I was furious like all of you. Dan Campbell cost his team the game, cost the city of Detroit a chance at eternal glory that they may never sniff again. On 4^th and 2 up 14 points at San Francisco’s 28-yard line, Campbell lifted his boot straps, kept the kicking team on the sideline and went for the conversion. It failed and so did the Lions from that point onward.

It seemed so obvious in the moment, go up three scores, Dan! The 49ers didn’t have a lot going for them, they finished their first drive of the second half with a field goal, and the Lions immediately drove the ball down the field and put themselves in a good position. Everyone around me and myself said take the three, go up 17. That’s almost a nail in the coffin with 22 minutes left in the game. But what was going through Campbell’s head?

Using ESPN’s analytics machine, the choices a lot of fans thought were simple, may not have been that easy after all. The analytics essentially said the decision did not have that large of an impact on the game. When you look at win probability (actual in game probability before and after the attempt), it was 86.2% favoring the Lions before the 4^th down decision, and after it only dropped to 84%.

If he goes for it the win percentage (this calculates if they convert it) climbs to 90.5%, if he doesn’t and kicks the field goal it goes to 90.3%. The difference is 6 percentage points, which is fairly large, but not the end of the world. Using an article from sportingnews.com, when the distance of the fourth down is two yards or less, the percentage of conversion is 57.2%. You have to wonder if the Lions finish this drive off with a touchdown, does the win percentage climb upwards of 95% (data is somewhat limited on the final conclusion of the drive)? What if they convert then kick the field goal with less time on the clock, later in the drive? A lot of these numbers conflict each other and make it incredibly difficult to make a decision in real game time.  So, when you put all of this information together, this decision was much less of an analytics decision and much more of a “who is Dan Campbell” decision. Dan Campbell is known as the rough and tough, gritty, we’re gonna slam it down your throat type coach. With that type of demeanor comes going for it. He didn’t want to be scared in front of his guys and I think that could’ve gotten into his head. In the moment, I imagine Campbell thought they wouldn’t stop them, couldn’t stop them, because they really hadn’t all game. That was the identity of the Lions all year and its commendable that he stuck to it, but was it the right decision? The analytics make it clouded, but in my opinion, no it wasn’t. If he converts this is a whole different story, but he didn’t and being up three scores and not giving the 49ers great field position sounds a lot better after the fact and a colossal collapse.

That wasn’t the only time Campbell might have been lost in his own bravado and identity.

In the 4^th quarter, having already given up their 17-point lead, the Lions had another decision to make. They were down 3, it was 4^th & 3, and they had the ball at the 49er’s 30-yard line. It would be about a 47-yard field goal, a pretty easy kick for any kicker in the NFL. The Lions kicker is Michael Badgeley, he took over the job on December 17^th replacing Riley Patterson who had missed two extra points in a game. Badgeley was perfect since taking over, but had only one kick over 40 yards in the past year. This, I have to imagine, plays deeply into Campbell’s thought process. Who do you trust? The kicker who just recently joined the team or the actual team that got you there? Then we go to the analytics: ESPN had Detroit’s win percentage at 39.1% if they go for it and get it and 38.8% if they kick the field goal. On ESPN’s win probability the number for the Lions dropped to 27.3% after the failed conversion, and before that play it was 38.7%.

These numbers are not in Detroit’s favor, they still lose the game with a kick there, but if they convert and go down to score a touchdown, you have to imagine the numbers would increase substantially to the point where the Lions are favored to win. As you looked at Campbell at the sidelines, you could see he felt the win was slipping away. His nose was starting to get red, his gestures getting larger, he wanted something big to happen. When you put the analytics behind it, it gives a coach all the more reason to go for it there. Like I said earlier, you can’t hate a coach for doing what got them there. Sure, from an outside perspective it seems easy, take the points shift some of that momentum back your way. You’ve given up 20 unanswered points, not putting any points up would be detrimental, but that’s not Dan Campbell, it never will be. Will it be to his downfall? Who really knows. The analytics were mixed on his decisions, so at the end of the day would you rather lose with a coach who sticks to his guns all year all or a coach who hops on the fads of the year?