I hate that I know so much about the NFL, my traditional interest being limited to rooting for former LSU kids to have good games, and most often not watching at all. But now I'm married to a woman who is a Cowboys fan in particular and a sports-ball fan in general, so I'm subjected to most every game that comes on TV.
I'm about done with "analytics." I've lost count of how many times just this season (okay, well, it's like 5 or 6, but still...) an NFL team has made bone-headed decisions that likely cost them the game. For some reason it offends my sensibilities.
It makes me wonder exactly how analytics are tracked. Because on the surface it appears nothing more nuanced than "Play X has Y chance of succeeding." Which....is something, I guess. In reality the chances of a play succeeding can't be evaluated in a vacuum. The score differential and time left in the game matter greatly. The risk/reward is constantly changing based on those factors. If a play has a 65% chance of working in a vacuum, it matters if the reward is high and risk is low, or if it's the other way around.
Just this past week I saw the Broncos, Raiders and the Bengals do some dumb things were ill-advised and it cost them. It's not a case of hindsight....it was easy to see they'd be in better shape if they played more safe. I'm all for going for it on 4th down or spurning a FG in favor of trying for a TD, or 2 pt. conversion instead of kicking an extra point......when it's warranted. There are times when it doesn't matter if a play succeeds 90% of the time, the risk/reward says don't do it.
In every situation the broadcasters keep talking about the analytics. I'm sitting there like "Say analytics one more time...."
