4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here [merged 10x]

[ivanvamp]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

For the record, pretty much every football statistician is saying it was the right call to go for it.


Teams convert 4th and 2 above 65% of the time. Converting is a win.


Pro-football-reference.com blog Belichick, Peyton Manning, and 4th down decisions
Pro-football-reference.com blog Checkdowns: Belichick Was Right
Advanced NFL Stats: Belichick's 4th Down Decision vs the Colts

Very interesting stuff. There are two probabilities in play. First, the probability of converting the 4th down. Second, the probability of the Colts, if they get the ball, scoring a TD. I don't know how you can accurately determine the odds of the second probabilities, but a 65% conversion rate gives you pretty good odds to win the game right there.

And the fact is.....Faulk *did* get the first down. Refs blew the call. So it actually worked.

 

[Synovia]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

You are correct, but you can't convince these guys of anything. Stats is stats.

Fine.


The problem is, without the stats its just "you're wrong. No, you're wrong."


Every discussion of statistics and probability involves some uncertainty. That doesn't mean we should throw our hands up in the air and give up trying to understand the situation.

 

[Synovia]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

I don't know how you can accurately determine the odds of the second probabilities, but a 65% conversion rate gives you pretty good odds to win the game right there.

Well, the average team scores( A TD) about 35% of the time from their own 30, and 65% of the time from the opposite 30. The colts offense is significantly better than average, which raises both numbers.

Also, considering that the colts had scored on two long TD drives (each of less than 2 minutes) in the quarter alone, and would now being playing 4 down football, its safe to say the rates are even higher.

I'd say 70 and 90 or so are probably pretty accurate. The defense was winded. The colts are fantastic. They're absolutely the last sort of offense that you want to give the ball back to in a 1 score game.

 

[eagle eye]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

You are correct, but you can't convince these guys of anything. Stats is stats.

Mathematically the call is very tight and favours kicking it away if anything.

If you go on league averages the call is in your favour, but you cannot go on league averages when you are playing an elite team. You have to look at averages for the Colts only.

 

[eagle eye]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

Well, the average team scores( A TD) about 35% of the time from their own 30, and 65% of the time from the opposite 30. The colts offense is significantly better than average, which raises both numbers.

Also, considering that the colts had scored on two long TD drives (each of less than 2 minutes) in the quarter alone, and would now being playing 4 down football, its safe to say the rates are even higher.

You are forgetting the major assistance they got on one of those drives with a mistaken pass interference call which put them in our red zone.

Don't forget that the Colts were 100% successful from inside our 30 yard line on the night which really skews the figures and makes it a bad decision to go for it.

 

[man2reg87]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

I don't think anybody had a better/closer view of the missed 4th down conversion than the Ref 5 feet away. TV angels are not as good as the Ref 5 feet away. Woulda, coulda, shoulda......there is no doubt he bobbled the ball, regardless were his feet were at that time. once the ball is secured both feet must be down (with control of the ball) at that point the ball is placed. Sorry, it was short of the first down marker. The PI...C'mon, he clearly hit him in the back with the ball in the air, without that the catch is made, so yes PI.

 

[Synovia]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

If you go on league averages the call is in your favour, but you cannot go on league averages when you are playing an elite team. You have to look at averages for the Colts only.

The problem is, the better the other team's offense is, the more productive going for it is. You go for it because the colts are so likely to score if they get the ball back.

 

[Synovia]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

once the ball is secured both feet must be down (with control of the ball)

Um, no. Thats not the rule.

at that point the ball is placed. Sorry, it was short of the first down marker. The PI...C'mon, he clearly hit him in the back with the ball in the air, without that the catch is made, so yes PI.

I'm curious as to how Butler hit Garcon in the back, when he was in front of Garcon.

 

[Deus Irae]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

I don't think anybody had a better/closer view of the missed 4th down conversion than the Ref 5 feet away. TV angels are not as good as the Ref 5 feet away. Woulda, coulda, shoulda......there is no doubt he bobbled the ball, regardless were his feet were at that time. once the ball is secured both feet must be down (with control of the ball) at that point the ball is placed. Sorry, it was short of the first down marker. The PI...C'mon, he clearly hit him in the back with the ball in the air, without that the catch is made, so yes PI.

The catch was a first down. The replays show that pretty conclusively to anyone with even a hint of impartiality and the ability to look at moving pictures.

 

[Synovia]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

Don't forget that the Colts were 100% successful from inside our 30 yard line on the night which really skews the figures and makes it a bad decision to go for it.

Okay, then we'll change the percentage for them scoring from inside the 30 to 100%.

That would obviously change the chance of them scoring from the opposite 30, correct? As, if they get those 40 yards to get to our 30, they're going to score.


The only way that kicking it becomes a favorite is if the Colts offense is really BAD. Their offense being good is in favor of going for it.

 

[VJCPatriot]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

You want the STATS? I'll give you the COLD HARD STATS From that game. Taken from the official gamebook that lists all the offensive drive charts.

http://library.kraftsportsgroup.com/20091115_gamebook.pdf

Indy Colts

Ind 23 Punt
Ind 10 TD
Ind 20 Punt
Ind 20 punt
Ind 24 punt
Ind 20 TD
Ind 25 Punt
Ind 24 punt
Ind 14 Int
Ind 21 TD
Ind 18 Int
Ind 21 TD
NE 29 TD

Indy chance of scoring when starting drive on their side of the field -- 33%
Indy chance of interception when starting drive on their side of the field --16.7%
Indy chance of scoring when starting drive within NE 30 -- 100%

The '65%' conversion number being spouted is taken out of context. That is a generalized number from a large sample of teams. It does not take into account the specific matchup of Pats vs Colts, the momentum swing in the game, the crowd factor, the intensity of a make or break play, and the particular play call. I am using stats that are ONLY from this game and therefore pertain specifically to this game. Cold hard numbers. I'm sure the Defenders club will try to spin this positively as well. Sometimes you just gotta say, yeah BB is a genius 99% of the time, but he's human. Is that so hard to admit?

I'll take a 33% chance of the Colts scoring from a long field over a 40% chance of failure to convert and a resulting 100% chance of them scoring from a short field any time. Sometimes playing conservatively is better. Particularly when you have the lead and the other team has only scored TDs 33% of the time on a long field and also coughed up interceptions 16.7% of the time. Make em use those timeouts. Make them beat you over multiple consecutive plays on a long drive.

 

[man2reg87]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

Um, no. Thats not the rule.

so you don't have to have control of the ball? OK, what is the rule?


I'm curious as to how Butler hit Garcon in the back, when he was in front of
Garcon.

I was talking about the Austin Colley PI. And he ws hit in the back.

 

[man2reg87]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

The catch was a first down. The replays show that pretty conclusively to anyone with even a hint of impartiality and the ability to look at moving pictures.

__________________
Can't say conclusively with the angle of the TV cameras, you can maybe say, it APPEARS to be a first down. Or maybe you got a better TV feed than I did and had the better angle

 

[MoLewisrocks]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

You're pulling those stats out of your behind. You don't know that the chance of converting is 60%. Particularly not on the road, with that huge momentum swing going against the Pats and the crowd rocking that field so loud the offense couldn't even hear itself think. I'll give you another stat. What if the conversion rate was actually 33% considering the additional factors and the play call? Empty backfield mean the Colts KNEW the Pats had to pass and played it accordingly. With a RB in you at least give the chance of the run or the draw play.

Again I can make up stats too. The most reasonable thing to do is play the field position game and MAKE THE ADJUSTMENTS so your defense CAN hold up for 70+ yards.

He's not pulling those stats out of his behind. They have been discussed here extensively and apparently there is a piece in the NYT today that Felger was just citing on his show.

Something people here keep pulling out of their collective asses is the certainty that Manning and the Colts would have had to cover 70+ yards to score after a punt from Chris Hanson...LOL Hanson punts on average gross less than 40 yards and net less than 35. From the inside our 20 that punt would have likely ended up around the Colt 45....

 

[Kontradiction]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

For the record, pretty much every football statistician is saying it was the right call to go for it.


Teams convert 4th and 2 above 65% of the time. Converting is a win.


Pro-football-reference.com blog Belichick, Peyton Manning, and 4th down decisions
Pro-football-reference.com blog Checkdowns: Belichick Was Right
Advanced NFL Stats: Belichick's 4th Down Decision vs the Colts

What's the percentage of the teams that try to convert it on their own 30 yard line despite being up six points?

 

[Deus Irae]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

He's not pulling those stats out of his behind. They have been discussed here extensively and apparently there is a piece in the NYT today that Felger was just citing on his show.

Something people here keep pulling out of their collective asses is the certainty that Manning and the Colts would have had to cover 70+ yards to score after a punt from Chris Hanson...LOL Hanson punts on average gross less than 40 yards and net less than 35. From the inside our 20 that punt would have likely ended up around the Colt 45....

Would this be anything like someone who's been pimping the stats pulling

Colts would have been back on our 30 in two plays and you know it.

out of his ass?

 

[Kontradiction]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

alright ,go on thinking whatever you want to think, while ignoring

1) people smarter than you
2) basic math
3) whatever subjective comments people want to make that your argument happens to cling on

gl with that

You keep talking about basic math. Let me put this in perspective for you:

If someone approaches you and tells you to run across a live shooting range and then tells you that there is about a 60% chance that you will live through it, do you do it? And you don't have to answer that as it was a rhetorical question.

By the way, feel comfort in knowing that guys like Merrill Hodge agree with your stance while guys like Tedy Bruschi and Rodney Harrison do not. That should give you a little insight into your stance that BB was absolutely correct in doing what he did.

 

[VJCPatriot]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

What's the percentage of the teams that try to convert it on their own 30 yard line despite being up six points?

Bingo! That call looks a lot different if the Pats are going for it on the Colts 40 yard line and dont want to risk missing the kick. But from your own 30 yard line? That's just not tactically sound. Too much risk to it.

I summed up the percentages from the game nicely in a previous post. In that game the Colts chances of scoring when starting from their own side of the field was 33%. From the Pats 30 was 100%.

 

[eagle eye]

re: 4th and 2 on the their own 30 - Discuss it here (Merged 9X)

He's not pulling those stats out of his behind. They have been discussed here extensively and apparently there is a piece in the NYT today that Felger was just citing on his show.

Something people here keep pulling out of their collective asses is the certainty that Manning and the Colts would have had to cover 70+ yards to score after a punt from Chris Hanson...LOL Hanson punts on average gross less than 40 yards and net less than 35. From the inside our 20 that punt would have likely ended up around the Colt 45....

Hanson had a net 53 yards on his punts from deep in our own half last night.

 

[mayoclinic]

The 4th and 2 Spot

Mods, I know we have a long thread on the 4th and 2 play. If you feel this should be merged with that, feel free. But my intent is not to discuss the events leading up to 4th and 2, or BB's decision to go for it, or the particular play called. This post is limited to the actual spot of the ball.

Having reviewed the play several times from different angles, my thoughts are as follows:

1. I think the video evidence is incontrovertible:

- Faulk made initial contact with the ball with his body at or over the 30 yard line. The ball was close to his right side, closer to the 31 yard line than the 30.
- Faulk initially bobbled the ball, but then maintained clear control and touched both feet down on the 30 yard line, with the nose of the ball well over the 30 yard line. I believe that the ball should clear have been spotted just over the 30 yard line, which would have been a first down.
- Faulk was then pushed back to the 29 yard line.

2. This is the second game to be decided in 2 weeks (the other being the Philly-Dallas game in week 9) based on the spot of a ball. That's just not good. Andy Reid twice challenged spots in the Philly game, and twice lost, despite clear video evidence. Mike Pereira even admitted this week that the officials blew the replay and should have re-spotted the ball. It's just not right for these kind of games to be decided on poor spots.

3. We have been the beneficiaries of a generous spot at least once this season (in the Baltimore game, when we tried a fake field goal which was nullified by penalty but the officials gave us a first down on the play with a generous spot, allowing us to kick a field goal after the penalty instead of turning the ball over on downs). So I'm not just whining about the call. But I think some rules changes should be made given the games that have been decided on arbitrary spots.

Changes that I would suggest would include the following:

1. When 2 officials disagree about the spot (as the two side judges did in this case) I don't think the one with the poorer view should be allowed to overrule the other. The side judge with a good view of the ball was about to spot it as a first down, and was overruled by the side judge whose view of the ball was blocked by Faulk's body. That's not right. Those kind of disagreements should trigger a mandatory review with the head umpire determining the spot of the ball.

2. Right now reviews are determined by the officials inside the 2 minute warning, and by challenge outside of it. I believe that the officials should have the discretion to review ball spots outside of the two minute warning. It's very hard sometimes to determine exactly where the player was down and where the ball was at that time without looking at film. Why not try to get it right, regardless of who benefits?

3. Right now there is a strong bias on review in favor of the call on the field unless the video evidence is "incontrovertible". I think that's fine for issues like whether the ball was a fumble or whether the receiver got his feet in bounds. But ball spots are often practically arbitrary. I think the officiating crew should simply review these spots and determine where the ball should be without bias to where the field official spotted it.