3. Writing in the NYT about a Superbowl past (2014) and the Seahawks coach's decision to go for a pass play, Justin Wolfers (Econ professor at Michi- gan) defends this decision and goes on to write on how the Seahawks coach should choose his mixed strategy: The analogy between Rock-Paper-Scissors and football is close, but not perfect. In Rock-Paper-Scissors each weapon is both as destructive and as vulnerable as the other they each beat one opponent, and are beaten by another and this symmetry means that the best strategy is to play each alternative with the same probability. In the football context, your running back may be a B I i T T I e T better weapon than your quarterback, and so an optimal strategy does not dictate that you use them both with the same probability. Rather, you choose the probabilities in an optimal mixed strategy so that the payoff from a running play will be the same as that from a pass, This means that even with a great running back, an optimal strategy sometimes involves passing. Otherwise, your star running back, always facing a run defense, may end up less effective than a less great passer. Explain very briefly why this analysis is not quite correct? (no more than 1/2 page). A pdf of the full article is available on canvas