick shouldn’t have gone for it with 2:08 left in the game, because the Colts scored a touchdown with 13 seconds left in the game. At the time he made the decision, Belichick didn’t know whether they’d get the first down or not, so he has to look at the probabilities, as several people have described above in the thread.
That’s one dimensional coaching. You can have a computer make descisions based on percentages. A smart coach (as opposed to a coach who is too smart for his own good) will look at risk vs. reward, the rhythms of the game, etc. It’s not just a short field vs. a long one (although that’s a huge part of it). It’s also about playing an away game, knowing how invincible the Colts feel if they get it inside the thirty, the crowd going crazy. How doomed your own team would feel if they can’t get two yards.
Punt the damned ball. There’s a reason that’s the “conservative” play. Trust your defense, but give them every yard you can.
---
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/137 "2009-11-16T15:40:14Z")
> [@VarlosZ](#):
>
> Yes, _but you can’t stop there_. If you only include what might go wrong in your analysis, then every course of action is incorrect.
>
> So far, you have failed to consider (or even acknowledge) the possibility of a good outcome – this is especially egregious since the good outcome _is more likely than the bad outcome_, and would yield an infinitely good result (i.e., a virtually assured victory).
Better than denying the existence of a bad outcome that actually happened.
Seriously, put your money on the Phillies. I have a good feeling about this on paper.
---
### Author:  [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/138 "2009-11-16T15:41:33Z")
You’re all right. The Patriots won ten alternate history versions of that game. Billicheck is a genius. Carry on.
---
### Author:  [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/139 "2009-11-16T15:43:28Z")
> [@cricetus](#):
>
> That’s one dimensional coaching. You can have a computer make descisions based on percentages. A smart coach (as opposed to a coach who is too smart for his own good) will look at risk vs. reward, the rhythms of the game, etc. It’s not just a short field vs. a long one (although that’s a huge part of it). It’s also about playing an away game, knowing how invincible the Colts feel if they get it inside the thirty, the crowd going crazy. How doomed your own team would feel if they can’t get two yards.
>
> Punt the damned ball. There’s a reason that’s the “conservative” play. Trust your defense, but give them every yard you can.
The circumstances (“rhyhtms of the game”) were stacked in favor of that decision. The Colts had just burned them for a long TD drive very quickly and it’s unlikely they were going to stop another one. Chances are high that the Colts are going to score even if they have 70 yards to go in 2 minutes with a timeout.
On the other hand, the Pats are the best team in the league at making a short passing play conversion.
So you have 2 great offenses, one that has a very high chance of converting the 4th down, and the other that has a very high chance of scoring a TD if you let them touch the ball again, so “letting your defense handle it” is a bad decision in regards to the rhythm of the game. The Pats’ best chance was not letting Manning touch the ball again.
---
### Author:  [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)
#### Post date: [November 16, 2009, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374/140 "2009-11-16T15:44:42Z")
> [@Hamlet](#):
>
> Anyone catch this? Is this a planned marketing thing? Am I insane?
I didn’t see the game, but I’m inclined to think this was set up. We’ve seen these guys at sporting events before – hell, they were in the crowd at American Idol – and it’s no coincidence they only show up when Fox is doing the broadcast.
As for Indy/NE, yes, it was four-down territory – 30 yards or 75 yards, you give Manning the final two minutes and he’ll give you a TD – and no, the Pats did not convert on 4th – even a cursory look at the tape makes it clear that he didn’t have posesssion anywhere near the marker.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374.md?page=6)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nfl-week-10-thursday-night-games-are-upon-us/517374.md?page=8)