The “Worst” Call in Super Bowl History
In Super Bowl 50, a drive that would have likely gone down as one of the best comeback drives in Super Bowl History was ended by arguably the best plays in Super Bowl History. After getting the ball with 2:00 minutes left in the fourth quarter, the Seattle Seahawks trailed the New England Patriots 28-24. After an amazing catch by the Seattle Wide receiver Jermaine Kearse over NE CB Malcolm Butler and a 4yard run by Marshawn Lynch, the Seahawks were on the 1-yard line in a goal-to-go situation. This is where it gets dicey. The Seahawks Head Coach, Pete Carroll, has one of the most dominant running backs in the league in Marshawn Lynch with three tries to gain 1 yard and win the Super Bowl. Most logical football fans would all agree that this is an obvious running situation; even the Seahawks fans after the game expected the coach to call a running play. However, Pete Carroll calls a pass and Russell Wilson throws the ball to a Ricardo Lockette, and NE CB Malcolm Butler makes a tremendous read on the ball and intercepts the pass.
Pete Carroll received a huge amount of criticism for this call that lost them the Super Bowl, but as the article attached below described, from a game theory perspective, he wasn’t necessarily wrong. If you consider a game where the players are the offense and the defense and their options are (Run,Pass) and (Defend Run,Defend Pass) respectively, in the 2014 the success rate of run and pass were equal. This means that offenses should technically be indifferent to each strategy. However, it is important to note that the Seahawks success rate in those situations is much higher than the league average. This still means that, according to the theory, if the Seahawks success rate was higher they would shift their play to running more. This would still mean they would pass every now and then given that their success rate isn’t 1. So from a game theory perspective, Pete Carroll’s call wasn’t that bad. This is highlighted but the fact that New England was playing the run quite obviously which would decrease their chances.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2015/02/game-theory-american-football