Greg Olsen defended NFL broadcasters everywhere after ESPN’s Michael Wilbon criticized them for working with analytics in their broadcasts.
Wilbon’s complaint occurred on Monday’s edition of “Pardon the Interruption.” The veteran co-host lamented the Buccaneers’ 2-point attempt while trailing by 8 points in their divisional round loss to the Lions.
“Don’t start with ‘tests say go ahead,'” Wilbon said. “Does the analytics say to do it no matter who does it? So if you and I were in the field, ‘Does the analytics say to do it?'”
POWER RANKINGS: How the 49ers, Chiefs, Ravens and Lions can win the Super Bowl
Michael Wilbon, known for being anti “analytics” in the past, once again gets into it while talking about the Bucs-Lions game on PTI.
“Does the analytics say to do it no matter who does it? So if you and I were in the field, ‘Does the analytics say to do it?'”
“Is he… pic.twitter.com/alqxybALvs
– Horrible advertisement (@awfulannunciando) January 22, 2024
In fact, the theory behind going for 2 points and losing 8 points is mathematically sound. As long as a team makes at least 50% of its 2-point conversions, it can increase its regulation chance of winning by attempting 2-point attempts after reducing the lead to 8.
The logic? A team that is converting at least 50% of its 2-point conversions will likely make at least one in every two attempts. So if they miss the first time, they’ll likely tie the game after a second touchdown and a 2-point conversion attempt.
What if they make the first try? Then they could try the easier extra point next time to take the lead.
Despite this, Wilbon attacked NFL broadcasters who tried to explain analysis as part of the experience of watching the game.
“It’s the stupidest, laziest, dumbest thing I’ve ever heard about reasoning in competition,” Wilbon said of the 2-point conversion. “And I hate that broadcasters just buy it without questioning it.”
Wilbon’s comments evidently did not sit well with Olsen, who currently serves as the lead game analyst for Fox’s coverage of the NFL. He took to X (formerly Twitter) to explain that analytics are now “vital” to the sport, so they need to be part of the broadcast.
“This is just further proof of how vital it is for broadcasters to continue educating viewers about the current approach to NFL football.” Olsen wrote. “It’s not about the announcers being ‘lazy’. It’s the way the game is played and it’s here to stay. The game evolves. Not sure why people resist?”
This is just further proof of how vital it is for broadcasters to continue educating viewers about the current approach to NFL football.
It’s not about the announcers being “lazy.” It’s the way the game is played and it’s here to stay. The game evolves. Not sure why people reject? https://t.co/X174e5wA6W
-Greg Olsen (@gregolsen88) January 23, 2024
Olsen’s assessment is spot on. While Wilbon and others may not be fans of the impact of analytics in the NFL, coaches are using it to influence on-field decisions.
That’s not to say analytics is gospel. NFL teams don’t follow numbers blindly and sometimes adapt to the current scenario.
But as long as analytics are involved in the game, Olsen & Co. will need to acknowledge them and explain how they impact the decisions each coaching staff makes throughout the game.
