Last week’s conversation about Reid/Vick in a 4th quarter drive to win the game is once again relevant.
Once again: Zero confidence. Zero.
Well, Roddy White dropped an easy TD catch that would have won it in regulation. One of my many fantasy busts continues to disappoint. Oh, and Julio Jones got hurt. Fantastic.
Also, Ryan missed a open Gonzo in the endzone on the play before. Considering the pending Dynasty league move that’s typical for this season. As soon as I get a guy they start falling apart.
I’m loving that Philly is close to blowing yet another game with another 4th Qtr lead blown.
I am also enjoying this opening drive by my Giants. I hope they can punch it in for the TD now.
ETA: Well Eagles and Skins have lost and I think they are pretty much dead. The Cowboys and Giants are the only teams really left in the NL East.
It looks like the Giants will be settling for a FG. Nearly coughed up the ball.
ETA: Cool Bears strike first over Lions, 7-0.
What the fuck is Mike Smith thinking, going for it on 4th down on his own 29? Glad he lost.
4th and inches. Probability was in his favor.
The upside (a first down at your own 30), in no way counter balanced the downside ( you lose the game), even if the odds were in your favor (anyone have the stats?). I’m more than happy to see poor coaching like yhat leading to a loss.
I never fault a coach for being too aggressive. I hate the cowardly, conservative nature of NFL coaches so much that I’ll back a coach even if they make the wrong, but aggressive decision.
Not sure if that one was wrong though.
Saints got a gift today with that decision to go for it on 4th down. Glad to see they cashed in. I remember too many years where they’d still find a way to lose…
[QUOTE=Hamlet]
The upside (a first down at your own 30), in no way counter balanced the downside ( you lose the game), even if the odds were in your favor (anyone have the stats?). I’m more than happy to see poor coaching like yhat leading to a loss.
[/QUOTE]
It was in OT (you lose if you allow a score) and they would have been punting to Drew Brees.
Brees eighty yards away is a lot better than Brees on your 30 in sudden death.
It seems like a dumb high risk move to me. Gave the ball up in a position making it way too easy to score versus punting and trusting your D.
**Manning **is looking really good today so far. Another drive right down the field. This time maybe they’ll complete the job.
That’s your perogative, of course, but I don’t have a problem calling a stupid decison that costs your team the game the wrong thing to do, even if it was “aggressive”.
[Quote=Senor Beef]
Not sure if that one was wrong though.
[/QUOTE]
I am.
Tebow and Denver complete 2 passes and somehow still win. I’m figuring that hasn’t happened in like 50 years, so I check the pro-football-reference, and the last time it happened is…
Two years ago when Cleveland beat Buffalo 6-3. The funny thing is people probably paid good money for that game.
Before that in 2000, Cincy beat Denver 31-21 with 2 pass completions. Think Akili Smith.
And in 1982, New England beat Miami 3-0. Think snowplow.
Prior to that it shockingly happened quite frequently.
Results-based thinking.
Yes, but what part of the fairly high risk of give the ball to the opponents in OT at the 29 yard line is really smart?
FWIW, Shurmur went for the super conservative route - 2 minutes left on the clock, down at the Rams 5 or so, he called a fullback dive (with a tight end as a fullback!), set up the chip shot field goal, and then they botched it.
As far as Atlanta/NO goes, it really depends on the game flow to that point to determine if it was a reasonable move. If Atlanta is highly likely to get the inches, and New Orleans is very likely to score even if they’re 40 yards further back due to the punt, it can be a good move.
This is almost similar to the Belichick 4th and 2 situation against the Colts a few years ago that everyone exploded over even though it was at worst a break-even call. The big difference in that case is that Belichick just had to run out the clock, so completing the fourth down play ended the game, whereas for Atlanta it only lets them keep the ball on their own side of the field and lots more has to happen for them to score.
How do you figure? It would have been the wrong decision if they had made the first down instead.
The probability tree is like this
make it-80% don't -20%
/ \ / \
score-30% don’t 70% lose lose
Obviously I assumed values/pulled them out of my ass without thinking about it, but you get the idea (substitute your own values if you want). So, if Brees has a greater than 80%*30%=24% chance of scoring from his own 20, you should go for it. Also assuming that the “don’t score” result ends in a loss. You could keep going there.
Well, a big factor is that if Atlanta converts and fails to score, they probably end up punting it in a better situation than they were in if they were just to punt in the first place, making it a wash at worst for a signififcant fraction of the results. But I agree that if you actually plug in reasonable numbers the result is a lot closer than intuition suggests.
We discussed this in detail when the Pats/Colts thing came up, although the situations differed somewhat, it was similar in the sense that there were people saying that absolutely it wsa the worst coaching move ever etc etc but they couldn’t come up with reasonable numbers to plug into the situational formula to demonstrate that. The probabilty was staring them in the face, but they decided to ignore it and stick to their gut feelings.
Brees without the ball is better than both.