I did not see the game, other than a few glances from casino playing tables.
It certainly is unconventional to go for it from your own 18, but the key question is: is it a positive EV move?
I think that it very possibly was the correct move to go for it.
It is -EV to consider things on a strictly results oriented basis.
A very common error made by NFL coaches is to sacrifice EV to delay a very negative event, kind of like a blackjack player not hitting a 14 when the dealer has a 10 up. It’s usually (ahem) the correct move to hit, but amateurs fear getting knocked out right away, so they stay, sacrificing EV for a few seconds of still having a chance to win.
As gamblers here, we have to look at the EV. Belichik was crucified for doing something similar several years ago, but he did make the correct move.
I’m surprised that Collinsworth is criticizing it: he has a financial stake in a football analytical business. He should know better than judging things results oriented vs analytics.
The key point here is that the Chargers are in deep Doo Doo no matter what they do. If you punt, you are giving the Raiders the ball right near field goal territory anyway. Risk versus reward
... I give the edge to going for it.
That being said, I
agree with you that, although the decision was correct, the execution stunk.
Running up the gut ?!
I am unfamiliar with the two field goals versus KC. But a rule of thumb is: if it’s a close decision, you usually analytically should go for the TD instead of the FG.
