Originally Posted by RedsBaron
It was funny during introductions when he was saying his name and alma mater it didn't sound like Marshall. Sounded like he said, "Random University" or "Randy University"
Peyton Manning
Tom Brady
It was funny during introductions when he was saying his name and alma mater it didn't sound like Marshall. Sounded like he said, "Random University" or "Randy University"
Last edited by Chip R; 11-16-2009 at 11:45 AM.
He always says "Rand University" because he grew up in Rand, West Virginia. There is some animosity between him and Marshall due to some behind the scenes disrespect shown to him, so he has been saying Rand University for the past two years. Hopefully our new AD and soon to come new head coach can turn that around. It is painful to hear our most famous football alum acting like we don't exist! I won't go into details, but the university turned down a huge sum of money from him because of one of the conditions attached...now he is bitter.
Oh, I see. Thanks for the info. That's too bad.
Well the odds actually suggest that the BB made the right call, that it gave them the best chance to win. I agree, it does seem counter intuitive, and I disagreed at first, but it's hard to completely disregard the percentages.
in the Tell Your Statistics to Shut Up! Department...
The numbers suggest one should go for it. Because the Colts needed a TD, 30-40 yards isn't going to make as much of a difference in stopping them versus the near certainty that comes with getting the 2 yards.
What I don't understand is how do you not have Randy Moss run a yard past the stick and turn around. If I want the ball in my best players hands, I don't care if Moss if he's triple covered.
Not being able to get the 2 yards speaks more to the lack of a running game(they had a shotgun and 5 WRs formation.)
Begging the question of "near certainty that comes with getting the 2 yards." Who says? 2 yards in that situation is not a "near certainty." Inches might have been a reasonable call, but not two yards.
The flip side of the numbers say that the longer the Colts had to go likely means more plays, and the numbers suggest that the more plays needed to cover yardage will increase the probability of not scoring. This isn't just going against the grain, it is poor strategy and was a knee-jerk in game decision that BB will likely never do again. Just a stupid football decision. I don't buy the logic that "well, they couldn't stop them anyway." That is actually the greatest probability of occurring considering the available decisions to choose from there.
I'll let advanced NFL stats.com speak for me. The chances of them getting the 2 yards plus the chance they could stop the Colts from scoring from 30 yards were greater than the chances of stopping the Colts from 65 yards.
That's before you factor in Peyton Manning, night game, tired Patriots defense.
http://www.advancednflstats.com/2009...-vs-colts.html
Yea, I'm not real sure that 60/40 as the first decision rule makes it a slam dunk for ya there, esp. considering the field position. Also, nice assumption that the change of possesson would be on the 35 yd. line. A good punt, a block in the back and suddenly you're starting inside your own 20. Plug that into your formula. That doesn't even get into the numbers being a compilation of all NFL games, so the usefulness of such information without tailoring to make game decisions? Nice try though. It was a stupid move.
Last edited by traderumor; 11-16-2009 at 01:50 PM.
I'm not saying it's a slam dunk, but if you want team specific stats, the Patriots had converted 78% of their 4th downs to that point this season. Since Brady's rookie year they've converted 63% of all 4th and 2 or shorter.
The question is, how much better are the odds of winning if you back the Colts up 35 yards versus the odds of making the 4th down. Considering Peyton Manning's on the other sideline, I wouldn't feel comfortable if he had to go 99 yards. Considering Tom Brady's got the ball in his hands, I want him figuring out a way to get 2 yards.
How about numbers on 4th and 2 on your own 28 with the game on the line? Now 0%Really, all this does is show the folly of using statistics in this manner.
Not really, you use statistics to tell which choice has the highest probability of success.
Think of it this way, if Dusty Baker brings Francisco Cordero in with a 1 run lead and Cordero gives up a walk and a homer, did Baker blow the decision? No he went with the high % move.
I think in any case, there was a good chance the Colts were going to win. The only way the Patriots could control their destiny so to speak was if they got the 1st down. Whether they punted or gave it up at their own 28, they were putting the ball in the hands of probably the best late game quarterback in his own building and defending him with a bunch of tired guys.
TMBS I would have punted, but I can certainly see his rationale for going for it.
So, BB admitted that he used probability tables to make this decision, since that is what you're using to justify the decision? Do you really think it had anything to do with a tired defense? Do you think it was just as likely that he arrogantly said "watch the praise they will heap on me after this gutsy call. I will thumb my nose at all those second-guessers, each and every one of them that questions the great BB"?
No. I mean I wasn't in his head obviously but Belichick has pretty much never cared what people thought of him. I'm sure he doesn't mind being called a genius, but he never seemed to make moves so people would call him smart.(ala Tony Larussa)
However, I do think sometimes he gets to be too smart for his own good. Not because he wants to make a move that everyone will praise, but simply because he thinks he's smarter than everyone else.
Not sure if that was the case here but I can see the argument.
BB is about as arrogant as they come, but I don't think that had anything to do with the call.
I like the call, not saying I would do the same thing, but I liked it. You are doing your best to keep the ball out of Payton's hands. Even when they didn't get the 1st they still could have stopped them.
Also I think BB thinks Manning is going to engineer a scoring drive no matter what. Wouldn't you rather have a chance to get the ball back (only having 20+ yards to go) than getting the ball back with little time on the clock (going 70 yards to score)? I heard someone say that 31 other coaches in the league punt that ball away, the Jim Tressel in me says punt the ball away. But the best way to win the game is to keep the ball out of Manning's hands.
FWIW, BB said what he always says when asked about going for it on 4th down from their own side of the field, that he believed in the play, thought they'd get it, and converting would have given them their best chance to win the game.
Posnanski's take: http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/2009.../going-for-it/
Personally, I have a hard time faulting Bill Belichick for believing that Tom Brady and Kevin Faulk are going to get him 2 yards when he needs them the most.
"Reality tells us there are no guarantees. Except that some day Jon Lester will be on that list of 100-game winners." - Peter Gammons
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote