Question About Lions Eschewing Field Goal

The metric is "win probability" not "expected points" so game situation is taken into account.

Ask 50 people on here you'll get 55 answers as to whether it was right or not and why tbh.

the usual models say that they win the game more often by going for it

i think it was still early enough in the game where maximizing points was perfectly fine. sacrificing Skalansky points is usually not good until at least the fourth quarter.

Oh for ****’s sake

Last thing I ever wanted in life is for parrot flosser over here to have a take on a game the 9ers won

Edit: was crypto88 sklansky’s gimmick account?

There's a reason why this has barely been discussed here as opposed to being discussed to death elsewhere, and that's because we know Campbell was clearly correct

yeah everyone knows that when you kick a fg to go up 17 points you win the game, like when just before halftime in the nfc championship the lions kicked a fg to go up 17 points and they won the game

Sklansky,

First, let me say that is an absolute honor for you to create a thread in a forum that I moderate.

Second, I believe Campbell made the right decision in the game situation to kick the field goal.

Yep it's not just the math that shows it's correct. That's strong evidence in itself but one can argue around it by challenging the assumptions that underpin the math. But trying to go that route only strengthens the argument supporting Campbell's decision because the model probably assumes a league average kicker. The Lions had a below average kicker which makes the math argument a virtual lock to be correct.

Boom!

It baited a huge flop in momentum ... and that's exactly what happened. Seems integral to the equation. The Lions introduced a huge variance factor into the game when sitting on 80% win equity. We've hashed it ad nauseum, but that is a huge factor on the field in real time.

He chose a risky 3 score lead over a sure 3 score lead.

I do believe they misapplied.