Game Theory in a Goal-Line Offense
When Seahawks fans woke up the morning after Super Bowl XLIX, there was one question on their minds – Why did we throw the ball? At the time, it was one of the most baffling play calls in NFL history. Seattle was sitting on the 1-yd line with one of the best and most powerful running backs in the league in Marshawn Lynch in the backfield, and the choice couldn’t have seemed more obvious. Run the football. Seattle coach Pete Carroll decided to throw the ball instead, and the pass was intercepted, ending the Seahawks’ chances at becoming back-to-back Super Bowl Champions. He was torn apart in the press for his decision, however according to this article, Carroll might have made the right call.
This particular situation can be broken down using the principles of game theory. In the regular season, the Seahawks had established a hard-nosed, ground-first style of offense. In similar situations to the one encountered in the Super Bowl, they ran a convincing majority of the time. They were successful often because of their strength as a team, and the talents of their individual players, but in football there is no play that is indefensible. If the New England Patriots are expecting a run, they can focus every single defensive player on Lynch, and there is nothing the Seahawks could do to break through. To put it simply, if both teams choose the same play (run or pass), the Patriots win. If both teams choose a different play, the Seahawks win. Because the Seahawks are more likely to run, the Patriots will most likely decide to defend against the run. A passing play in this situation was actually very advantageous for Seattle. On the one hand, it would it catch Bill Belichick (the Patriots’ playcaller) off guard, and potentially lead to a touchdown because of it. Even if the play was unsuccessful however, the play call would also create uncertainty in predicting play calls in the future, as Seattle would have 2 more tries to score. Because they have seen the Seahawks pass, the Patriots are less likely than they were before to expect a run, making a running play more effective for Seattle. All of this was thrown out the window when rookie Malcolm Butler intercepted the pass, winning the game for the Patriots. However the percentage of this happening was so insignificant mathematically that it shouldn’t have made a difference in decision making. Pete Carroll made the call that gave his team the best chance for success, which is necessary and crucial in any game theory model.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2015/02/game-theory-american-football