What Can We Learn From Mike Tomlin?

Screen shot 2011 01 25 at 3.00.56 PM1 What Can We Learn From Mike Tomlin?

So you’re the Steelers, you have the ball on the Jets 40 yard line, and a 5 point lead . There’s two minutes left, and the Jets have no timeouts. What do you do? You can run the ball, let the play clock run to 0, then punt, giving the Jets the ball on about their 10 yard line. They’d have about 1:10 left to travel 90 yards.

Alternatively, you can pass. But if its incomplete, the Jets get the ball back in presumably the same spot, but now with 1:50 left?

According the Win Prob. calculator at AdvancedNFLStats, the Jets would win 3% of the time (.03 of Win Probability, or WPA) if the Steelers ran the clock and punted. But if they throw incomplete and give them the extra 40 seconds, those odds go up to 8%. So basically the Steelers need to get the 1st down successfully about 62.5% of the time to pan out, right? You’re risking .05 of WPA to “earn” .03. Considering a generic team makes 3rd and 6 about 40% of the time, that sounds insane?

Or does it?

Well, it wasn’t quite that insane. Among other things, the game essentially ends if they get the 1st down. In addition, this is not an automaton running the play. If you trust the QB to only throw to a wide open receiver, and eat the ball inbounds otherwise, you essentially get a 2nd look. And finally, you catch the defense by surprise, no one’s expecting the QB to do anything but run around there.

In a way its like playing an options vertical, earnings on, expiration day. The spread either goes to $5 or 0. If you sell it for $1, you need to win 80% of the time, e.g. Except in the football case, there’s a little game theory going on too. Roethlisberger can change the play at the line if he thinks the pass won’t be there, can take a sack, and so on. You don’t get a second look if you carry the option position at 4pm.

And again, that lame math up above isn’t really correct. Its not just any .03 of WPA you add with success, its the last .03 of WPA you need, it ends the game. The (f***ing) DeSean Jackson touchdown vs. the Giants was more or less a .50 WPA play, but it had the exact same effect. Its just obviously easier to convert on 3rd and 6 than it is to run a punt back for a TD.

In other words, maybe time to roll out a poker analogy!

The Steelers had the chance to buy the pot, and took it. Sort of….that fails a little under scrutiny too (the Jets can’t actually fold, they still get to defend the play).

I guess the point is, they’re all relatively simple math problems., but none are completely the same.  There is one connection though. In all situations, we’re winning at the time of the decision. Even in the options trade. If its a $5 vertical trading for $1, odds are in your favor (assuming expected gain is 0). But in the Steelers game, and the poker hand, it actually made more sense to add risk, not less. Option trades are all about the specifics, but perhaps the principle of “pressing” a winner is better than meets the eye.


The information in this blog post represents my own opinions and does not contain a recommendation for any particular security or investment. I or my affiliates may hold positions or other interests in securities mentioned in the Blog, please see my Disclaimer page for my full disclaimer.

You might be interested in:
blog comments powered by Disqus

In partnership with CNN Money Part of the CNN Network