I'm just not making my point.
I think it's a poor decision to throw into the end zone even with a good percentage chance of making the play.
As for the comment a bit above about defenses t-ing off on you when you play for first downs and not downfield, I'm not sure what this has to do with the highly specialized situation I'm talking about.
All I'm saying is that the benefits of going for the first down, if it's available, are far greater than going for the TD. If it's 3d and 8, or your opponent is out of timeouts or something, it's a different calculus.
The possible benefits of going for a TD there: One chance at making seven points.
The downsides: You have to try the field goal (with attendant risk of missing or block) and you give your opponent the ball back with plenty of time to score.
The possible benefits of going for the first down: 3 more chances to score a TD if you convert, plus you wind down the clock more or make your opponent use time outs that hurt their drives. Or more chances to draw a penalty and get even more chances to score a TD.
The downsides: None. It's easier to convert a 3d and 4 than make an 18 yard touchdown on a short field. If you don't make it, you kick the same field goal. The major downsides really are if you MAKE the first down, you have added plays to make a turnover that takes 3 points off the board. But at least then you've taken time off the clock. There is also a chance of lengthening the field goal by taking, for example, a sack or holding penalty.
Even if you think the TD pass had a higher percentage chance of working than picking up 4 yards, I still think the higher percentage play for the overall goal is to go for the first down.
I posted this thread during the game merely to express this observation. Isn't that what message boards are for? It wasn't an overly pessimistic thread. It wasn't critical of players trying to get records. It was just trying to spin out the statistics of football decisionmaking during the game.