4th Down No Problem: Go for it!

[T-RO]

In the big picture Philly has little to do with this. They didn't invent analytics. They didn't invent any of these formulas.

The only reason they are in the discussion is because they are -- for this small little window of time -- one team that is employing the data to some of its potential.

Be assured: There will be a lot more teams on the more-aggressive list this next season. Expect to see a spike in 4th down conversion attempts.

 

[Roadtrip635]

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).

I agree that generally speaking, more coaches should go for it on 4th down more often than they do now. Most coaches don't do it because of fear of failure and can get you fired. Garrett should have been more aggressive during his tenure, because he shouldn't have feared getting fired. He was given time to learn on the job and Jerry has been more forgiving than almost every other owner would have been.

 

[Roadtrip635]

In the big picture Philly has little to do with this. They didn't invent analytics. They didn't invent any of these formulas.

The only reason they are in the discussion is because they are -- for this small little window of time -- one team that is employing the data to some of its potential.

Be assured: There will be a lot more teams on the more-aggressive list this next season. Expect to see a spike in 4th down conversion attempts.

I doubt we see a "spike" next season. As you said, Philly didn't invent analytics, teams have been using this type data for decades and as @JustChip pointed out, they are referred to as tendencies. Philly's success last year wasn't just about being more aggressive, it was about having a better team overall. Philly was just as aggressive the year before (27 vs 26), but converted only 48%.

Having a better overall team allows you to be more aggressive, but still doesn't guarantee success. It will still be up to the HC to weigh all the factors. the risk vs reward, and ability of his own team to make that choice. Analytics is just a tool and like any other tool, it only works when used properly.

 

[T-RO]

I doubt we see a "spike" next season. As you said, Philly didn't invent analytics, teams have been using this type data for decades and as @JustChip pointed out, they are referred to as tendencies. Philly's success last year wasn't just about being more aggressive, it was about having a better team overall. Philly was just as aggressive the year before (27 vs 26), but converted only 48%.

Having a better overall team allows you to be more aggressive, but still doesn't guarantee success. It will still be up to the HC to weigh all the factors. the risk vs reward, and ability of his own team to make that choice. Analytics is just a tool and like any other tool, it only works when used properly.

OK...here’s my gentleman’s wager:
I say there will be a 20% or more increase in NFL teams going for it on 4th down this upcoming season over last season.

If I win you have to insert whatever text or image I want for your signature here on this forum. If I lose you get the same privilege with my sig. The signature control is for 3 months.

Game?

 

[JustChip]

At least 3 times I said the opposite.

Dang, you sound just like my wife - is that you Ms. Beverly masquerading as T-RO?

 

[T-RO]

Dang, you sound just like my wife - is that you Ms. Beverly masquerading as T-RO?

Don’t know about that, but you forgot the milk again.

 

[JustChip]

Don’t know about that, but you forgot the milk again.

But I got beer instead - does that count for anything?

 

[Roadtrip635]

OK...here’s my gentleman’s wager:
I say there will be a 20% or more increase in NFL teams going for it on 4th down this upcoming season over last season.

If I win you have to insert whatever text or image I want for your signature here on this forum. If I lose you get the same privilege with my sig. The signature control is for 3 months.

Game?

I'm game, I'm pretty confident in taking that gentleman's wager and if you're lucky I'll forget about the wager and not cash in when due. I get the feeling you will want to back out or alter the terms you presented before this is said and done.

There were 485 4th down conversion attempts last season, a 20% increase is 97, so there needs to be at least 582 this upcoming season for you to win.

 

[T-RO]

I'm game, I'm pretty confident in taking that gentleman's wager and if you're lucky I'll forget about the wager and not cash in when due. I get the feeling you will want to back out or alter the terms you presented before this is said and done.

There were 485 4th down conversion attempts last season, a 20% increase is 97, so there needs to be at least 582 this upcoming season for you to win.

OK...we’re on.

 

[fredp22]

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

LOL I agree
but i still dont want to copy Philly

 

[gjkoeppen]

That’s a mis-characterization.

No analytics-savvy person would say ‘never punt’

Hey I'll turn on the light bulb for you. That was sarcasm. It was humor directed at you.
.

 

[T-RO]

Hey I'll turn on the light bulb for you. That was sarcasm. It was humor directed at you.
.

There has been academic research...guy at UC Berkeley
https://eml.berkeley.edu/~dromer/papers/JPE_April06.pdf

Perhaps study done at Harvard too. Wouldn’t surprise me.

If I insulted you along the way I’m truly sorry. Have a good one.

 

[gjkoeppen]

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.

You assertion that a less than 50% success rate is sometimes viewed as a smart call would only possibly be by fellow risk takers. Those that have a conservative philosophy wouldn't think trying something with less than 50% success rate is a smart call. All coaches at some point are forced to take risks due to score and only seconds left in the game, but to do it unnecessarily isn't viewed by most coaches as the smart move. If it were then there would be many many many times more times each game and season 4th down conversion attempts and be many many many times fewer punts and/or field goal attempts. You've got to get the idea that coaches sit on the sidelines with their spreadsheets, and calculators doing calculations after every play so when it comes to 4th down they can then go back and look at all of that in 1 1/2 seconds to make the decision whether or not to go for it. You havn't watched many games or you would have noticed that 99% of the time as soon as the whistle blows ending the 3rd down play and it is short of the 1st down either the punting unit or field goal unit is already running onto the field. The times when this doesn't happen is when the score and time left and time outs left for both teams are factored in, but mostly because of the need to win or tie the game and then play it out in OT.
.

 

[T-RO]

You assertion that a less than 50% success rate is sometimes viewed as a smart call would only possibly be by fellow risk takers. Those that have a conservative philosophy wouldn't think trying something with less than 50% success rate is a smart call. All coaches at some point are forced to take risks due to score and only seconds left in the game, but to do it unnecessarily isn't viewed by most coaches as the smart move. If it were then there would be many many many times more times each game and season 4th down conversion attempts and be many many many times fewer punts and/or field goal attempts. You've got to get the idea that coaches sit on the sidelines with their spreadsheets, and calculators doing calculations after every play so when it comes to 4th down they can then go back and look at all of that in 1 1/2 seconds to make the decision whether or not to go for it. You havn't watched many games or you would have noticed that 99% of the time as soon as the whistle blows ending the 3rd down play and it is short of the 1st down either the punting unit or field goal unit is already running onto the field. The times when this doesn't happen is when the score and time left and time outs left for both teams are factored in, but mostly because of the need to win or tie the game and then play it out in OT.
.

I see what you are saying that a lot of coaches will have great difficulty adopting a more aggressive approach—despite the backing of the math. Some coaches think football is different...that mathematics doesn’t apply. There was very similar resistance in the world of baseball and it took a decade for things to really change.

Yes football decision-making is bang-bang...that’s why the math is distilled to things like apps...graphs and cheat sheets.

 

[gjkoeppen]

There has been academic research...guy at UC Berkeley
https://eml.berkeley.edu/~dromer/papers/JPE_April06.pdf

If I insulted you along the way I’m truly sorry. Have a good one.

So this is the basis for your idiotic obsession to play this also idiotic game of who's on first - no wait go for it on 4th. A study by someone who has probably never played the game let alone played in the NFL who sat for who knows how long playing with numbers in his perfect little world and came up with this. I'm sure there were things that he didn't account for like how each player on offense was playing that day? Where any of them getting beat by a defender? How has the defense played the run that day? What was the conversion rate on the same distant and place on the field? Did they stuff the run attempts. How good are the corners because they will be in very tight coverage for that attempt if we pass. There are probably 25 other things that your wiz kid didn't take into consideration when playing with his numbers like the most important thing is not understanding there are different philosophies among coaches. The long and the short of it is NFL games aren't played in test tubes or research centers.
.

 

[gjkoeppen]

I see what you are saying that a lot of coaches will have great difficulty adopting a more aggressive approach—despite the backing of the math. Some coaches think football is different...that mathematics doesn’t apply. There was very similar resistance in the world of baseball and it took a decade for things to really change.

Yes football decision-making is bang-bang...that’s why the math is distilled to things like apps...graphs and cheat sheets.

But coaches in the NFL and college or even high school football don't and can't have apps on the sidelines and that is just another reason why your big apps answer is so ridiculous. Yes the NFL uses tablets but they can only use them in the same way they used to use still pictures they printed off on the sidelines behind the benches. I've said it before and I'll say it again that if a coach needs to run an app to figure out what he's doing or should do, he's in the wrong profession. This wiz kid's paper is for people like you to play the idiotic game you've been playing and you just don't see that.
.

 

[T-RO]

But coaches in the NFL and college or even high school football don't and can't have apps on the sidelines and that is just another reason why your big apps answer is so ridiculous. Yes the NFL uses tablets but they can only use them in the same way they used to use still pictures they printed off on the sidelines behind the benches. I've said it before and I'll say it again that if a coach needs to run an app to figure out what he's doing or should do, he's in the wrong profession. This wiz kid's paper is for people like you to play the idiotic game you've been playing and you just don't see that.
.

Bro, your tone has been repeated personal attacks. Gonna set to ignore.

 

[gjkoeppen]

I see what you are saying that a lot of coaches will have great difficulty adopting a more aggressive approach—despite the backing of the math. Some coaches think football is different...that mathematics doesn’t apply. There was very similar resistance in the world of baseball and it took a decade for things to really change.

Yes football decision-making is bang-bang...that’s why the math is distilled to things like apps...graphs and cheat sheets.

Baseball and football are 2 completely different animals. Baseball doesn't have a clock running to get plays off, when they do sort of by the pitcher has to get a pitch off but there are several ways to extend that. Baseball doesn't have a limited number of timeouts they can use which catchers use all the time. There have been catchers who have admitted that a base runner had tells when they were just about to attempt to steal so as soon as they see that they tell the ump time out and have a short discussion with several of the infielders and have either the 2nd baseman if the runner was on 1st or the shortstop in the runner was on 2nd line up directly in the path between the bases so the base runner would have to take a wider path to steel. This also often times stopped the base runner from attempting to steel. It was a tip off to the other team that that they knew a steel was going to be attempted. Even at that MLB mangers don't play apps during a game either. This whole numbers game you're trying to play is for geeks.
.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

That’s a mis-characterization.

No analytics-savvy person would say ‘never punt’

Depends on what they’re addressing. What’s important for purposes of the Harvard study (if it actually exists) is the aggregate. Iif it’s 4th and 20 from your own 5, you’re probably going to punt. However, for the sake of argument, let’s say you didn’t. In the aggregate, all the times you went on 4th and long from your own 5 and didn’t make it would be more than offset by the times you made it on 4th down in other situations.

Clearly, there’s going to be more nuance in a real world setting.

 

[T-RO]

In the aggregate, all the times you went on 4th and long from your own 5 and didn’t make it would be more than offset by the times you made it on 4th down in other situations

This is true...I agree. Key term is "in the aggregate."

It's a bit nuanced for this forum, however...and I suspect this might confuse some folks...It's likely advisable to stick w/more straight-forward scenarios and appeals to logic.