Over Valuing Analytics in Football

dwmyers

dwmyers

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
522
One of the things folks have to realize is that the analytics available to fans almost all derive from computer analysis of play by play data, which began to be available in the early 2000s. From these kinds of raw data, guys like Brian Burke could take a ten year block of PBP data, consume it with an expected points model, and then come to some conclusions about what strategies are good on 4th down and whatever on the X yard line. And when Belichick started using some of that stuff and failed, that's when popular awareness of analytics appeared.

These are not the same analytics folks like Chip Kelly were using, as what they could do was put sensors on athletes and then figure out sustained and peak athletic performance of these players. This kind of analytics has been heavily embraced by the professional community.

So I think before you ask if Coach X or Coach Y is using analytics, what kind of analytics are you talking about?

And to the OPs point, what he's calling "analytics" I would call film study, and that was an innovation dating to the 1940s that markedly changed the game (along with platooning). You start seeing modern defenses appearing along with film and athletes who were pure defensive specialists. For someone wondering about those old changes, read any autobiographical book by Bobby Layne. He was a QB around when the NFL went from the 5-2/5-3 fronts to the four man fronts that Landry helped pioneer.

D-
 
DanA

DanA

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,964
Reaction score
5,781
It's a bit like professional poker IMO.

There's a lot of different ways to play but you've got to know, understand and implement a strategy based on probability/analytics if you want to be a top player. It's the same with coaching or in time will be. Nepotism in the league is slowing evolution in the game but won't stop it.
 
JD_KaPow

JD_KaPow

jimnabby
Messages
11,040
Reaction score
10,804
aikemirv said:
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!
Click to expand...
Wow. No. Data doesn't have to match in every single particular to be useful. That's not how any of this works.
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!
Click to expand...
Of course it had to do with analytics of situations. You just did analytics yourself (albeit back-of-the-envelope analytics) to arrive at that conclusion. This was an obvious case. Others are not nearly so obvious, and the more information you have going into them, the better prepared you are to make the call in the moment. I can't fathom why people think less information is better than more information.
 

pansophy

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,011
Reaction score
4,114
JD_KaPow said:
Wow. No. Data doesn't have to match in every single particular to be useful. That's not how any of this works.Of course it had to do with analytics of situations. You just did analytics yourself (albeit back-of-the-envelope analytics) to arrive at that conclusion. This was an obvious case. Others are not nearly so obvious, and the more information you have going into them, the better prepared you are to make the call in the moment. I can't fathom why people think less information is better than more information.
Click to expand...
Have to wonder how close we are to having AI suggesting the top 3 play calls for a certain situation, and the coach picks from them.
 
aikemirv

aikemirv

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,219
Reaction score
9,721
JD_KaPow said:
Wow. No. Data doesn't have to match in every single particular to be useful. That's not how any of this works.Of course it had to do with analytics of situations. You just did analytics yourself (albeit back-of-the-envelope analytics) to arrive at that conclusion. This was an obvious case. Others are not nearly so obvious, and the more information you have going into them, the better prepared you are to make the call in the moment. I can't fathom why people think less information is better than more information.
Click to expand...

And I also just showed why if the conditions were reversed it was a good decision. My team, my circumstances, the location (home or away), the given day. All much better information than previous NFL games analytics with various conditions and circumstances. I would put very little weight on those, they are very low on my decision tree!
 
Kevinicus

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,444
Reaction score
12,215
pansophy said:
Have to wonder how close we are to having AI suggesting the top 3 play calls for a certain situation, and the coach picks from them.
Click to expand...
Madden has had this feature for years. Just sayin'. No idea how good the feature was because I never bothered with it.
 

pansophy

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,011
Reaction score
4,114
Kevinicus said:
Madden has had this feature for years. Just sayin'. No idea how good the feature was because I never bothered with it.
Click to expand...
Not really the same thing, but then many people seem to think that winning on Madden and the NFL are similar, so sure.
 
gongjr

gongjr

Member
Messages
99
Reaction score
43
dwmyers said:
One of the things folks have to realize is that the analytics available to fans almost all derive from computer analysis of play by play data, which began to be available in the early 2000s. From these kinds of raw data, guys like Brian Burke could take a ten year block of PBP data, consume it with an expected points model, and then come to some conclusions about what strategies are good on 4th down and whatever on the X yard line. And when Belichick started using some of that stuff and failed, that's when popular awareness of analytics appeared.

These are not the same analytics folks like Chip Kelly were using, as what they could do was put sensors on athletes and then figure out sustained and peak athletic performance of these players. This kind of analytics has been heavily embraced by the professional community.

So I think before you ask if Coach X or Coach Y is using analytics, what kind of analytics are you talking about?

And to the OPs point, what he's calling "analytics" I would call film study, and that was an innovation dating to the 1940s that markedly changed the game (along with platooning). You start seeing modern defenses appearing along with film and athletes who were pure defensive specialists. For someone wondering about those old changes, read any autobiographical book by Bobby Layne. He was a QB around when the NFL went from the 5-2/5-3 fronts to the four man fronts that Landry helped pioneer.

D-
Click to expand...

I think part of the issue is people hear on air about increased/decreased odds of winning based on a play call. That sort of stuff bugs me, but appears to be the general public's idea of what "analytics" means.
 
aikemirv

aikemirv

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,219
Reaction score
9,721
JD_KaPow said:
Wow. No. Data doesn't have to match in every single particular to be useful. That's not how any of this works.Of course it had to do with analytics of situations. You just did analytics yourself (albeit back-of-the-envelope analytics) to arrive at that conclusion. This was an obvious case. Others are not nearly so obvious, and the more information you have going into them, the better prepared you are to make the call in the moment. I can't fathom why people think less information is better than more information.
Click to expand...
And by the way, I am not saying I would not use analytics. I would use them a lot in game planning for tendencies and deciding how to attack a team-what not to do-what to do. Make sure I am not predictable and stuff like that but this stuff of a 31% chance of winning going for it or a 21% chance if I kick away. I would not base my decisions on that type of stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top