Bill Simmons Article on 4th and 2

[MoLewisrocks]

I would have to agree with the Head Ref on NFLN, If it were challenged not enough to over turn, If the call was a first down and challenged again not enough to over turn. Just my 2 cents, like you guys give a flying frog what I think but, you punt. Regardless what the Colts had done prior, you force them to go 60+ yards vs. 28 yards.

That's not what he said. He said in real time he couldn't tell where the bobble ended. Said forward progress would have been to that point if the player established his feet down. Faulk's feet were down before he was driven back. Stradling the 30. And the slow motion front angle available in a booth review showed he barely bobbled that ball and had it cradled to his chest when he landed on his feet before he was driven back.

As for the punt, I guess you haven't met our Punter. His net is <35 and his gross is <40. Like Brady said on Monday, any return or less than his best kick ever and that ball is at or beyond midfield and all it takes from there is a 20 yard completion to put the ball inside the 30 with a minute fifty to go and a time out remaining. You don't think Manning routinely makes that play in 2 minute drills with the game on the line, eh?

 

[fillylabinga]

It is NOT like a 2 pt conversion. At all. In a 2 pt conversion the defense only has 12 yards of field to defend. In this situation the defense had 70+ yards of field to defend. The Pats had converted earlier this season on 4th and short by going deep to Moss.

Anyway, for those of you who haven't read the article let me sum it up like this:

"I'm Bill Simmons. I think statistics are stupid. And I think people who care about statistics and study them are even more stupid.

"So I'm going to ignore all the statisticians who analyzed this and came basically the same conclusion--that the decision to go for it was either a good one or it was too close to call.

"In spite of this, I'm now going to make up my own non-sensical statistics (even though I just told you statistics were stupid) to prove my point. I might even work in some new theories about how defenses feel disrespected when offenses try to get first downs against them.

"To top it all off I am also going to work in unrelated anecdotes about coffee and Mariano Rivera in the off chance that you were able to sit though enough of this drivel to realize that my argument makes no sense.

"Now I'm going to bash the Pats at random, tell you how BB is washed up, and the Pats have no chance of even making the playoffs. I will attribute this to some armchair psychology about how BB doesn't care anymore in spite of every indication that he does.

"Of course, this is all going to make me feel really stupid when the Pats are lifting the Lombardi trophy this winter, but when that happens I'll just write another long article about how everything I said this season was a 'reverse-jinx'.

"Now...where did I put my Mai-Tai??"

 

[letekro]

It is NOT like a 2 pt conversion. At all. In a 2 pt conversion the defense only has 12 yards of field to defend. In this situation the defense had 70+ yards of field to defend. The Pats had converted earlier this season on 4th and short by going deep to Moss.

Anyway, for those of you who haven't read the article let me sum it up like this:

"I'm Bill Simmons. I think statistics are stupid. And I think people who care about statistics and study them are even more stupid.

"So I'm going to ignore all the statisticians who analyzed this and came basically the same conclusion--that the decision to go for it was either a good one or it was too close to call.

"In spite of this, I'm now going to make up my own non-sensical statistics (even though I just told you statistics were stupid) to prove my point. I might even work in some new theories about how defenses feel disrespected when offenses try to get first downs against them.

"To top it all off I am also going to work in unrelated anecdotes about coffee and Mariano Rivera in the off chance that you were able to sit though enough of this drivel to realize that my argument makes no sense.

"Now I'm going to bash the Pats at random, tell you how BB is washed up, and the Pats have no chance of even making the playoffs. I will attribute this to some armchair psychology about how BB doesn't care anymore in spite of every indication that he does.

"Of course, this is all going to make me feel really stupid when the Pats are lifting the Lombardi trophy this winter, but when that happens I'll just write another long article about how everything I said this season was a 'reverse-jinx'.

"Now...where did I put my Mai-Tai??"

Well done, sir. Sounds like you can ghostwrite for him anytime.

 

[Twentytothree]

Anyway, for those of you who haven't read the article let me sum it up like this:

"I'm Bill Simmons. I think statistics are stupid. And I think people who care about statistics and study them are even more stupid.

"So I'm going to ignore all the statisticians who analyzed this and came basically the same conclusion--that the decision to go for it was either a good one or it was too close to call.

"In spite of this, I'm now going to make up my own non-sensical statistics (even though I just told you statistics were stupid) to prove my point. I might even work in some new theories about how defenses feel disrespected when offenses try to get first downs against them....."

Thank you! Perfect!

 

[emoney_33]

His point was that the Pats played it like a 2pt conversion (as did the Colts, BTW) and I agree. They (stupidly) abandoned any pretense of a run with no RB next to Brady, they apparently had no intention of stretching the field as all options were a quick hitter a few yards downfield to whoever appeared to have the best matchup (Brady admitted this afterward), the Colts played them this way (right up on the receivers, unafraid of a deep ball) and all this for 2 yards in one play. That's very much like a 2pt conversion.

Regards,
Chris

And yet they succeeded if not for a terrible spot by an official that couldn't see the ball...

 

[BennyBledsoe]

What I'm wondering....

What happened to the tight end position or the middle of the field?

You know, where the quarterback has a line of sight, the ball doesn't have to travel as far and so on.

Did a sudden plague take out Ben Watson?

Isn't a fourth and two pass pretty much a tight end's job?

 

[BradyFTW!]

If Bill Simmons agrees with you re: football, then you're probably wrong. The guy knows basketball, but knows exactly **** about football.

 

[vyrago]

Please, somebody, anybody, make this stop.

 

[mosslost]

Please, somebody, anybody, make this stop.

AlllllllaaaakaZAM!

You're welcome!

 

[upstater1]

I think it actually (surprisingly since I've given up on Simmons since he's become LA'fied) sums up how I feel about this pretty well, not to mention every big Pats loss since 2004. It goes into how this was essentially a 2-pt conversion, just how unlikely Manning would have scored had we punted, and how even the numbers don't really justify the call.

Bill Simmons breaks down Belichick's 4th and 2 and makes his week 11 NFL picks - ESPN



This isn't related to the article, since I think the Patriots should have punted, but after a few days now I can actually live with going for it IF Belichick were consistent and had run on 3rd down, called a 4th down play with Brady under center, and if that failed just let his D lay down so Brady could try to get a FG with 1:20 left. The blown timeouts will never be forgiven. Since none of these things actually happened, I can't agree with how everything went down.

When you don't win the Super Bowl, and when you're a good team that goes to the playoffs, EACH season ends with a big loss.

The only year BB wasn't associated with a big loss was last year.

 

[supafly]

If Bill Simmons agrees with you re: football, then you're probably wrong. The guy knows basketball, but knows exactly **** about football.

I'll certainly agree with you here, FTW. I regularly listen to Simmons' weekly column on Vegas trends/betting info regarding football, and he really is lost sometimes. If I didn't try and pump my brain full of info every week regarding this subject (from anyone ) I wouldn't listen to him at all.

 

[upstater1]

If Bill Simmons agrees with you re: football, then you're probably wrong. The guy knows basketball, but knows exactly **** about football.

And this is precisely why he made that harebrained Tim Thomas analogy.

 

[maverick4]

Manning and the Colts on the past two TD drives before their game winning touchdown went for 158 yards in 3:53. The Patriots front line was completely gassed and they were no longer getting to Manning on those plays.

How was the defense gassed? It barely played in the 2nd half, got a bunch of 3-and-outs in the 3rd quarter, was barely on the field in the 4th, and the secondary was rested. Who cares about the Patriots front line, we lost our pass rush in the 1st quarter due to injury, didn't have much pressure all game, and yet held them to 14 through the mid-4th quarter.

 

[HarkDawg]

I was angry at the Indy comeback but Bill made the right call.



Look at percentages..... and Bill is still right. We got the 1st on a $h1t mark that gave INDY the ball....... biased home team football at its best.

 

[HarkDawg]

why are you all talking about this?



its not like Indy will win the Super Bowl......

 

[JMarr]

Jesus H! If nothing else, the Belichick defenders around here at least are consistent in doggedly defending the man. I thought that was a great article, despite the random analogies and long-windedness. I agreed with the call at the time and still do. I think Belichick is one of the greatest, if not THE greatest coach in history. I disagree with Simmons' conclusion, but he raises some great points, especially about risk-taking as it relates to job security, and about the possiblility that BB might, just might, not be the same coach as he was in 1999 or in 2001 or in 2004, or 3 weeks ago for that matter. This doesn't mean he's lost it--hell, he may even be at his best right now. But people seem to want to attack anyone who attacks Belichick, with no exceptions. Why?

 

[HarkDawg]

QB averages cannot account for elite QB's


averages do not count if you are the best.....



eg. Brady/Peyton/Brees

 

[maverick4]

QB averages cannot account for elite QB's
averages do not count if you are the best.....
eg. Brady/Peyton/Brees

Even with the best QB's, the chance isn't as high as people think that you can just march down the field, 70 yards, 2 minute, 1 timeout, needing a touchdown (not a field goal).

If Manning had done that after we punted, it would have been epic (epic, because it happens so rarely, even for the great ones). Look at Manning's comebacks, even for him it is very difficult to score a required TD with such little time.

Look at how often Brady has failed the past 4 years to get a key score when we needed it.

 

[supafly]

why are you all talking about this?



its not like Indy will win the Super Bowl......

I agree that we should do our best to let this go. It becomes harder due to all of the articles and media attn that comes throughout the week, that stirs the pot up again. We can all agree that the only way to put this behind us is to beat the NYJ on Sunday of course.

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment on Indy's chances, however.

They certainly have just as good as a shot as we do, probably much better since they will most likely have HFA throughout, and 2 weeks to get through their lowest ranked opponent in the first playoff game. This gives them a 50/50 chance of going to the AFC Championship, which they very well may host.

With that offense, I would think they are a serious contender, and right now, it's a fact that we are behind them in the race. They're a hard draw, and no matter how you come at them, they have a viable answer. Ever since MIA held the ball for 42 minutes in week #2, I have been very leery of the Indy Colts. They have proved they don't need hardly any time to score, and can come back from almost 3 TD's down in the 4th quarter. They have an incredible offense, and a great pass rush in Freeny and Mathis. That may mask their rushing and secondary problems--as it did when they won in SB 41.

 

[supafly]

Jesus H! If nothing else, the Belichick defenders around here at least are consistent in doggedly defending the man. I thought that was a great article, despite the random analogies and long-windedness. I agreed with the call at the time and still do. I think Belichick is one of the greatest, if not THE greatest coach in history. I disagree with Simmons' conclusion, but he raises some great points, especially about risk-taking as it relates to job security, and about the possiblility that BB might, just might, not be the same coach as he was in 1999 or in 2001 or in 2004, or 3 weeks ago for that matter. This doesn't mean he's lost it--hell, he may even be at his best right now. But people seem to want to attack anyone who attacks Belichick, with no exceptions. Why?

I think after all the hatred and unfairness that came with Cameragate, coupled with all of the negativity throughout the years from the media, it is just natural for many of us to stick up for someone whom we have such deep respect and admiration for. It is just a natural reaction most likely.

But I can see where you're coming from.