dubs

Look, I can see both sides of the argument. Going for it was actually the "safer" thing to do in the sense that not a single person would have second guessed the coach if he went for it. But I thought in the moment they should have went for it. Despite what some posters are claiming, there are not statistics or data to apply to this situation. In retrospect, I think it was the right call and not just because they won. Here's why: There was over 4 minutes left and you had the 2 minute warning and a TO left. You pin the Colts deep and they are going to have to put the ball in the air to have a chance to win the game. In those conditions, with a very average QB, that seemed very unlikely. In fact, that's exactly what happened. The Bills even scored the TD with about 1:30 to go. More than anything, what baffles me is how this decision is being portrayed as an obvious decision to go for it. It clearly was not, but I could see both sides of the argument. If anything it was an obvious judgment call.

How are you measuring “less likely”? Not being a jerk, just don’t know if I agree (in this very specific scenario, not generally) and that argument seems to be light on evidence to support it, despite alluding to math, probabilities, and chances constantly.

Haha. Well, then it should be easy to explain. Please enlighten us with your position, please use some actual data since you seem to love saying you have it. Or at least explain how these models are applicable to the game today. Fire away.

Exactly. People quoting odds and probabilities either are refusing to articulate how they arrive there (not likely) or just blindly using some talking points they’ve heard from people or seems on espn’s gamecast. Heres what I found about that ... “Win probability measures the chance that a team will win a game, given a particular combination of circumstances, including score, time remaining, field position and down and distance. Win probability is based on a model built on actual outcomes of NFL games from recent seasons that featured similar circumstances.” So, basically people quoting probabilities and “math” are making the argument that the models scernarios resemble what we saw today. Haha. Not too smart of an argument if you ask me.

You keep posting about math or probability but ive yet to see a coherent argument showing what the probabilities were in that situation for each choice. Except for the ESPN win probability machine. But even with that not a single person has been able to explain how they arrive at those numbers and if their modeling is applicable to the Bills in that situation or not. I get the point you are trying to make, but I don’t think you or anyone else is able to do anything more than quote some models that IMO don’t really apply well to today’s game, given the weather conditions and the teams playing. I’m not saying this is exactly the way to quantify it, but if was like a three standard deviation situation today. Most models don’t do well in those extreme environments.

I hear your point, but I think it’s totally misplaced with today’s game and in this circumstance. MAJadhominem attack

Any casino or or card game analogy is a false one unless you can quote known odds for the situation in the game today, which you cannot.

This is an important point. In this situation, you basically force the Colts into a terrible position. They have to throw the ball to move down the field to have enough time for even a FG chance. In that weather, with Brissett, and based on their passing up to that point, seems like a good bet to get the ball back with good field position and enough time left. And that’s what happened.

Or none of the above. It was a tough call. I was more inclined to see him go for it, but they call worked and ended up being the right call. I think given the situation and circumstances, it was a defendable if not best decision. But I don’t think it was overwhelmingly better or worse one way or another, like many are making it out to be.

In that situation I can understand why it was a good call. Not obvious, but certainly defendable and it worked out well.

Im not playing hypos. Bills punted. Colts punted. Bills scored a TD and won.

The Bills won.

Exactly. It’s situational awareness versus following espn’s stat machine.

Um, IIRC that didn’t happen so your point is moot.

Again, there was a DPI on the play so either way it would have worked. I dont think he was genius. Just made the right call in that situation. It’s not a science as much as you’re trying to make it out to be.

What % of “win equity” were they giving up and how did you calculate that “equity”?

There was also a defensive PI on that play so...even if he doesn’t catch it, same result.

Like I said, I was blown away at the punt decision too. But I was wrong. As I thought about it after the game, I started to understand why the decision was made and it makes sense to me. But either way it didn’t seem like an obvious decision as many are making it out to be. It was a crap position either way. The idea was that there was a better chance pinning the Colts and trying to get a short field as the game was winding down. Other than the one drive, the Colts did pretty much nothing. On the the flip side, of the Bills don’t get the first and even if the Colts go 3 and out, the field would be too long for the offense there. Tough call, the decision made worked, so it was the correct one, IMO.

Well, it’s certainly more important of a factor than highly questionable projections or gut feelings or what Mike Schoop and the Browns would do.

I get that you are sourcing ESPN. What I’m asking is do you know how they come up with those odds?

Poker hands can project odds because of the limited number of cards. This situation was unlike anything so I’m not sure your metaphor is really applicable.

Again, what is the source of your odds? Oh! Espn! And do you know what they use to make those projections.

Hah! Based on what exactly?

You have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re assuming things with no facts to back it up. But since you said it I will ask. What were the odds for each decision at that moment, in those conditions, with those players, at that point in OT? McD made a call and it worked, that’s all that matters and all he should be judged on. The rest is total conjecture based on assumptions that have no basis in fact and certainly not facts for the exact situation.

At the time I thought they should have went for it as well. But then the Bills won the game and McDermott ended up being right. So, I had to say, “I was wrong”. Try it, it’s easy to say and makes you look humble and reasonable, “I was wrong, McDermott was correct”. Ahhhhh....feels good.