Understand. I just really don't care much for these probability of winning %. Analytics in general to me would carry very little weight in my game decisions. I would be much more cognizant of specific game flow than any analytic tendancy that was produced over the course of many different situations, different game conditions and different teams.
I, as a coach need to have a feel for what my team and the opponent is doing that day.
If I am 7-10 on third down for the day or 2-10 on 3rd down for the day, that is going to have a huge effect on my decision making over some analytic of winning % based on going for it or not. Someone was clamoring for us using analytics in the NE game in horrid weather conditions. Those conditions makes the analytics pretty much useless!
This would have been a better OP.To all, my point is that Analytics is not new. Since the Landry days, play calling tendencies have been tracked in the NFL for an edge. Now that you have it on an IPad does not make it new. The coach saying he is big on analytics should have been using statistics before it was called analytics.
How much analytics did it take for Jimmy Johnson in the 1992 NFC Championship game to say "I want to win" to Norv Turner after the 49ers got within 10 points? What analytics was used for Norv to call the most often used go to pass play in the Cowboys playbook to gain a 1st down. Or, Where was the analytics after being down at halftime in the Super Bowl to the Bills did it take for Jimmy and Norv to run the football with the NFL MVP RB they neglected in the 1st half?
Football is more about putting your playmakers in position to make plays and the instincts to call those plays. That is not analytics. That is coaching. Since 1994, Cowboys have not had leadership at Head Coach and a real Head Coach (except when Jerry had to get his stadium and hired Bill Parcells).
Analytics does not give a Head Coach leadership, and game instincts to win.
I agree completely. "Analytics" has a place but it can water down a specific situation to a one size fits all scenario that ignores the factors specific to that situation.
Coaching/Management got crucified on the Zone for saying they don't pay attention to analytics when referring to that specific fourth down play near the goal line. They absolutely shouldn't have paid attention to a boiled down stew of many many similiar but not equal situations to decide what to do in this moment, with these players, in this stadium, against this defense, in this weather etc etc etc.
Instinct born of experience matters a great deal.
A couple things.Yep, I don't want analytics to tell my coach what to run on 4th and 1 with the game on the line. I want him to be able to have enough feel for the game to know what is going to work based on his teams performance that day!
The thing about this situation is, if you fail to make the first down are you giving up the ball at your own 33 to a Tom Brady in his prime or to a Mark Sanchez.
That's a really weird argument. You don't have to have exact matches of down, distance, field position and clock to get useful data.Would love to see the amount of data they have on that specific situation.
1) It would be very rare for a team to go for it on their own 33 with 4 minutes left
2) ton of data for a team kicking it in that situation
- so the win percentage of kicking it really can't be compared to the win percentage of going for it because the sample size is not large enough on going for it on 4th and 2 to make the comparison.
That's my take on that scenario.
That's a really weird argument. You don't have to have exact matches of down, distance, field position and clock to get useful data.
There's a ton of data on going for it on 4th and 2, and for that matter on 3rd and 2 in situations where you'll be punting if you don't make it. Clock and field position are irrelevant to that data. (Okay, you may want to discount plays run close to the opponent's end zone because there's less field to defend).
There's a ton of data on what happens when teams have 1st downs at different positions on the field, and about what you can expect from their running and passing matchups (assuming they'll be mostly running in this situation).
In this particular situation, the Packers willingly gave up the ball and never saw it again, because the Seahawks got two first downs. If they hadn't gotten the second first down, the Packers would have gotten the ball back with about 80 seconds left and no time outs.
This is example of where analytics come into play , I got this form another forum that I frequent and share to provide some insight on how it can be applied.
Week 10, 2018 GB @ SEA. GB is 4-4-1 and McCarthy is firmly on the hot seat, coaching for his job.
4:20 and 1 TO remaining in the 4th, GB trailed 24-27. Following an incomplete pass on 3rd and 2 he decides to punt from his own 33.
By deciding to punt he is requiring his defense to get a stop to have a chance to win the game.
Had he decided to go for it and failed, a defensive stop would have still given his team a chance to win with a TD on the final possession. The punt cost GB 9.8% win probability (31% vs 21%)
You can't always just go by that. I don't remember the game, so to me it looks like the right decision. But what if the packers didn't get a 3 and out all game? What if they were being gashed on the ground? Does it take these things into considering?
Thats the point - who you have on the field - but even if you have Rodgers, Brady scores and now you down by 10, with prob little time left.Not that it matters but in this example you do have Rodgers as your QB
I will post my thoughts on the new Head Coach after his press conference and staff is announced (or majority is announced).
However, I have been hearing the buzz word of Analytics in football and I laugh because it is basically statistics which has been in football since Engineering major Tom Landry was coaching. When you hear a coach talk about getting a analytics group or using analytics like it is some new thing...BEWARE.
First, on offense you can only do one of 2 things on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd down which is run or pass. You have three choices on 4th down which is punt, run or pass. So the probabilities are not numerous as in baseball. Lets get real, this is a sport that uses X, O, arrows and lines for communication in a playbook.
Tom Landry took analytics out of defense with the flex which was read, then react, and flow your linebackers to the football. Jimmy Johnson a psychology major was attack and have the offense react to you. That is pretty much all you can do on defense.
However, because there are timeouts, 15 minute quarters, play clocks, and 2 minute warnings, time management is important. But that is not analytics, that is time management.
So, on offense 4th and 1, on the opponents 30 yard line, with 45 seconds left, down by 4 with 1 time out with Ezekiel Elliott at RB and Dak Prescott at QB what will you do? Run, Pass, or kick a field goal? Jason Garrett probably kicks a field goal. Jimmy Johnson probably goes for it on 4th down. Instincts give the information for statistics/analytics. So if you want to know the answer.... it is below....
Clock and field position are irrevelant to the data? - seriously - that's just stupid. If you are not looking at game situations - then you are just throwing a dart blindfolded!
So, the Seahawks, who had scored 5 times that game already, made 2 first downs. Seattle is running the ball at over a 5 yrd per carry clip. That surprises you - it does not surprise me? The in game performance of GB's defense told me all I needed to know of that situation. My defense is not likely to stop them. They scored a FG and a TD on their last 2 drives! I am on the road and this could be my last possession. I have Aaron Rodgers and his chances of getting a first down are greater than the chances of my defense stopping them..
I don't need outside analytics influencing my decision there!
McCarthy made the wrong decision but it had nothing to do with analytics of situations prior, he probably just did not want to look like a fool going for it because most coaches would not in that situation!
The point is , you have to stop them if you punt or don't make the 1st , you're toast either way if they scoreThats the point - who you have on the field - but even if you have Rodgers, Brady scores and now you down by 10, with prob little time left.
Point is there are many variables besides just numbers.
I just don't see it because if the score and teams were reversed and I were Seattle I would have definitely punted because I had pretty much shut them down in the second half and I was at home with a crowd that makes a difference!Exactly why analytics help , with this info available to him he might of based his decision on it and not his feelings.
Point being having more info to gain a slight edge to win I'll gladly accept
Well in the scenario, when Brady takes over, he's basically already in FG range - so say you do stop em - they still get the FG (up by 6) and now you have to get 7.The point is , you have to stop them if you punt or don't make the 1st , you're toast either way if they score