4th Down No Problem: Go for it!

[gjkoeppen]

Didn’t a Harvard study show a team is better off going on fourth down 100% of the time than punting on fourth down 100% of the time?

I think NATO did a similar study and gave the same results.
.

 

[T-RO]

The last six years I was a head coach, we had a package where we would read it from the press box and IIwould make the call from the sideline. Depending on defesed we would roll out pass, run, or quick kick. Worked every time. But, it was just Texas HS football, not the NFL. That's what everyone will say around here, so I'll just be quiet.

Yup. There is a military quality to football.

In the military you win with reconnaissance, intelligence and communication from the top brass to the guys in the field. And again with the military there are lots of apps that do calculations. Data is key...and decisions that leverage data are essential.

 

[Doomsday101]

Go back to our last playoff game:

Cowboys:
Packers: 4 TD / 2 FG / 3 Punt / 1 Turnover...3.4 points per possession
Cowboys: 3 TD / 3 FG / 2 Punt / 1 Turnover... 3.44 points per possesion

*Packers had one more possession in game...game winning FG

Neither offense had difficulty going on long drives

I can’t criticize our punting decisions in that game...but...

Consider these Garrett decisions:
4th down and 2 on GB 32...we kick a 50 yd field goal (first quarter)
4th and 3 on GB 33...we kick 52 yard field goal. (4th quarter, 35 sec left)

Statistically odds are 50% or better on converting first down on both these 4th down plays...and those FG attempts weren’t gimmies. I’m not super critical of those calls, but food for thought.

I’ll say this: In a game lik this where your opponent is scoring 3.5 points per drive...a 3 point field goal won’t help you much. In games like this a coach should be VERY aggressive in going for touchdowns.

4th and 3 on GB 33...we kick 52 yard field goal. (4th quarter, 35 sec left) sorry Knowing I have one of the best FG kickers in the game I would kick with only 35 seconds. If you go for it and fail game is over, if you go for it and make it you still will likely have to kick a FG. Just the fact that any screw up and not getting the 1st makes it easy to say kick the FG now as opposed to risking it

 

[T-RO]

Didn’t a Harvard study show a team is better off going on fourth down 100% of the time than punting on fourth down 100% of the time?

That’s a mis-characterization.

No analytics-savvy person would say ‘never punt’

 

[T-RO]

4th and 3 on GB 33...we kick 52 yard field goal. (4th quarter, 35 sec left) sorry Knowing I have one of the best FG kickers in the game I would kick with only 35 seconds. If you go for it and fail game is over, if you go for it and make it you still will likely have to kick a FG. Just the fact that any screw up and not getting the 1st makes it easy to say kick the FG now as opposed to risking it

As I said in my post above...I’m not necessarily critical of those decisions. And I agree with you that on our final FG attempt...that was the right call.

The thing to point out is in a game where your opponent is averaging 3.4 points per possession...you aren’t getting ahead settling for field goals.

Limited time and the game circumstances likely dictated we needed to play for a tie there when down 31-28

 

[Reverend Conehead]

If you go for it on 4th down and make it, you're a genius. If you don't, you're an imbecile.

 

[T-RO]

If you go for it on 4th down and make it, you're a genius. If you don't, you're an imbecile.

From the view of most fans...yup!

From strategic standpoint — in some scenarios you don’t always even need 50% success rate for it to be the smart call.

 

[JustChip]

I can’t criticize our punting decisions in that game...but...

Consider these Garrett decisions:
4th down and 2 on GB 32...we kick a 50 yd field goal (first quarter)
4th and 3 on GB 33...we kick 52 yard field goal. (4th quarter, 35 sec left)

Statistically odds are 50% or better on converting first down on both these 4th down plays...and those FG attempts weren’t gimmies. I’m not super critical of those calls, but food for thought.

I’ll say this: In a game lik this where your opponent is scoring 3.5 points per drive...a 3 point field goal won’t help you much. In games like this a coach should be VERY aggressive in going for touchdowns.

Using your 50/50 odds for making it on 4th down, what happens downstream in the game if you eschew the 1st quarter field goal attempt and fail to get the 1st down? You're now forced to go for it on 4th down with 35 seconds left because you're behind by 6 - you don't have the option at that point to go for the tie. This is essentially what happened in the 2016 Dallas Pittsburgh regular season game. Pittsburg going for 2 because that's what the analytics said to do cost them that game.

The problem with you're 3.5 points/drive is that is an average. There were drives with points scored (6) and drives with no points scored (4). You can't automatically assume the other teams would score since they had 4 drives where they did not. Seven drives all of which ended in field goals yields the same average as 3 drives with TDs and 4 scoreless drives. By your hypothesis, both scenarios are the same, but they're not. The seven field goal scenario would more likely cause me to go for it on 4th since I haven't stopped the other team from scoring, whereas the later tells me I've stopped them more than not so I'll take my chance.

Look, I've not been arguing against using analytics at all, I'm simply arguing that decisions can't be based solely on a numeric calculation because there are unmeasurable variables at play that have to be considered as well.

 

[T-RO]

Using your 50/50 odds for making it on 4th down, what happens downstream in the game if you eschew the 1st quarter field goal attempt and fail to get the 1st down? You're now forced to go for it on 4th down with 35 seconds left because you're behind by 6 - you don't have the option at that point to go for the tie. This is essentially what happened in the 2016 Dallas Pittsburgh regular season game. Pittsburg going for 2 because that's what the analytics said to do cost them that game.

The problem with you're 3.5 points/drive is that is an average. There were drives with points scored (6) and drives with no points scored (4). You can't automatically assume the other teams would score since they had 4 drives where they did not. Seven drives all of which ended in field goals yields the same average as 3 drives with TDs and 4 scoreless drives. By your hypothesis, both scenarios are the same, but they're not. The seven field goal scenario would more likely cause me to go for it on 4th since I haven't stopped the other team from scoring, whereas the later tells me I've stopped them more than not so I'll take my chance.

Look, I've not been arguing against using analytics at all, I'm simply arguing that decisions can't be based solely on a numeric calculation because there are unmeasurable variables at play that have to be considered as well.

You are mixing and matching two-point conversions w/going for it on 4th down. I want this thread to be about 4th down. I suggest we talk two-point conversions in a different thread.

In this chat I’ve been repeatedly clear that I wouldn’t want to lock a coach into using analytics and that game circumstances trump league average data.

There are human and emotional elements in games, I readily concede. For instance John Madden used to say he was happy to play for a field goal early in the game...he wanted to get his team on the scoreboard. Whether he was right or wrong I readily concede psychology is a very valid consideration.

Overall when you look at the recommended data it’s clear that coaches are way too conservative. They opt to play not-to-lose rather than play-to-win. I say in Dallas that needs to change.

 

[JustChip]

You are mixing and matching two-point conversions w/going for it on 4th down. I want this thread to be about 4th down. I suggest we talk two-point conversions in a different thread.

In this chat I’ve been repeatedly clear that I wouldn’t want to lock a coach into using analytics and that game circumstances trump league average data.

There are human and emotional elements in games, I readily concede. For instance John Madden used to say he was happy to play for a field goal early in the game...he wanted to get his team on the scoreboard. Whether he was right or wrong I readily concede psychology is a very valid consideration.

Overall when you look at the recommended data it’s clear that coaches are way too conservative. They opt to play not-to-lose rather than play-to-win. I say in Dallas that needs to change.

Sorry then, I guess I missed the whole point. I thought the whole point was a debate of whether teams'/coaches' decisions should be based solely on what the numerical analytics said to do. I only mentioned Pittsburgh's 2 point strategy because it was based on analytics.

So, in a nutshell, and speaking only of the 4th down scenarios in the OP, I'll say again that what I would depends on my assessment of the variables beyond the analytics. I might go for it in 1 situation and not in another (same down distance, point in the games, etc.).

I agree that coaches do tend to the conservative side and probably could benefit being less so, but it depends on the individual coach and team. The gravitating to the conservative side is probably born from the fact that failure gets you fired (unless you're Billy Martin working for Steinbrenner).

 

[Cowpolk]

From the view of most fans...yup!

From strategic standpoint — in some scenarios you don’t always even need 50% success rate for it to be the smart call.

It is only a smart call if you make it. Otherwise you have mass hyshysteria in the forums

 

[3rd_n_inches]

These are scenarios I could see Dallas become much more aggressive in 2018.

4th and one foot, our own 41 yard line...go for it.
4th and two, opposing 44 yard line...go for it.
4th and goal...2 yards out...go for it.

The Eagles coaches let the analytics dictate last season...and the analytics suggest it’s a much smarter to be aggressive over conservative in 4th down decision-making.

Philly was crazy-successful w/this approach last season.

On top of the league-wide analytics we have invested in a premium o-line. I say we need to take more risk, press opponents and keep our offense on the field.

Your profile pic reminded me of something my grandfather showed me the other day. The menu is pretty basic.

 

[StarOfGlory]

who gives a F what Philly thinks/does. I dont want to know much less copy anything they do

I'd like to copy a Super Bowl victory.

 

[T-RO]

Sorry then, I guess I missed the whole point. I thought the whole point was a debate of whether teams'/coaches' decisions should be based solely on what the numerical analytics said to do. I only mentioned Pittsburgh's 2 point strategy because it was based on analytics.

So, in a nutshell, and speaking only of the 4th down scenarios in the OP, I'll say again that what I would depends on my assessment of the variables beyond the analytics. I might go for it in 1 situation and not in another (same down distance, point in the games, etc.).

I agree that coaches do tend to the conservative side and probably could benefit being less so, but it depends on the individual coach and team. The gravitating to the conservative side is probably born from the fact that failure gets you fired (unless you're Billy Martin working for Steinbrenner).

No I never said a coach should go solely on analytics. At least 3 times I said the opposite. I understand your point about Pitt and 2-pt conversions...and it does relate to the discussion. I just don’t want to veer off. Sounds like we generally agree on things.

Martin and Steinbrenner deserved each other - both nutty, LOL.

 

[PhillySpecial]

Good gawd that’s silly. Digital assistance is the norm for almost all professions...and has become commonplace in sports. Have you failed to notice all the tablets on NFL sidelines?

Making the smartest call in those situations involves calculating LOTS of data. Perfect job for a consultative app. And to spell it out...the guys communicating to coaches via headset...are using computers.

By your statement Doug Pederson, Super Bowl campion coach...who most certainly was consulting computing data...should be fired. Your statement is ignorant.

I’d fire a coach who didn’t use every helpful tool available.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think those tablets on the sidelines take the place of the still photographs teams use. I don't know if they are even allowed actual video showing the action on the field. Just stills. I think they started using the ipads in 2014. At that time video wasn't allowed. It may have changed since then.

According to this teams aren't allowed active computers during games.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/02/sports/football/eagles-analytics-super-bowl-lii.html

Teams are prohibited from using computers to process information during games, but with no ban on charts or graphs, the Eagles can plot strategy based on hypothetical situations run in the off-season or customized reports based on that week’s opponent.

 

[T-RO]

I'm not 100% sure, but I think those tablets on the sidelines take the place of the still photographs teams use. I don't know if they are even allowed actual video showing the action on the field. Just stills. I think they started using the ipads in 2014. At that time video wasn't allowed. It may have changed since then.

According to this teams aren't allowed active computers during games.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/02/sports/football/eagles-analytics-super-bowl-lii.html

Teams are prohibited from using computers to process information during games, but with no ban on charts or graphs, the Eagles can plot strategy based on hypothetical situations run in the off-season or customized reports based on that week’s opponent.

Whether it’s canned data or not...it’s still data. I’d like to read the times link but its behind pay-wall.

 

[PhillySpecial]

Whether it’s canned data or not...it’s still data. I’d like to read the times link but its behind pay-wall.

It wasn't behind a pay wall for me. Am I allowed to post the article? I'll copy and paste if I'm allowed. I wouldn't have read it if I would have had to pay for it.

 

[T-RO]

It wasn't behind a pay wall for me. Am I allowed to post the article? I'll copy and paste if I'm allowed. I wouldn't have read it if I would have had to pay for it.

I’m on an iPad at the moment...was behind paywall when I tried.

 

[fredp22]

I'd like to copy a Super Bowl victory.

by copying Philly?????

 

[StarOfGlory]

by copying Philly?????

I don't give a damn at this point. I want another ring. How many years has it been????