Winning probability if they punted: 79%
Winning probability if they went for it on 4th and 2: 80.5%

So clearly, a VERY CLOSE CALL, but one that was statistically correct. In any case, NOT a terrible call (you can argue the percentages used in the calculation might be off by a number of points, even so the percentages are very very close (within 5% of each other)).

http://espn.go.com/boston/columns/patriots/blog/_/post/4660828

Because statistically it’s justifiable? I think the numbers quoted in the article are overly generous, but even at 50% on 4th down, I think it is the right call, as the Colts’ chance of winning does not go up by 50% with 40 fewer yards to cover in two minutes. There’s a good article on ESPN.com that covers the math, and it estimates that the decision is very close.

“9.9 out of 10, no matter who the coach, the team, the same situation, you punt the ball!!!! BB just happened to do it that .1% of the time.”

Hard to take your arguments against math seriously. 9.9/10 is 99%, leaving 1% left over.

“The defense wasn’t tired, quick drives by the Colts equal less field time for the defense, more time on sideline. The defense was fine.”

Really? Reworded, this says: “The Pats’ couldn’t stop the Colts even a little on the two previous drives, so they had a great chance to stop them on the final possession.” That’s some logic there.

Going for it at the end of the game on your own 30 is totally different from going for it at a different point of the game. Two major reasons that you punt is that earlier in the game the opposition only gets 3 downs to get a first down and punting increases your scoring expectancy by improving your expected field position. Neither one of those things matters at the end of the game. It’s 4 down football and no matter where you get it back the game’s over.

I always look to Belicichick to be ahead of the curve. He is the only coach in college or pro football, out of approx 150, who consistently makes the correct decisions in stead of hiding behind “convention”.

I heard a stat saying that the Patriots convert 76 % of 4th and 2 or less. That means you win the game right there 3 out of 4 times and the other 1/4 Peyton still has to go 30 yards. Punting gives Indy the ball, on average, on Indy’s 30 with 2 minutes to play 100 percent of the time.

Who watching that game thought Peyton, with 4 plays per first down, and a hot offense couldn’t score more than 1 out of 4 times?

If you crunch the numbers it’s apparent that conventional wisdom is again wrong if you have a great offense vs. a great offense.

This decision is debatable but almost every single other one of his “unconventional” decisions are slam dunks but other people are in hot tubs while Bill spends his offseason dreaming about football minutiae and it shows.

It’s funny. The reason Belichick doesn’t want to explain himself to the media is not because he’s embarrassed by his decision it’s because he knows the media and the other coaches in the NFL don’t follow his thought process because they don’t understand the numbers, and he has no interest in helping them do so.

He understands the numbers.

He stays awake at night thinking about these scenarios, crunches the numbers and ignores “conventional/conservative” wisdom. It’s funny when you look at Belichick and hear about him he comes off as very conventional and the smartest coach in the League. So why would he be so unconventional?

Because most football convention was invented in the 60′s and a lot of it’s wrong.

Do you really want to follow conventional football wisdom that has been drilled into taskmasters over decades or actually look at the data that is all around us telling you how conventional wisdom is flat wrong.

The Patriots success this decade makes me wish Belichik was being eviscerated today, while coaching my team.