Can someone explain the analytics that say going for it on 4th at 0-0 is the right call?

[VaqueroTD]

There are some smart fans on this site who can maybe explain this better. I've seen the articles and the websites that show you the percentage. The analytics guys seem to say it's almost always a good call to be aggressive and go for it on 4th early in the game?

When McCarthy decided to go for it on 4th in the Pats game at 0-0, I thought we may have lost the game with that decision. Having watched the Parcells Tree in Dallas, I know how those teams play against high-powered offenses. They're looking for mistakes like that so they can grind it out. It was a good win though, and everyone forgot about it, especially when the analytics guys said it was a good call.

But what about momentum? And just psychological 'getting points on the board.' Having watched the Boys since the early 80's, it always feels like there is this sense of relief in the stadium, on the TV, etc when you score first blood. FG or TD, and sometimes just going through your first series, doesn't matter. AND it seems to settle the players down. Playing in front of 100k people every game - no matter how many years of experience - I would guess much of our roster comes in with some butterflies and needs to settle down. From my own personal sports experience, I know once you get the sweat and the intensity going, you're in the zone, but that START of the game is always weird.

I'm all for being aggressive later in the game with a high-powered offense that has momentum (which oddly enough seem to be the decisions the analytics guys seem to frown on the most) but at 0-0? I would always go conservative.

 

[cowboyec]

you would think we could gain a yard with this talent.

 

[Established1971]

There are some smart fans on this site who can maybe explain this better. I've seen the articles and the websites that show you the percentage. The analytics guys seem to say it's almost always a good call to be aggressive and go for it on 4th early in the game?

When McCarthy decided to go for it on 4th in the Pats game at 0-0, I thought we may have lost the game with that decision. Having watched the Parcells Tree in Dallas, I know how those teams play against high-powered offenses. They're looking for mistakes like that so they can grind it out. It was a good win though, and everyone forgot about it, especially when the analytics guys said it was a good call.

But what about momentum? And just psychological 'getting points on the board.' Having watched the Boys since the early 80's, it always feels like there is this sense of relief in the stadium, on the TV, etc when you score first blood. FG or TD, doesn't matter. AND it seems to settle the players down. Playing in front of 100k people every game - no matter how many years of experience - I would guess much of our roster comes in with some butterflies and needs to settle down. From my own personal sports experience, I know once you get the sweat and the intensity going, you're in the zone, but that START of the game is always weird.

I'm all for being aggressive later in the game with a high-powered offense that has momentum (which oddly enough seem to be the decisions the analytics guys seem to frown on the most) but at 0-0? I would always go conservative.

teams who score first win 66% of the time. They were playing the #6 defense in the league, you take 3 points, set the tone. Then he goes for it again. He needs to freaking stop doing this so often

 

[MysteryIceGuro]

Going for it on 4th down is nothing now. Most teams in the NFL do it regardless of score or situation unless they are up by a lot and don’t want to start screwing up.

i get the momentum thing, but I don’t think 1/2 field goals would have changed how sloppy this team looked on both sides of the ball. And who’s to say Greg “The Leg” would have even made those FG’s? He’s very inconsistent and the fact that they never trusted him this game shows that.

 

[Risen Star]

I don't mind it as much as everyone seems to.

 

[glimmerman]

Elliot paused. Should have been a ram play. Or Dak sneak. Bad call…

 

[CT Dal Fan]

I also think it's about sending a message early in the game too. Dallas held Denver after the failed 4th down to open the game too.

After Pollard's big opening runback and the early 3 and out by the Broncos, the Cowboys had a chance to take control of this thing and assert themselves, but they just thought they could throw their helmets out there and win today.

Lesson (hopefully) learned.

 

[CWR]

The analytics stuff is a sham we were sold. MM believes in this offense and most of the time he will go for it. It is only in certain context that he opts otherwise. This is something he has consistently demonstrated all year.

 

[JonesBoys]

This team has shown they are not good at converting short yardage lately. McCarthy needs to punt or go for 3 points. Every time I see them go for it I fully expect zero push from the o-line and Zeke getting tackled behind the line. Enough with these calls they can’t be trusted to get a yard.

 

[Killerinstinct]

The first score is the hardest and the def started out playing well.

 

[kumizi]

Because there's more than a 50% chance you convert a short 4th down. Let's say there is a 60% chance you convert there. Let's say if you convert there, there's a 60% chance you score a TD on that drive. That's an expected points of 0.6 x 0.6 x 7 = 2.52 points.

Let's say there's an 75% chance Zuerlein makes the field goal. That's an expected points of 0.75 x 3 = 2.25 points.

I dont know the exact numbers. I just made up ballpark figures. But you can see that 2.52 > 2.25 in this example.

 

[pansophy]

I'd have to see how the analytics were constructed to have a real opinion, but generally, the way these analyses work is the probability of winning goes up a lot more if we make the play than it decreases if we don't convert. That's what justifies the decision.

What I don't know is if those statistics factor in our offensive strengths, their defensive strengths, and generally the specifics of the two teams playing. I'm guessing that these analytics are based on all things being equal here is the probability of winning versus losing given the score and time of the game.

 

[CowboyRoy]

There are some smart fans on this site who can maybe explain this better. I've seen the articles and the websites that show you the percentage. The analytics guys seem to say it's almost always a good call to be aggressive and go for it on 4th early in the game?

When McCarthy decided to go for it on 4th in the Pats game at 0-0, I thought we may have lost the game with that decision. Having watched the Parcells Tree in Dallas, I know how those teams play against high-powered offenses. They're looking for mistakes like that so they can grind it out. It was a good win though, and everyone forgot about it, especially when the analytics guys said it was a good call.

But what about momentum? And just psychological 'getting points on the board.' Having watched the Boys since the early 80's, it always feels like there is this sense of relief in the stadium, on the TV, etc when you score first blood. FG or TD, and sometimes just going through your first series, doesn't matter. AND it seems to settle the players down. Playing in front of 100k people every game - no matter how many years of experience - I would guess much of our roster comes in with some butterflies and needs to settle down. From my own personal sports experience, I know once you get the sweat and the intensity going, you're in the zone, but that START of the game is always weird.

I'm all for being aggressive later in the game with a high-powered offense that has momentum (which oddly enough seem to be the decisions the analytics guys seem to frown on the most) but at 0-0? I would always go conservative.

Dumbest thing he does. When your are playing teams that are inferior to you you dont give them a chance to get a lead early in the game and gain momentum.

MM is an idiot.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Because there's more than a 50% chance you convert a short 4th down. Let's say there is a 60% chance you convert there. Let's say if you convert there, there's a 60% chance you score a TD on that drive. That's an expected points of 0.6 x 0.6 x 7 = 2.52 points.

Let's say there's an 75% chance Zuerlein makes the field goal. That's an expected points of 0.75 x 3 = 2.25 points.

I dont know the exact numbers. I just made up ballpark figures. But you can see that 2.52 > 2.25 in this example.

analytics are a tool, not a strategy. Those analytics dont know diddly about your opponent, your injuries, run defense, momentum, time of the game, ect....ect.......

 

[Ranching]

There are some smart fans on this site who can maybe explain this better. I've seen the articles and the websites that show you the percentage. The analytics guys seem to say it's almost always a good call to be aggressive and go for it on 4th early in the game?

When McCarthy decided to go for it on 4th in the Pats game at 0-0, I thought we may have lost the game with that decision. Having watched the Parcells Tree in Dallas, I know how those teams play against high-powered offenses. They're looking for mistakes like that so they can grind it out. It was a good win though, and everyone forgot about it, especially when the analytics guys said it was a good call.

But what about momentum? And just psychological 'getting points on the board.' Having watched the Boys since the early 80's, it always feels like there is this sense of relief in the stadium, on the TV, etc when you score first blood. FG or TD, and sometimes just going through your first series, doesn't matter. AND it seems to settle the players down. Playing in front of 100k people every game - no matter how many years of experience - I would guess much of our roster comes in with some butterflies and needs to settle down. From my own personal sports experience, I know once you get the sweat and the intensity going, you're in the zone, but that START of the game is always weird.

I'm all for being aggressive later in the game with a high-powered offense that has momentum (which oddly enough seem to be the decisions the analytics guys seem to frown on the most) but at 0-0? I would always go conservative.

Analytics goes out the window during the heat of the game.....that's used in preparation......those decisions are mostly feel of the game and trying to get a moment boost.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I'd have to see how the analytics were constructed to have a real opinion, but generally, the way these analyses work is the probability of winning goes up a lot more if we make the play than it decreases if we don't convert. That's what justifies the decision.

What I don't know is if those statistics factor in our offensive strengths, their defensive strengths, and generally the specifics of the two teams playing. I'm guessing that these analytics are based on all things being equal here is the probability of winning versus losing given the score and time of the game.

They 100% dont factor it those team details. They just tell you what has happened in the past based on a similar situation. There is no analytic that can measure the odds of getting a first down on 4th and 1 with Aaron Donald and the Rams on defense.

 

[Cmac]

Too much analytics is going into this. It's the arrogance to respect other teams, and the arrogance that formations are lending defensive clues (no lead blocker/no jumbo) and the penchant and fool's gold success of the trickery. Teams have film on this now. Situational Awareness and success is everything.....make the 1st down (look good)......miss the 1st down (look bad/foolish). Our staff has been looking at too much college film......apparently.

 

[Floatyworm]

I don't mind it as much as everyone seems to.

Sorry....I'm oldschool....I would have kicked the FG. The team that scores first usually wins....

 

[Xeven]

In the first quarter is when you take your shots. You have the entire game to make up for an early fail. If you go for it and get 7 then you establish momentum.

 

[CowboyRoy]

This team has shown they are not good at converting short yardage lately. McCarthy needs to punt or go for 3 points. Every time I see them go for it I fully expect zero push from the o-line and Zeke getting tackled behind the line. Enough with these calls they can’t be trusted to get a yard.

Its because the other team has analytics too. And they know if they stack the box, more than likely Zeke will run up the middle and not have the ability to bounce it outside.