He should've took the points on the first 4th down. We had 2 possessions after that series plus 3 TO. Get lead down to 5, score a TD later and go for 2. Dumbfounded he passed up on 6 points with plenty of time and 3 To's...
If he takes the FG, then never gets close enough to score again, he'd be labeled an idiot.
If he goes for it, then scores later, he'd be labeled an idiot.
In both scenarios, there's no 100% solution. But there's definitely times both work and both fail. If you run both 100 times, you will succeed sometimes, you will fail sometimes. I don't know which scenario is "optimal" but neither is guaranteed success.
Those who wanted the points have to assume they can drive the field for a TD later, something we had only done once at that point, and only largely aided by a silly turnover by the Broncos at their own 22. And quite frankly, we barely got that TD, which is what BB was afraid of.
Jules had a heck of a return to get us to midfield. If we started at our own 34, we probably don't score. And even with the short field, we gained 0 yards in 3 plays, and needed a miracle play from Brady to Gronk to even keep the drive alive. Then with a fresh set of downs, we had 2 incompletes sandwiched around a 6-yard gain, and again a prayer by Brady.
Yes, we got the TD, but it took 5 incompletions, a 6-yard gain, and two miracle plays for 2 4th-down conversions. If we had kicked the FG and didn't get one of those miracle plays, everyone kills BB for being arrogant for assuming they'd be able to score again.
We evaluate based on outcome, but process matters quite a bit too in uncertain outcomes. So ask yourself, if we got the first down and then scored the TD, would you still have disagreed with the call? If so, I understand that and there are still people who would still take the points, even if it meant they lose. There are valid reasons for both. But if you're looking at just outcome, you're not really upset with the decision at all then, just that we lost.