Jump to content

Patriots-Colts SNF


124
 Share

Recommended Posts

why?

What are the odds of Brady picking up 2 yards there? 50%? Probably better imo.

Hansens net punt avg is 33 yards, are those 33 yards more valuable then a better then 50% chance of winning outright? I doubt it.

For a guy so concerned with percentages I'd think you'd be adamant about playing the one that says your opponent is less likely to score from their own 30 rather than yours. Those punting averages are irrelevant. Dude had a 55 yard bomb at one point in the game and you have to hope he can do it again, especially since he's doing it in a dome.

2 minutes left, no time-outs in case they score, on the road, to Peyton Manning just outside the redzone, who you've already picked off twice since halftime, is worthy of being called many things. Logical is not one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love it when it's CTM vs. The World.

That was a classic genius decision by Belichick, in that, "It's such an incredibly stupid decision than if it succeeds I look like a genius."

Belichick knew that his defense couldn't stop Peyton. Belichick just pissed on his own defense, so he said, "WTF? let me take an incredible gamble because I'm Bill Belichick & I'm a genius."

Lol.. So, you acknowledge Manning would've scored either way, and somehow conclude that going for the kill with your own HOF QB and 2 yards to gain was a bad call?

That's a consistant position..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a guy so concerned with percentages I'd think you'd be adamant about playing the one that says your opponent is less likely to score from their own 30 rather than yours. Those punting averages are irrelevant. Dude had a 55 yard bomb at one point in the game and you have to hope he can do it again, especially since he's doing it in a dome.

WHy would season long punting averages be irrelevant?

2 minutes left, no time-outs in case they score, on the road, to Peyton Manning just outside the redzone, who you've already picked off twice since halftime, is worthy of being called many things. Logical is not one of them.

Dude.. you know as well as i do that if they were going to stop Manning it would've been in their own red zone with less field to defend.

Tell me how much better the odds are of keeping Manning from scoring a TD from his 40 as opposed to your 30? 10% better? 20%? Give me a number, cause I know for a fact it's less then the odds of Brady converting that 4th and 2 and that is the only relevant issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol.. So, you acknowledge Manning would've scored either way, and somehow conclude that going for the kill with your own HOF QB and 2 yards to gain was a bad call?

That's a consistant position..

Consistent yes, but again, it's not logical. Once you decide to treat a purely hypothetical situation as factually true, the need for discussion goes out the window and Belichick would have been justified going for it even on the 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol.. So, you acknowledge Manning would've scored either way, and somehow conclude that going for the kill with your own HOF QB and 2 yards to gain was a bad call?

That's a consistant position..

Nah, I don't acknowledge it. I was saying that Belichick thought that Peyton was going to score, otherwise he wouldn't have gambled.

The Pats generally convert on 4th down 50% (5/10 before this game).

It's a 50/50 chance of winning on that one play of 4th & 2. It's pretty much 50% guaranteed win vs. 50% guaranteed loss.

Punting, however, gives the Pats a higher percentage of victory because every down gives the Pats a chance to win because they have an opportunity to make a defensive play. The Colts still need to execute on the final drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHy would season long punting averages be irrelevant?

Because they're not reflective of the fact that he was punting farther than that in tonight's game.

I know for a fact it's less then the odds of Brady converting that 4th and 2 and that is the only relevant issue.

Meh, they picked off Peyton twice in the second half and in the end the call failed. So no, that's not a fact. Again, under your logic, Belichick would have been justified going for it from any position on the field. And that's absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, I don't acknowledge it. I was saying that Belichick thought that Peyton was going to score, otherwise he wouldn't have gambled.

The Pats generally convert on 4th down 50% (5/10 before this game).

It's a 50/50 chance of winning on that one play of 4th & 2. It's pretty much 50% guaranteed win vs. 50% guaranteed loss.

Punting, however, gives the Pats a higher percentage of victory because every down gives the Pats a chance to win because they have an opportunity to make a defensive play. The Colts still need to execute on the final drive.

not to mention that PM was off tonight

he threw some of the worst passes i have ever seen him throw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, I don't acknowledge it. I was saying that Belichick thought that Peyton was going to score, otherwise he wouldn't have gambled.

The Pats generally convert on 4th down 50% (5/10 before this game).

It's a 50/50 chance of winning on that one play of 4th & 2. It's pretty much 50% guaranteed win vs. 50% guaranteed loss.

Punting, however, gives the Pats a higher percentage of victory because every down gives the Pats a chance to win because they have an opportunity to make a defensive play. The Colts still need to execute on the final drive.

That doesn't make sense. You are saying Peyton starting from the 29 is 100% chance of success while Peyton starting from his own 35 is less then 50% chance of success. Getting from the 30 to the 30 is the easy part of the 2 minute drive remember, I guarentee you it doesn't change the odds that much, in that situation, against that qb. Maybe 10% better chance of the Pats stopping him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't make sense. You are saying Peyton starting from the 29 is 100% chance of success while Peyton starting from his own 35 is less then 50% chance of success. Getting from the 30 to the 30 is the easy part of the 2 minute drive remember, I guarentee you it doesn't change the odds that much, in that situation, against that qb. Maybe 10% better chance of the Pats stopping him.

79% of this post is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because they're not reflective of the fact that he was punting farther than that in tonight's game.

So, he was due to regress to his own mean? Maybe he wouodl've shanked one?

Meh, they picked off Peyton twice in the second half and in the end the call failed. So no, that's not a fact. Again, under your logic, Belichick would have been justified going for it from any position on the field. And that's absurd.

No. That's not what I'm saying at all. You used the 1 yard line (which is impossible to have a 4th and 2 from your own 1 but i digress) In this case, it's a lot murkier as the odds of the Colts scoring a TD from the 1 greatly exceeds the odds of Manning scoring from the 35.

My point is that the most difficult portion of the field for the offense to navigate was going to be from the 25 yard line in. That area of the field wasn't sacrificed in this decision. He simply took the odds of Brady converting a 4th and 2 versus as being greater then the difference of the odds of Mannign scorign from the 30 versus his own 35.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't make sense. You are saying Peyton starting from the 29 is 100% chance of success while Peyton starting from his own 35 is less then 50% chance of success. Getting from the 30 to the 30 is the easy part of the 2 minute drive remember, I guarentee you it doesn't change the odds that much, in that situation, against that qb. Maybe 10% better chance of the Pats stopping him.

Number of plays.

Peyton was throwing 11.6 yards per completion in this game with a 63 completion rate.

From the Patriots' 28 that is 3 completions. With his completion rate, that is within 5 plays.

From the Colts' 35, that is 7 completions. With his completion rate, that is within 11 plays.

Therefore, the Patriots defense would have potentially faced 6 additional plays if they punted than if they failed to convert 4th & 2.

That's 6 extra plays to make a defensive play, an INT, a fumble, a big sack. Heck, with those 6 additional plays there is a chance for an offensive penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NFL QUARTERBACKS SINCE THE YEAR 1999

Warner: 31,067 yards, 200 TD 125 INT, 63-47 record as a starter

Manning: 44,771 yards , 427 TD 144 int , 123-46 record as a starter

Brady: 29,185 yards, 216 TD, 92 INT, 93-27 record as a starter

Favre: 40,773 yards, 338 TD, 172 INT, 103-66 record as a starter

McNAbb: 31,005 yards, 206 TD 94 INT, 87-49-1 record as a starter

Brees: 28,813 yards, 187 TD, 108 INT, 64-51 record as a starter

since 1999

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Number of plays.

Peyton was throwing 11.6 yards per completion in this game with a 63 completion rate.

From the Patriots' 28 that is 3 completions. With his completion rate, that is within 5 plays.

From the Colts' 35, that is 7 completions. With his completion rate, that is within 11 plays.

Therefore, the Patriots defense would have potentially faced 6 additional plays if they punted than if they failed to convert 4th & 2.

That's 6 extra plays to make a defensive play, an INT, a fumble, a big sack. Heck, with those 6 additional plays there is a chance for an offensive penalty.

So a guy who gets picked off like 2% of the time for his career is more likely to through an INT in an extra 6 attempts then Brady picking up a 4th and 2. Dont' agree at all..

Have to admit, this whole strategy of making up hypothetical situations to justify the end results of bad decisions is brilliant. I'm going to start using it with chicks.

Results based analysis is rehtahded

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love it when it's CTM vs. The World.

That was a classic genius decision by Belichick, in that, "It's such an incredibly stupid decision than if it succeeds I look like a genius."

Belichick knew that his defense couldn't stop Peyton. Belichick just pissed on his own defense, so he said, "WTF? let me take an incredible gamble because I'm Bill Belichick & I'm a genius."

Hmmmm, what have I been saying all year about the Pats: Arrogance and attrition catch up to everyone.

This was a prime example. Bill Belichick's arrogance in his own standing as a football "genius" caused him to make a stupid decision because he had no trust in a defense that has been decimated by attrition.

I quote Joe Theisman: "A football coach is not a genius, a genius is a guy like Norman Einstein."

Good ol' Norm thinks Belichick is a bonehead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So a guy who gets picked off like 2% of the time for his career is more likely to through an INT in an extra 6 attempts then Brady picking up a 4th and 2. Dont' agree at all..

It's not just an INT. It's a fumble, dropped pass, offensive penalty, etc. The more snaps, the more opportunity for the defense to make a play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Here's what advanced nfl stats say about the call... It was the right call..

Belichick's 4th Down Decision vs the Colts

New England coach Bill Belichick is taking a lot of heat for his decision to attempt a 4th down conversion late in the game against the Colts. Indianapolis came back to win in dramatic fashion. Was the decision a good one?

With 2:00 left and the Colts with only one timeout, a successful conversion wins the game for all practical purposes. A 4th and 2 conversion would be successful 60% of the time. Historically, in a situation with 2:00 left and needing a TD to either win or tie, teams get the TD 53% of the time from that field position. The total WP for the 4th down conversion attempt would therefore be:

(0.60 * 1) + (0.40 * (1-0.53)) = 0.79 WP

A punt from the 28 typically nets 38 yards, starting the Colts at their own 34. Teams historically get the TD 30% of the time in that situation. So the punt gives the Pats about a 0.70 WP.

Statistically, the better decision would be to go for it, and by a good amount. However, these numbers are baselines for the league as a whole. You'd have to expect the Colts had a better than a 30% chance of scoring from their 34, and an accordingly higher chance to score from the Pats' 28. But any adjustment in their likelihood of scoring from either field position increases the advantage of going for it. You can play with the numbers any way you like, but it's pretty hard to come up with a realistic combination of numbers that make punting the better option. At best, you could make it a wash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if they decided to go for it on 4th and 2, why throw the ball there?

The playcall is def. questionable, seeing that Faulk was running all over the Colts.

That was a helluva FAIL by the Pats coaching staff. Belicheck and Brady think they are invincible. The arrogance. :rl:

Edited by DLJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if they decided to go for it on 4th and 2, why throw the ball there?

The playcall is def. questionable, seeing that Faulk was running all over the Colts.

That was a helluva FAIL by the Pats coaching staff. Belicheck and Brady think they are invincible. The arrogance. :rl:

Excellant point. If they knew they were going for it on 4th, why not run on third to get a litle closer? Also, why throw a 2-3 yard route and leave your margin for error so small..

Edited by CTM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellant point. If they knew they were going for it on 4th, why not run on third to get a litle closer? Also, why throw a 2-3 yard route and leave your margin for error so small..

Yep, excellent point by DLJ and you as well.

That's the one thing that can't be really accounted for in the percentages.

It's similary to game 2 last year when the Jets ran the ball 3 times at the goaline and was stuffed. People killed Mangini for taking the ball out of Favre's hand, but the play selection was the biggest culprit.

Back to the play itself, I understand the desire to pull the ball in Brady's hands, but on such a short pass to Faulk (as you noted)? Kleck laughs about Welker, but throwing it to him is a smarter play.

I'm reminded of the "Get Open" play in the 1997 AFC Championship. The Broncos had the ball and the lead very late in the game. Convert on 3rd down and short and the Broncos can run out the clock.

Elway had Terrell Davis, Shannon Sharpe, Easy Ed McCaffrey, and Agent Smith as an option. Who does he want to throw to? His safety blanket and most reliable receiver, Sharpe. Elway doesn't call a play. He simply tells Sharpe: "Get open."

Sharpe runs a couple of yards past the 1st down marker and turns around so it'll simply be a catch, tackle, 1st down. And that's exactly what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And why not throw to Wes Welker since he is the greatest receiver to ever play the game? :rl:

He was actually more open the faulk and definitely beyond the first down marker..

The other thing is that Bellichick should've been smarter about instructing hius defense to let Manning score if they were running free inside the 5. They let Addai score on that 13 yard run, and I believe Brady has 1:15 to get into FG range..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was actually more open the faulk and definitely beyond the first down marker..

The other thing is that Bellichick should've been smarter about instructing hius defense to let Manning score if they were running free inside the 5. They let Addai score on that 13 yard run, and I believe Brady has 1:15 to get into FG range..

So you're saying the start of BB's mistakes was to go for it on fourth and then he compounded it from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're saying the start of BB's mistakes was to go for it on fourth and then he compounded it from there.

Imo, the decision to go for that on 4th and short was a good one. The mistakes were:

1) The play calls (should've ran a bit longer of a route imo) Also, and as much as I like the idea of putting the ball in Brady's hands 2x with the game on the line, I'd think 2 running plays gets the job done there. (Much like the 2006 playoff game, Brady failed to ice a game in Indy)

2) Wasting of the timeouts that lead them to not be able to challange the Faulk play

3) Not instructing his defense to let them score should someone be running free within the 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...