Hurley's Picks: John Harbaugh got caught in the weeds of analytical thinking

BOSTON -- Analytics conversations can be tough. For a lot of reasons.

There are people who believe that anyone who doesn't robotically follow a computer calculation to make football decisions is an idiot. Those people? They're rough. They live in their own reality.

Then there are people who believe the word "analytics" is in and of itself a dirty word, and that anything involving percentages and historical data is hooey. Baloney. BALDERDASH! They are, likewise, rough.

So when John Harbaugh makes an objectively bad decision in a football game and then throws the A-word around in his postgame press conference, the conversation and analysis of his decision can get a bit muddied. To say the least.

That's the case this week. Facing a fourth-and-goal at the Bills' 2-yard line, in a tie game with more than four minutes remaining, Harbaugh decided to go for the touchdown instead of kicking the field goal. Lamar Jackson threw an interception in the end zone, and the Bills then marched all the way down the field, kicking a chip-shot 21-yard field goal as time expired to win the game.

Had Harbaugh simply said, "We wanted to be aggressive, we wanted to get the touchdown, we wanted to make it harder for Buffalo to win," then he would have been in the clear. Instead, Harbaugh made it seem like this was an objectively correct decision by the letter of the law. He basically feels sorry for you if you can't see that.

"[If] you kick a field goal there, now it's not a three-down game anymore, it's a four-down game. You're putting them out there, you're putting your defense at a disadvantage because [the Bills have] got four downs to convert all the way down the field and a chance to again score seven, and then you lose the game on a touchdown," Harbaugh said. "So, then the worst thing ... The other thing you think you're going to get the ball at the 2-yard line, so I'm very confident in the defense's ability to stop them down there with the ball on the 2-yard line, so we have them backed up if we didn't get it. It didn't turn out that way, unfortunately, and we lost the game. So, hindsight, you could take the points, but if you look at it analytically, understand why we did it." 

There's a lot there. Let's unpack it quickly.

Harbaugh wanted the touchdown so that Buffalo would not be able to force overtime with a field goal. Harbaugh trusted his defense to be able to prevent the Bills -- who would still be getting four downs to move the chains, not three -- from embarking on a 75-yard touchdown drive to tie the game (or win it with a two-point conversion). Got it.

Harbaugh didn't want to go up by three, because then Buffalo would only need a field goal to tie the game. At the same time, Harbaugh didn't like his defense's chances of being able to prevent a touchdown from Buffalo on the ensuing drive to lose the game. Got that, too.

AT THE SAME TIME, Harbaugh did trust his defense to prevent the Bills from scoring at all, in any way ... but only if the Bills started their drive at their own 2-yard line. Got it?

What we seem to have here is a man being unable to see the forest for the trees. (Analytics show this is the correct idiom to use.)

While there's some validity to the idea of Buffalo having a slight advantage by being in four-down mode for their potential game-tying or game-winning drive, there's also this:

You can't win the football game if you never take the lead.

That is a rather important detail that perhaps the "analytics" missed. Both analytics and common sense show that the easiest way to take a lead when facing a fourth-and-goal at the 2-yard line is to kick the easy field goal. After that -- with the four downs, with the field goal implications, etc. -- it's up to your football team to win the football game. You're going to have to play defense one way or another. Doing so with a lead is actually the smarter play.

It all ended up being kind of a moot point, anyway. The Bills did drive 77 yards, and the Ravens didn't have the awareness to let them score a touchdown so that they'd have a chance to counter with the winning score. It was a master class in how not to finish a football game, something the Ravens have now put forth in half of their contests this season.

Ah, I'm sure it'll all end up fine, though.

Here are the Week 5 picks.

(Home team in CAPS; Thursday lines)

Indianapolis (+3) over DENVER
The Broncos will win this game by a final score of 4-3. You heard it here first.

New York Giants (+8) over Green Bay Packers (in London)
The Giants just won a game without a quarterback. The Packers just failed to cover against Bailey Zappe. I try not to ride the week-to-week momentum too much, but the Giants are 2-0 against the spread and straight up as underdogs. And Aaron Rodgers seems, like, 36 percent invested in this season. At most. Packers win by four. It will be boring. Sorry to England.

Pittsburgh (+14) over BUFFALO
This is a two-touchdown spread you can really agonize over. On the one hand, the Bills are probably four or five touchdowns better than the Steelers on any given day. But that's at full strength. Clearly, the start of the season has taken a physical and mental toll on the consensus Super Bowl favorites. They're going to win this game, but are they going to be completely rolling like they were to start the year?

I mean ... yeah, probably. But Kenny Pickett and Co. will be playing to the final whistle as they try to establish a new offense. This one reeks of a backdoor cover with no time remaining on the clock.

CLEVELAND (+2.5) over Los Angeles Chargers
Three of the Browns' four games have been decided by three points or fewer. The one that wasn't close was a 12-point Browns win. At the very least, as they get by without Deshaun Watson, the Browns know how to stay in games.

MINNESOTA (-7) over Chicago
The Chicago Bears. Are so, so bad. 

The Chicago Bears. Ought to reconsider. Many, many things.

This has been your Chicago Bears Thought Of The Week.

Dalvin Cook has been pretty quiet to start this season. That will change this week. That is a guarantee.

NEW ENGLAND (-3) over Detroit
Listen. The Patriots are vulnerable. They're down to their third QB, in all likelihood. If they have their starting QB, he'll be barely ambulatory. Their only win came against the Steelers. Things are not great.

But let me ask you something: Do you believe in the power of Pat Patriot? I do. And the man is back in a big way this week, as the Patriots go full throwback for this game. It won't be an easy win, but there's no way they can look that good and lose to the Lions. Analytics show that to be the case.

(The Lions also have the worst run defense on earth. Might be a bigger factor than the uniform situation. Maybe.)

Seattle (+5.5) over NEW ORLEANS
Geno Smith has the third-highest passer rating in the NFL. Sports rock.

The Seahawks on the road for a second straight week does give me pause. But the Saints are banged up and ... might not be very good. So 5.5 is too rich for my blood.

Miami (-3) over NEW YORK JETS
It's been, um, a turbulent couple of weeks for the Dolphins. Yet with a week and a half to recover, a date with the Jets feels like a safe landing spot to get back on track. Even, of course, without Tua Tagovailoa.

If the Dolphins don't pull this one out, then the honeymoon with Mike McDaniel may indeed be over after a lovely 3-0 start to the year.

Atlanta (+9) over TAMPA BAY
Look, do I like betting against Thomas Brady? No, reader, I do not. In fact, I hate it. It's the dumbest thing you could ever do.

Alas, this line feels like a relic from last year or from 2020. The 2022 Bucs are strugg-a-ling. Injuries and bad vibes are hanging over them at all times. Cole Beasley is randomly quitting after just one game. Bruce Arians is chirping opponents from the sidelines. Patrick Mahomes is quite literally reinventing the sport on the fly, at the expense of the Bucs.

Don't get me wrong: The Bucs will win the game. But it won't be easy, and the Falcons are an extra level of pesky this year. I can't take Brady and the Bucs by nine until they prove they are worthy of such respect.

(Now cue up a 50-0 Bucs victory, because that is what Brady does.)

Tennessee (-2.5) over WASHINGTON
My how the Titans have fallen. Hopefully they're embarrassed by this spread. I think Mike Vrabel can get them feeling a certain way so that they can improve to 3-2 before their much-too-early bye in Week 6.

JACKSONVILLE (-7) over Houston
If you don't have full-on Jags Fever by now, then I cannot help you. It's simply not my fault and not my problem.

San Francisco (-6.5) over CAROLINA
Matt Rhule is 11-26 as a head coach.

When David Tepper hired Matt Rhule, David Tepper said this about Matt Rhule: "I think Matt Rhule can come in here and build an organization for the next 30 or 40 years."

Yikes.

Now, Tepper also said this: "He dresses like [crap] and sweats all over himself. He dresses like me, so I have to love the guy. I was a short-order cook, he was a short-order cook. Nobody gave him anything, nobody gave me anything."

Maybe it wasn't a great hire!

At least it was only a seven-year, $60 million deal for a guy who had exactly one year of experience in the NFL, and even then, it was as an assistant offensive line coach.

Not a great hire.

LOS ANGELES RAMS (-5.5) over Dallas
There are two types of defending champions. There are the defending champs who are just full of badasses, who come out every week looking to hunt instead of being hunted. Then there are the defending champs who are just kind of obnoxious, acting like the wins will just come on their own every week, as if things are supposed to be easy. The Rams are definitely in the latter group thus far. 

I'm giving them one more shot, albeit on a short week but against this backup quarterback who's long overdue for a bad game and a loss.

(Perhaps when the 36-year-old head coach spent his offseason contemplating retirement, it was a sign that the Rams wouldn't be entering 2022 as the most focused group.)

Philadelphia (-5) over ARIZONA
On the one hand, it feels like the Eagles are overperforming. At least slightly, right? On the other hand ... they are good.

In terms of yardage, they have the No. 2 offense and No. 3 defense in the NFL. You can bet against them based on feel if you'd like, but for the time being, there's no actual reason to do so.

Cincinnati (+3) over BALTIMORE
Am I still overrating the Bengals based on their postseason run last year? Of course I am.

But as mentioned in a sentence or two earlier in this here column, I have my concerns about the Ravens' ability to put away games in the fourth quarter. Considering seemingly every game ends up being close this year in the NFL, I'm going to trust the Bengals to execute a little bit better in the end. 

KANSAS CITY (-7) over Las Vegas
Listen. I said earlier that I try not to ride the week-to-week vibes too much. And I do. But Patrick Mahomes took last week's nationally televised opportunity as a challenge to be ridiculously, absurdly, stupidly good at the quarterback position. Now he gets to do it again?

The Raiders rank 22nd in the NFL in passing yards allowed per game and 27th in yards allowed per attempt. Opponents have a 103.2 passer rating against them, which makes Vegas the eighth-worst in the league in that regard. They also have the 29th-ranked red zone defense, and as a result, they're tied for 24th in terms of scoring defense. Now with Patrick Mahomes playing at home on a Monday night ... Josh McDaniels' second head coaching stint appears to be headed for a 1-4 start.

Life in the NFL: Pretty hard!

Last week: 10-4-2
Season: 30-32-2

You can email Michael Hurley or find him on Twitter @michaelFhurley.