MWmetalhead wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 7:06 am
There are definitely parallels between the Lions and Tigers in that regard.
The play at the end of the half was inexcusable as was the call to for the FG.
I bet Mr. Rodgers (pun intended) was - and probably still is - FUMING over his coach's decision to kick that field goal late in the 4th on what ultimately turned out to be GB's last possession.
Green Bay was having trouble putting points on the scoreboard all game long. Why on earth would you squander a 4th & goal opportunity to tie the game at that stage in the game?
Even if GB were successful in stopping Tampa Bay from converting a couple first downs on the ensuing possession, best case - you're talking about a situation with no more than a minute on the game clock and at some point Rodgers probably having to heave the ball downfield "Hail Mary" style.
Football coaches seem to have a poor grasp of statistical probability.
I watched this live, and I agreed with the decision to kick the FG as I did some quick math in my head at the time and I don't think going for it was the statistical no-brainer you make it out to be. Now the breakdown:
First off, the situation was 4th and goal at the 8. Statistically, that has a 30 percent conversion rate.
Then, they would have needed a 2-point conversion for the tie. Those come in at just under 50%. Let's call it 48%.
Then let's put their odds of an OT victory at 55% (I'm being generous here as they were the home team and the slight favorites).
Already, just multiplying those 3 numbers out, they would be at 7.9% to win the game. But even that ignores the odds of the Bucs, even if GB scores a TD and converts a 2-pointer, using the last 2:05 to come down and score to win the game. Those odds clock in at 35%
So the final math is 0.30 x 0.48 x 0.65 x 0.55, or 5.1 percent to win the game if they had gone for it. That number is actually slightly higher since they could theoretically have gone for it, not got it, stopped TB to get the ball back and go through that whole process all over again, bringing that final number to around 5.3 percent overall chance of winnning.
Now let's analyze what they actually did - kicked a field goal. Their odds of making that field goal at that distance was around 97 percent. Then down only 5, you no longer need the 2-point conversion or the overtime to win. You simply need a stop and then a TD.
Let's say they get the stop and get the ball back at their own 25. Their odds of winning from that point would have been 24 percent. See here:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... s_to_go=10
Even if they gave up a first down, they could have still gotten the ball back, albeit with less time.
Given ALL OF THAT MATH (yeah, I know, long-winded), the only remaining question is, what are the odds they would have gotten the stop (which they obviously didn't get, but that's hindsight, all that is relevant is the odds at FG decision time) ? We're basically comparing a 5% win chance going for it on 4th and 8 down 8 with a 24 percent win chance had they gotten the stop after getting the FG. That means the break-even decision point is at a mere 20% chance of getting a stop, and if the odds were any higher than that, then kicking the FG was the right decision. This is the one stat I can't find, but my gut tells me that the statistical odds of GB holding TB to a 3-and-out in that situation were at least 20 percent, making the FG statistically the correct call.
EDIT - I missed the scenario of GB getting the TD but missing the 2, then getting a stop and coming back and kicking a FG. Don't really feel like figuring out the math on this one but that maybe pushes up odds of getting a stop needed to justify the FG to 25 or 30 percent.
