BELICHICK'S BIG BALLS...

[BiggieScooby]

As an economics major Bill Belichick is well versed in Game Theory which models strategic situations, or games, in which an individual's success in making choices depends on the choices of others. University of Chicago Economics Professor Steven Levitt who wrote the famed book Freakonomics analyzed 125,000 offensive plays between 2001-2005 and concluded that a team who exploited its knowledge .."could add one or two season wins and millions of dollars in associated revenue". Bill Belichick has exploited Game Theory both on and off the field and in general has benefited from making calculated decisions based upon probability. http://www.nber.org/digest/oct09/w15347.html

 

On The Field:

Bill Belichick told his defense before Super Bowl 25 that they would win if Thurman Thomas ran for over 100 yards. Bill Belichick in effect "invited" the Bills to run on them dropping 7 to 8 men in coverage and told them to "punish" the Bills receivers should they decide to pass. The game plan was to slow the Bills No Huddle attack and it worked, not only did the Giants dominate time of possession, they also forced the Bills into punting. In Super Bowl 36 Belichick employed a similar strategy forcing 3 turnovers which directly led to 17 points against a Rams team known as the Greatest Show on Turf. The underdog Pats "shocked" the highly favored Rams 20-17 despite being outgained nearly 2 to 1.

 

Belichick goes for it on 4th down more than any other coach in the NFL. Can this be explained by the relatively high level of job security he enjoys or the fact that he is merely playing the percentages? While we all know the outcome of his infamous 4th and 2 call against the Colts in 2009, Belichick has enjoyed more success than failure electing to go for it on 4th and short. Belichick knew from a probability standpoint that teams on average convert 43% of all 4th downs.

 

More and more coaches are deciding to take risks even on their own side of the 50 yard line. In fact High School Coach Kevin Kelley of Pulaski Academy in Arkansas has a different view on punting...he doesn't. http://www.sportsquant.com/fourth.pdf

 

Off The Field

As a master of understanding his opponent Belichick was willing to gamble on the prospect of getting caught cheating to get an upper hand on his opponent. Spygate demonstrated the lengths that he would go to gain an extra edge on his opponent before the game was even played. When analyzing the fallout from Spygate what really has been the cost to the Patriots? The shame of getting caught has to be considered the worst, a $500,000 penalty and a forfeited 2008 1st round draft pick were mere slaps on the risk. While the gains are unknown, one could argue that their tactic of cheating contributed to a dynasty.

 

Another off field tactic Belichick employs is his willingness to trade back in the draft. This can be compared to his willingness to go for it on 4th down. By stockpiling picks year after year Belichick is ensuring that he has a maximum advantage in the draft over other teams giving him a greater probability of success.

 

My hope for the Bills organization, Chan Gailey & Buddy Nix in particular, is that they too have the Balls & the Authority to take all the risks necessary to build a dynasty.

[Scrappy]

How these guys are taught is how it's taught again & those who break with tradition will be met with a certain distain for changing the things that "work". Ralph Wilson is too old for something like this to even be explained, it'd have to be done at a level where Ralph was just informed about it. If Ralph is still making the decisions (which I think is less & less a fact lately), than something like this might fly. We also need to implement safeguards about how our clock management works, timeouts & challenges. These things seem easy on TV but are hard to deal with during the limited time you have during the game.

 

I think that we need a challenge / clock coordinator that gives us the highest probability as to how to play timing events & what to do with challenges. It only makes the most sense to improve on your probability of success, so bravo for pointing this out.

[K-9]

Bellyache is a brilliant football mind but the myth of his SB XXV "genius" continues to grow. His defense didn't stop anyone in SB XXV, unless you consider holding the opponent to 19 points in 19 minutes as stopping someone. Bellyache simply got lucky that our defense couldn't stop a girls field hockey team and, to a lesser extent, that Kelly stubbornly refused to give TT the ball early in the game.

 

I don't think Bellyache indulges in game theory at all. It just isn't that complicated for him. He's been breaking down game film since he was 10 years old. I'm pretty sure he's learned a thing or two about the game and has mastered them.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[RaNdom]

I don't think Bellyache indulges in game theory at all. It just isn't that complicated for him.

 

The situation where he applies game theory is best illustrated by his draft strategies. Whether he gets the best players he could have is debatable, but he takes a long-term view and maximizes the continuing value of his draft picks.

[billsfan89]

Maybe Belicheat was so good because he was cheating? No need to explore game theory there he just had an unfair illegal advantage.

 

Throw in the fact that the clutch Pats* suddenly can't win that many playoff games since they got caught cheating. Its as if they had an advantage in clutch situations and now they suddenly lost it.

 

If you draft good players put them in the right system and have the right talent around them you will win games. Its not rocket science.

[BiggieScooby]

If you draft good players put them in the right system and have the right talent around them you will win games. Its not rocket science.

 

I agree, however you can't win unless you take risks. The Bills historically have been a risk-adverse organization. They are a conservative bunch. Bill Polian era was unique as was the awe-inspiring Levy leading our team. I put Levy in a more cerebral coaching category similar to Phil Jackson & Dick Vermeil. Say what you want about Belichick he gets the job done. As an avid Civil War buff I'd make this analogy, Levy & Vermeil are to Robert E Lee, as Belichick is to U.S. Grant & Sherman. Belichick would do anything to win, whearas Levy would not accept winning if it came at the cost of morality.

[CodeMonkey]

For longer than I care to remember he has been teabagging the Bills with those big balls.

[Never NEVER Give-up]

His risk taking works very well against the lesser teams - it intimidates them.

 

The key is how you respond - ya gotta go for the win, you can't play not to lose as many do. Hopefully, as the Bills improve, so will some of the risk taking. They really aren't that big of a risk if you have skilled personnel carrying out the assignments.

[K-9]

It's a helluva lot easier to take risks with superior players. Why, it's down right "less" risky.

 

Bellyache took the same risks in Cleveland and his early years on NE*, didn't he?

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

Edit: I meant to ask anyone who cares to answer to cite some "risks" Levy took as a coach. He was one of the most risk-averse coaches I can think of. The crime is that he DIDN'T take more risks with that line-up.

Edited May 9, 2011 by K-9

[Sisyphean Bills]

The situation where he applies game theory is best illustrated by his draft strategies. Whether he gets the best players he could have is debatable, but he takes a long-term view and maximizes the continuing value of his draft picks.

Good call. He uses the scouting information much differently than do some others. Instead of trying to use it to decide which player is the best, the Patriots use the information to create groups of options. So, when the phone rings and someone wants to trade up, they can see that they have so many players ranked in a particular range, and know how many players at their positions of interest fall within the relevant window. So, say they want a DL or DB and that they are being asked to trade down 5 spots. Now if they know that there are 3 DL and 3 DB rated in that range and/or maybe a couple of others that slipped and/or there is an active run on, say, QB where players are being reached for, then no matter what other decisions are made by the other teams, they will end up with one of the guys they really want. They might not get the best of the 6, but they get a player that is only graded slightly lower.

[Peter]

There is no doubt in my mind that we should have run the ball more in that game. We (Jim) were too impatient.

 

There were so many what ifs in that game (the almost defensive TD, the Giants' third and nineteen or whatever it was, Thurman coming thisclose to breaking the tackle at the end of the game, the laces of the football on the kick). Oh well, that is football. Yet, it was a game we certainly could have won.

 

Billy B (whatever you think of him) did a very good job of coaching that game.

 

 

[ColdBlueNorth]

For longer than I care to remember he has been teabagging the Bills with those big balls.

Until the Bills coaching staff can prove they can out-coach and out-prepare the teabagging genious, this team will be going no where.

 

As far as cheating goes... I hate to say it, but give Belichick a week or two and sans cheating he could probably have beaten most Bills teams while playing his second string guys.

 

If there is a next year for the NFL, I am looking forward to seeing what Wannstedt and our defensive staff come up with. I don't expect changes overnight, but I do think we added some pieces to the puzzle to make Bill and Tom lose some sleep.

 

Drafting monster D-lineman who can stop the run yet are capable of crushing the pocket and putting some heat on the QB is clearly aimed at:

1. Eliminating the ability of Brady to sit comfortably in the pocket - getting guys right in his face.
   
2. Taking away the ability to spread us out and gash us or setup short yardage situations with the run.
   
3. Creating the ability to effectively rush Brady with a three or four man front and still get pressure...
   
4. Also, with less men committed to the rush we can put more guys in coverage on third or fourth and long situations where NE likes to overload our coverage and create mismatches.
   

 

Say what you want about our current FO, they know that we will probably never beat NE in a scoring race. To get past them this team needs to be able to stop them that is why they focused so heavily on drafting defense. Besides the fact that only a superior draft team comprised of Donahoe, Mularky, Modrak and Jauron with Ralph assisting could have completely whiffed on one of the richest defensive drafts in history.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

The Bills historically have been a risk-adverse organization.

How?

 

Multiple picks for Losman, multiple picks for McCargo, multiple picks for Poz, drafting Spiller 9th overall, trading a 1st round pick for a past-his-prime Bledsoe, drafting McGahee when he's already hurt, releasing our starting LT Walker 2 weeks before the season starts...risk-adverse isn't the conclusion I draw, "stupid" seems a more fitting term.

 

On the field is a different case, it doesn't get much more conservative than Jauron (though Gailey is a different animal). But they've taken plenty of foolish risks in the personnel department.

Edited May 9, 2011 by Big Bad Boone

[....lybob]

The Belly is a smart guy but if he doesn't stumble on Brady in the sixth round I doubt anyone is calling him a genius - the Pats are a well run organization and even without Brady they are going to their share of Playoffs but without Brady there is no myth of inevitability.

[RealityCheck]

Bellyache is a brilliant football mind but the myth of his SB XXV "genius" continues to grow. His defense didn't stop anyone in SB XXV, unless you consider holding the opponent to 19 points in 19 minutes as stopping someone. Bellyache simply got lucky that our defense couldn't stop a girls field hockey team and, to a lesser extent, that Kelly stubbornly refused to give TT the ball early in the game.

 

I don't think Bellyache indulges in game theory at all. It just isn't that complicated for him. He's been breaking down game film since he was 10 years old. I'm pretty sure he's learned a thing or two about the game and has mastered them.

 

GO BILLS!!!

I believe that it was 60 minutes.

Edited May 9, 2011 by RealityCheck

[bills_fan_in_raleigh]

Bellyache is a brilliant football mind but the myth of his SB XXV "genius" continues to grow. His defense didn't stop anyone in SB XXV, unless you consider holding the opponent to 19 points in 19 minutes as stopping someone. Bellyache simply got lucky that our defense couldn't stop a girls field hockey team and, to a lesser extent, that Kelly stubbornly refused to give TT the ball early in the game.

 

I don't think Bellyache indulges in game theory at all. It just isn't that complicated for him. He's been breaking down game film since he was 10 years old. I'm pretty sure he's learned a thing or two about the game and has mastered them.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Actually I think he took advantage of faked inhury timeouts as a way to get his defense rested and ready for the Kgun attack. I recall seeing giant after giant laying on ground in pain only to return 1 - 2 plays later. So instead of spygate cheating he used faked injury cheating

[K-9]

I believe that it was 60 minutes.

 

Bills offense had the ball for 19 minutes of possession time. The Giants D barely broke a sweat.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[billsfan89]

I agree, however you can't win unless you take risks. The Bills historically have been a risk-adverse organization. They are a conservative bunch. Bill Polian era was unique as was the awe-inspiring Levy leading our team. I put Levy in a more cerebral coaching category similar to Phil Jackson & Dick Vermeil. Say what you want about Belichick he gets the job done. As an avid Civil War buff I'd make this analogy, Levy & Vermeil are to Robert E Lee, as Belichick is to U.S. Grant & Sherman. Belichick would do anything to win, whearas Levy would not accept winning if it came at the cost of morality.

 

Problem is that the Bills have taken too many risks over the smart safer picks. Whinter over Nagata, trading up to take Losman, trading up to take McCargo when Nick Mangold was there for the taking, and Maybin was a much more risky pick than Orakpo or Oher.

 

The Bills under Marv/Jauron and under Donahue were trying to outsmart everyone making boom or bust picks that ended up with bust for the Bills.

 

Spiller was another pick that seemed like they were trying to make the pick that proved they could outsmart everyone. Dareus much safer smarter pick. If you have the worst run defense in the league take the best run defender.

 

Bottomline you make the right picks and develop them you will be successful. Game theory and SAFER metrics they are all good but in the end its a game of blocking and tackling.

[BiggieScooby]

Problem is that the Bills have taken too many risks over the smart safer picks. Whinter over Nagata, trading up to take Losman, trading up to take McCargo when Nick Mangold was there for the taking, and Maybin was a much more risky pick than Orakpo or Oher.

 

The Bills under Marv/Jauron and under Donahue were trying to outsmart everyone making boom or bust picks that ended up with bust for the Bills.

 

Spiller was another pick that seemed like they were trying to make the pick that proved they could outsmart everyone. Dareus much safer smarter pick. If you have the worst run defense in the league take the best run defender.

 

Bottomline you make the right picks and develop them you will be successful. Game theory and SAFER metrics they are all good but in the end its a game of blocking and tackling.

 

Game Theory applies to the draft only when deciding whether to trade up or down. Otherwise you stay put and select the best player on your board, which is something prior Bills FO's haven't faired too well doing with the exception of Bill Polian. We can argue the reasoning behind their choice but we can't say they were taking a risk. A risk would be selecting a kicker in the first round. A risk would be selecting a player rated in 3rd round in the 1st. McGahee, Maybin, Spiller, Mike Williams, and Whitner were all mainly 1st round grades on everyone's board so you cannot say the Bills were taking the riskier choice. You can block & tackle all you want but without some gamesmanship and risk taking your chances of winning are around 50/50, depending on the quality of your opponent. Las Vegas does a great job creating a point spread system based upon these probabilities of victory. The idea behind Game Theory is what will it take to get your team over the hump to give you that extra humph needed to win the game. Perfect example would be Sean Payton's ballsy decision to execute an onside kick to start the second half of Super Bowl 44. Another one would be Belichick's decision not to run out the clock and play for overtime in Super Bowl 36 and to go for the win. So despite however well the Saints or Pats blocked and tackled in those games, the pivotal game changing moment came from a calculated decision. Taking too much risk can blow up in your face and cost you a game, but in general a more aggressive risk taking coach gives his team a higher number of chances to win than a less aggressive one.

[BiggieScooby]

The Belly is a smart guy but if he doesn't stumble on Brady in the sixth round I doubt anyone is calling him a genius - the Pats are a well run organization and even without Brady they are going to their share of Playoffs but without Brady there is no myth of inevitability.

 

Brady surely has helped but suffice it to say the Patriots were a good team without him. Brady put them over the edge. Given time Belichick finds a way to win with what he has. Matt Cassel hadn't started since high school and went 11-5 in 2008 and is now 60 million dollars richer. Ryan Mallett who by all accounts has tremendous potential if coached properly could flourish when Brady hangs em up in 4 to 5 years. That said Belichick's strategy of stockpiling picks and trading back could have landed him another later round "franchise qb" who the naysayers can say he stumbled upon. I beg to differ.