Thread: Belichick 4th Down Call

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"VikingMike" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

"tastywaves" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

[quote author=tastywaves link=topic=54199.msg1017658#msg1017658 date=1258396345]
[quote author=kevoncox link=topic=54199.msg1017649#msg1017649 date=1258395786]
It was the right call. You have an offense that is rounding into top 3 form. You take the game into your own hands and gain 2 yards to seal the victory. You don't give Manning 2 mins to drive the field. He does that in his sleep. I hate the Pats but I think people like to see Beliechick fail. The guy made the right call. He punts and the colts win, everyone is saying " How could he not go for it on 4th and 2". Live like a Lion or lose like a lamb.

Apparently it wasn't the right call.
And I hardly doubt there would be a slew of people saying "How could he not go for it on 4th and 2", when he's probably the only coach in the league in that situation who would even dream of going for it.

I appreciate that you like to see an aggressively called game, but that was more reckless than aggressive.

I think you really have to look at what his defense did the previous series to completely understand the call.
Sure the INT was a nice way to end the second one in that quarter but the other two were absolutely train wrecks.

I would have opted for the Brady/Welker attempt as well.

http://www.purplepride.org/forums/in...4d16cb1a36df4c

There's no guarantee the Patriots win no matter what the call, but assuming Manning wins the game if you give the ball is not giving your own ball club much credit.
Yes Manning just ate them up, doesn't mean he will again, he very well could have made another slip up ending the game.
I say make them earn it and don't just give them the game.

I agree with you to a point.
In hindsight he might rethink it.
Again, its Peyton, basically has been handing your defense its butt for whole quarter. You have Tom Terrific and Wes "the greatest slot reciever" Welker.

Again, I go for it.

In the end, you are still gonna win your division.
A risked loss here really doesn't hurt anything, other than of course, the message you sent to your D.
My guess they were so gassed they probably thanked him later.

I love the call, and I also love the outcome. But to me, it looked like Faulk had the first down with his forward progress
[/quote]

He didn't.
The reason is, he bobbled the ball.
At first I thought it was an awful spot by the refs, but when I saw the replay, Faulk bobbled the ball, and didn't catch it until he was back behind the first down line.
The spot was accurate IMO.
Had Faulk not bobbled the ball, Bellicheck would be looking like a genieus now instead of an idiot.
[/quote]


That explains it, thanks...I didn't see him bobble it. I thought he had possession cleanly.

"Overlord" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ick/index.html

Why Belichick made right decision

Posted: Monday November 16, 2009 12:21PM; Updated: Monday November 16, 2009 12:38PM
Joe Posnanski

And there you go -- 78.8 percent chance of winning vs. a 70 percent chance if you punt.

=Z=

Sweet.
That's pretty much exactly what I'm saying, with some better numbers and explanation and a few small differences.

And that's why I don't buy the 'sending a bad message to your defense,' or 'not making the Colts earn it.'

[size=10pt]Because it was the call that gave the Pats the best chance to win.[/size]

If calling a game was all based on statistical averages, then you wouldn't need a coach to make any big decisions, they would just need to look at their cheat sheet and go from there.
Statistics are good for telling you what happened, not what is going to happen.

The only thing you can say for certain about that call in that game is that it did not lead to a win.
Doesn't mean that punting the ball would have led to a win, but saying he gave his team the best chance to win is not an accurate statement.

I would still opt for the punt, and god help Childress on this forum if he made the same decision with the Vikings.

You guys a missing the point. It's the right call because you are giving your team 2 chances to win.
1) Get the 2 yards and win
2) Stop them from scoring a TD and win

If he punts he is giving his team only one chance to win. Stop them from scoring. Again, the media yutz are only d*ck riding. Had he gotten it, it would be how intelligent the play call was and how he is the greatest coach ever. Now that the play came down to inches....he is a dumb coach for not realizing that he has to punt in that situation...lol.

It's just like the Vikings. If we run up the middle and pound it, people cry for creative play calling. If we run a gimmick play and it fails...everyone ask why didn't we pound it. On the 1 yard line we run 3 runs people will complain that we should have run play action. We run 2 times and run play action, people complain that you have to give the ball to Peterson in that situation. Armchair coaches are funny.

"kevoncox" wrote:

You guys a missing the point. It's the right call because you are giving your team 2 chances to win.
1) Get the 2 yards and win
2) Stop them from scoring a TD and win

If he punts he is giving his team only one chance to win. Stop them from scoring. Again, the media yutz are only d*ck riding. Had he gotten it, it would be how intelligent the play call was and how he is the greatest coach ever. Now that the play came down to inches....he is a dumb coach for not realizing that he has to punt in that situation...lol.

It's just like the Vikings. If we run up the middle and pound it, people cry for creative play calling. If we run a gimmick play and it fails...everyone ask why didn't we pound it. On the 1 yard line we run 3 runs people will complain that we should have run play action. We run 2 times and run play action, people complain that you have to give the ball to Peterson in that situation. Armchair coaches are funny.

I seen a story on a college coach that believes in that philosophy (always go for it on 4th down) and used simulations to prove his point, he also had a good record to show for it.
According to Burke's numbers (from Zeus' post and ZEUS the computer), the only time his numbers support punting the ball on 4th and short in that situation is when your offense is 5% below league average and the opposing defense is above 5% league average...combined with the opposing team's offense being 5% below average and your defense being 5% above average.
Or more simply put, your offense and defense are 5% below average and the opposing team is 5% average in both categories, only then should you punt.
In his numbers, when trying to compare the Colts and Pats more specifically, it came out very close between running it and punting it (77.3% vs 75.7%). http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2...urth-down-bid/

Just really hard for me to buy into that theory, my brain has been too conditioned over the years I guess.
I believe too much in the dynamics and life of the game to try and reduce it to a simulation.
It was a good article to defend the decision, I just didn't agree with it.

You're right about the armchair qb's.
No matter what the play call, if it doesn't work out, the coach was an idiot, therefore Belichek=idiot.

We all know that Manning can drive the field in 30 seconds or less.
LOL!

Punt it and let him score.

Or go for it and let him score.


Fact is that the Pats need the ball in their hands to score or run the clock out.


Bigger question, where is the years when a power run game is important.
The Pats and the Colts don't really value that and the Pats paid for it last night.


I didn't see the hub-bub about the Booth Review.
Did they get screwed on the review?

"snowinapril" wrote:

We all know that Manning can drive the field in 30 seconds or less.
LOL!

Punt it and let him score.

Or go for it and let him score.


Fact is that the Pats need the ball in their hands to score or run the clock out.


Bigger question, where is the years when a power run game is important.
The Pats and the Colts don't really value that and the Pats paid for it last night.


I didn't see the hub-bub about the Booth Review.
Did they get screwed on the review?

I have to say that I am conservative on my side of the field and would have punted it.

This call has so much potential baggage with it. Road to the superbowl goes through Indy now. If the Patriots win, everyone is in play.

Another point on the call, said similar than the rest of you: If you had to convert a 4th and 2 to win a game, would you go for it? Heck yes you would.

I’ll put my vote in that it was a bad call.
At least if you punt it away the Colts would have to quickly march it down field, which means a few passing plays.
So you bring a lot of pressure on Manning and maybe get an interception or something.
I’m sure the Pat’s defense really appreciated the coach’s confidence in them to go for it rather than trust them to stop the Colts.

I don't have a problem with the call.

What I look at are the matchups you have either way. In the scenario he picked he had his strongest unit (offense) against the Colts Weakest (defense) with several injuries and several vulnerabilities to potentially exploit. He had the likes of Tom Brady, Moss, Welker etc to make the play.

On the other hand if he punts he has his weakest unit (Defense) against the Colts strongest (Offense) and he would have to keep manning from doing what he does best.

That sounds reasonable to me.

The way I look at it, it was an aggressive and confident call.
Typical Belichick.
They've won quite a few Superbowls with this type of playcalling but nothing works every time.