King Puppy
Arena Leaguer
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2008
- Messages
- 859
- Reaction score
- 441
Offline
I don't know if it was a "poor" decision. I'm of the opinion that either of the calls would be defensible. Your link says, "the conversion attempt would have been the percentage play, by a margin of 0.23 to 0.15." As the linked piece acknowledges, this conclusion is based upon pure statistical evaluations and not "game specific" considerations. I think such game specific considerations tend to narrow the numbers even more.Here's why it was a bad call: http://www.advancednflstats.com/2010/12/should-falcons-have-punted.html
The thought process leading to the decision, not the outcome, determines whether or not it was a good or poor decision. In this case, it was a poor decision. Heck, they beat us in the first game primarily because they went for it and converted on 4th downs.
Granted, I'm happy that Smith chose poorly, but still...
A 4th and 6 has a 44% conversion rate. At the risk of stating the obvious, a less than 50/50 conversion number isn't exactly the highest percentage play out there. If Atlanta gets a 3 and out, they're still going to have plenty of time (using two time outs and 2:00 warning) and good field position. It ended up not working out for Atlanta, but their strategy wasn't unsound there.
I honestly think the better play would have been to go for it there, but I don't think it was exactly an indefensible call.