Belichick a Robot?

Could that grungy hooded sweater that Bill Belichick wears be hiding an interior filled with circuit breakers and motor oil? Some are suggesting that's the only reasonable explanation for Belichick's reckless 4th-and-2 gamble which ended up dooming the Patriots in a 35-34 come-from-ahead loss to the rival Colts.

An NFL-decision-making computer designed by an Indiana University professor called Zeus predicted that going for it in that scenario yielded a higher win probability than punting the ball to the Colts. Belichick has been widely criticized for the call, which gave the Colts the football back on the Patriots' 29-yard line with over two minutes left.

I don't care what a computer says. A mathematical formula would see no differentiation in a 4th-and-2 on the opponent's 9-yard line in the second quarter leading 17-0 over the Browns at home, and a 4th-and-2 on your own 28-yard line with a six-point lead against the Colts (#1 scoring defense in the NFL) on the road. There's obviously a difference in those two scenarios.

It was the wrong decision and there's nothing that can convince me otherwise. Peyton Manning may be greatest quarterback in the NFL, but you have to make him and the Colts beat you. By serving it up on a tee and giving Indy the ball back nine yards away from the Red Zone, you've reduced your win probability from about 55% to 3% (that's not an actual calculation, just a guess). For example, if your team is up one on the Lakers with four seconds left, do you foul Kobe Bryant because you're afraid that he's going to make the game-winning shot? Of course not. You make him make a play. If he beats you, you live with it.

By going for it on 4th-and-2, Belichick put the pressure on his team. By punting instead, he would've put the pressure on Peyton and the Colts.