Here’s a little more info about the stats of it from the NY Times:

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/16/defending-belichicks-fourth-down-decision/

A conversion on 4th-and-2 would be successful 60 percent of the time. Historically, in a situation with 2:00 left and needing a TD to either win or tie, teams get the TD 53 percent of the time from that field position. The total win probability for the 4th-down conversion attempt would therefore be:

(0.60 * 1) + (0.40 * (1-0.53)) = 0.79 WP (WP stands for win probability)

A punt from the 28 typically nets 38 yards, starting the Colts at their 34. Teams historically get the TD 30 percent of the time in that situation. So the punt gives the Pats about a 0.70 WP.

Statistically, the better decision would be to go for it, and by a good amount. However, these numbers are baselines for the league as a whole. You’d have to expect the Colts had a better than 30 percent chance of scoring from their 34, and an accordingly higher chance to score from the Pats’ 28. But any adjustment in their likelihood of scoring from either field position increases the advantage of going for it.

I agree with your analysis of coaching and companies. Incentives to innovate are not aligned with criteria for keeping a job.

Football won’t change – there are too many Monday morning quarterbacks that use hindsight to criticize decisions. I bet that problem affects public companies too, who have more “Monday morning quarterbacks” in their stockholders.

Your stats aren’t really relevant. Defenses don’t defend a 2nd and 2 the same way they defend a 4th and 2 with the game on the line. If we knew Pats were converting 76% of the latter, that would be more relevant (and impressive). Doubt that’s the case though.

Startups should use the fact that they answer to no-one to take advantage of the opportunities that others can’t. Large companies should align incentives to encourage similar behavior. Great article, very interesting read.

This discussion reminds me of baseball. Most people would regard statistical analysis in baseball as too detail-oriented. Unfortunately, attention to detail only helps if you’re looking at the right details in the right way. Conventional wisdom in baseball rarely gives undue credit to the best power hitters, but often fails to reward productive players without success in the sexiest stat columns. While there are always technicians in the background who will run the numbers right, the fans and the media will overlook the guy who gets a lot of walks, plays solid defense, or forces high pitch counts. And let’s face it: baseball is a business. Fans who pay money to go to the stadium, and the media who determine which players are in the spotlight, will often dictate who plays and who makes what money.