Welcome to the Bill Barnwell show.

I am feeling well.

We have a topic that has been burning on the various platforms over about 24 hours now as we record this.

A very interesting set of conference championship games on Sunday.

And very foolishly, I saw the Chiefs and I saw the Ravens go for it on fourth and short

and convert the Ravens on fourth and short

in their own territory early in the games and I said, I think I even tweeted something like,

thank God the Ravens got that fourth and once. We don't have to have the discourse tomorrow.

Oops, my bad. That's on me because Dan Campbell decided to be Dan Campbell, made two very aggressive decisions.

We'll talk about it, aggressive decisions on fourth down.

Uncommon, maybe, might be the best way to put it decisions on fourth down with a big lead at first, then a with no lead trailing by three points after

the game fell apart and lions failed on them both the internet did not take kindly to dan campbell's

decisions this is analytics fault the nerds apparently made this decision, not Dan Campbell.

But I want to have a good faith conversation about Dan Campbell's decisions because I think

even as there's been plenty of criticism, perhaps warranted, perhaps some cases warranted, perhaps not.

I think there are real questions about wind probability models, about decision making,

about how you adapt things for each individual decision you have to make versus the broader

win probability model framework and structure.

And I'm not qualified to have that

conversation. That is far beyond my pay grade, but someone who is qualified to have that

discussion is someone I'm bringing back to the show today. Talk about this topic. I think one of

the smartest people out there breaking down, fourth down decision making and analysis and

...