hurtinbuckaroo
Veteran Member
The analytics on the FG decision is interesting. The Packers had a 10% chance of winning if they went for it on 4th down, which would require:
vs. 9% by kicking the FG, which would require:
So it wasn't a gutsy call, i.e. the easy call that would leave people saying "he played to win" regardless of the outcome, but it was far from a bad call.
Consider also the Packers' results inside the TB 10-yard line to that point:
That's pretty bad.
- scoring from the 8 in only one try
- scoring from the 2 in only one try (the 2-point conversion needed to tie the game)
- stopping the Bucs from driving into FG range with 2 minutes left
- winning in OT, where they might never possess the ball
vs. 9% by kicking the FG, which would require:
- making the chip shot FG (98% probability)
- stopping the Bucs when their intent would be to simply run out the clock (and GB had all three of their timeouts)
- driving for a touchdown with plenty of time left on the clock, if they held the Bucs to a 3-and-out.
So it wasn't a gutsy call, i.e. the easy call that would leave people saying "he played to win" regardless of the outcome, but it was far from a bad call.
Consider also the Packers' results inside the TB 10-yard line to that point:
- touchdown pass (8 yards)
- incomplete pass
- incomplete pass
- incomplete pass
- field goal
- run for no gain
- incomplete pass
- touchdown pass (2 yards)
- failed 2-point conversion
- incomplete pass
- incomplete pass
- incomplete pass
That's pretty bad.