Shame of the Game - Washington

[masterfins]

Easily McDaniel, the Dolphins won in spite of his poor calls.  Less than two minutes in a tie game, with your opponent having zero timeouts and your defense playing well, you KICK the Field Goal and take the lead!!!  Then he also uses Miami's remaining TO's to help Washington.

[Dave Gray]

I thought that McDaniel was crazy and I would have agreed with you.

But I started thinking about it and the liklihood of winning and you're 3.5% more likely to win the game if you go for the TD, according to Dan Lebatard today.  Granted, those numbers are averages, assuming a completely generic offense and defense.  You don't get to factor in that we're uniquely bad at running for 1 yard or that Mariota is a bum.

But the decision, on paper at least, seems to have been the right one.

And it worked out, so I think I need to eat crow.

[CF DolFan]

I would have made the same calls. We have 3 wins and realistsically little to no chance of making the playoffs. I would take a few chances as well.

The one thing it shows is our Offensive line is still getting their arse kicked on short yardage and they know its coming. Having the 6th lineman didn't help that situation. They were driven into the backfield both times. It was embarrasing for them ... or at least should have been.

[Spider-Dan]

While the stats may support the decision, if WSH makes the FG at the end of the game, McDaniel is probably fired today.  The talking heads would love nothing more than to absolutely incinerate any coach who does not kick a field goal in that situation.  The nerds with their pocket protectors and excel spreadsheets tell you that "the analytics" say to go for the touchdown, but Real Football Men Know that you kick the field goal there every time!

I gotta give McD my SOTG for failing to try to protect his own job.  Read the room, man.

[masterfins]

I thought that McDaniel was crazy and I would have agreed with you.

But I started thinking about it and the liklihood of winning and you're 3.5% more likely to win the game if you go for the TD, according to Dan Lebatard today.  Granted, those numbers are averages, assuming a completely generic offense and defense.  You don't get to factor in that we're uniquely bad at running for 1 yard or that Mariota is a bum.

But the decision, on paper at least, seems to have been the right one.

And it worked out, so I think I need to eat crow.

A 3.5% increase in winning is an extremely small increase and not worth the risk.  I used a probability calculator with a 3 point lead, 2 minutes left, with the opponent starting on the 30 yard line (no option to enter available TO's).  The result is a win 90.89% of the time.

[Spider-Dan]

"More likely" is more likely than "less likely," no matter how you slice it.
But sometimes the facts don't matter and public perception is what it is.

[CF DolFan]

While the stats may support the decision, if WSH makes the FG at the end of the game, McDaniel is probably fired today. 

It's almost like you haven't been paying attention. Mike would have to kill one of Ross's family members to be let go before Tua's contract expires. Hahaha

[Sibster]

It's almost like you haven't been paying attention. Mike would have to kill one of Ross's family members to be let go before Tua's contract expires. Hahaha

Exactly the point.   We're way past the area of McDaniel having pics of Ross in New Orleans or Vegas with hookers.   We're in the area of McDaniel having information about people in Biscayne Bay with concrete boots that Ross put there.

[CF DolFan]

I found it interesting that Joe Rose revealed today that Jimmy Cefalo and Kim Bokamper thought they should have kicked the FGs while he (Joe Rose) and Dan Marino thought they should have gone for it like they did. Seems to match what I'm seeing online as well.

[Denver2]

The offensive line for how badly they got beat on those goal line plays

[Dave Gray]

A 3.5% increase in winning is an extremely small increase and not worth the risk.  I used a probability calculator with a 3 point lead, 2 minutes left, with the opponent starting on the 30 yard line (no option to enter available TO's).  The result is a win 90.89% of the time.

This doesn't make mathematical sense.

If it's a 90.89% win to kick, then it would be a 94.39% to go for it.  Higher percentage is higher percentage.  "It's not worth the risk" doesn't make sense, in a vacuum, at least.

To Spider's point, there are things like scapegoats and optics, so maybe you kick for that reason.  But in general, you take the likelier chance of success when given the choice.

[Sibster]

This doesn't make mathematical sense.

If it's a 90.89% win to kick, then it would be a 94.39% to go for it.  Higher percentage is higher percentage.  "It's not worth the risk" doesn't make sense, in a vacuum, at least.

To Spider's point, there are things like scapegoats and optics, so maybe you kick for that reason.  But in general, you take the likelier chance of success when given the choice.

Percentages don't mean shit to me.   Logic does.  And in this case, logic dictates that you don't take points off the board.   If your defense is playing well, you take whatever lead you can get.

[masterfins]

This doesn't make mathematical sense.

If it's a 90.89% win to kick, then it would be a 94.39% to go for it.  Higher percentage is higher percentage.  "It's not worth the risk" doesn't make sense, in a vacuum, at least.

To Spider's point, there are things like scapegoats and optics, so maybe you kick for that reason.  But in general, you take the likelier chance of success when given the choice.

Yes it does make sense.  Those percentages factors assume both scoring opportunities were successful.  However, we all know that kicking a FG from 20 yards has a success rate of over 90%, whereas the success rate of scoring a TD from that location is much lower.

[Spider-Dan]

Yes it does make sense.  Those percentages factors assume both scoring opportunities were successful.

The actual percentages (that McDaniel would have been looking at) absolutely take into account the expected success rate of the plays in question.  Otherwise, the percentages would be meaningless!

Like, you can't meaningfully evaluate the difference in winning percentage between going for it on 4th and 4 at your opponent's 20 vs. kicking a field goal if you are baking automatic success into the outcome.  If you assume going for it will definitely be successful, the math would say to go for it 100% of the time, no matter where on the field you are!

[Phishfan]

It's pretty easy to look at every scenario after a game and punch in the numbers and give the probability. These coaches are facing a play clock,  are not sitting in front of a computer, etc. If you think McDaniel had any clue there was a 3.5% sway either way when he made his decision I think you are delusional. I may be naive.