CFZ Analytics in Football: What it is and isn’t

[Bobhaze]

One of the most misunderstood topics in the sports world is the use of analytics. Misinformation about what analytics is all about abounds which I hope to clarify here. In the last 5-10 years, top shelf head coaches like Bill Belechick, Nick Saban, Doug Pederson, Lincoln Riley, and many others are recognizing its help in making better decisions based on facts not just feelings.

With that in mind, here are some basics about what analytics is and isn’t.
First a brief description of what it is:

• Analytics is quite simply the collection and sorting of factual data about situations and personnel for your team and opponents. It shows you the best options for success based on factual data. It uses the data to show which strategies and personnel have the best chance for success on both sides of the ball in multiple situations.
  • For example- if you are playing the egirls, analytics could show you if your defense is in a 3rd and 3 or less, which defensive alignments have had the most success against Philly in that particular situation.
  • Another example- analytics could pick up that your next week’s opponent is very vulnerable to a deep ball on 2nd down and long. It may go against typical thinking.
• Analytics uses data to inform coaches and players using terms like “percentage of potential success” for specific plays, alignments, down and distance, etc.
• Analytics helps with preparation in these areas:
  • Player Performance Analysis: Tracks players' movements and actions on the field, giving insights into a player's situational strengths and weaknesses. This data can be used to optimize training programs, identify areas for improvement, and make informed decisions about optimizing a player’s playing time. It can also help a Coach be better informed when to use a particular player in certain situations.
  • Game Strategy Optimization: By analyzing data on opposing teams and their players, coaches can develop better informed game plans that take less time. The data collected on opponents can identify the weaknesses of an opposing team in certain situations, down and distance tendencies and adjust tactics accordingly. It’s all about making better informed decisions.
  • Injury Prevention: By tracking data on players' movements and physical exertion, and when injuries tend to occur, teams can identify players who are at risk of injury and take steps to prevent them.
• Analytics is a tool to make you better in preparation decisions, as well as in-game situational football. It is a tool to enhance decisions, not make decisions.

What it is NOT:

• Analytics does NOT replace coaching or a coaches decisions or player responsibilities to execute. In fact it actually makes their decision making better informed because they have more information to make good decisions.
• Analytics do NOT replace a coach‘s “gut feeling”. It may actually support that “feeling” or provide cautionary data for that feeling.
• People working in analytics are NOT replacing coaches or making in-game decisions. They do NOT have authority over coaches, players or other members of the organization.
• Analytics do NOT replace game film study. (But it does make it faster and enhance its findings)
• Analytics is NOT artificial intelligence (”A.I.”)

This is certainly not everything about analytics. And any fan is welcome to not agree with analytics and its use. But we should all at least have discussions based on the facts of what it is and is not. I keep seeing many fans talk about analytics as if coaches are no longer making decisions and/or the players are no longer required to think and execute plays as they always have. That is simply inaccurate.

 

[Whyjerry]

If Lincoln Riley is using analytics to enhance his defenses somebody needs to tell him the algo is broken.

 

[jazzcat22]

My concern is will a coach, or do they, go with the analytics in a certain situation over the gut feeling.

Say 4th and 1, at the 38, and the analytics say go for it against a particular defense, what are the odds of making it. As opposed to ... we have a 260 RB, give it to him ... or kick the FG, we have a good K. I know the score and situation comes into account as well.

Or does it come down to that or not. Is someone in the coaches ear feeding him the analytics. Or do they have all of that before hand, and possibly in the game plan.

Still a lot to take into account and to learn as well.

 

[Bobhaze]

My concern is will a coach, or do they, go with the analytics in a certain situation over the gut feeling.

Say 4th and 1, at the 38, and the analytics say go for it against a particular defense, what are the odds of making it. As opposed to ... we have a 260 RB, give it to him ... or kick the FG, we have a good K. I know the score and situation comes into account as well.

Or does it come down to that or not. Is someone in the coaches ear feeding him the analytics. Or do they have all of that before hand, and possibly in the game plan.

Still a lot to take into account and to learn as well.

Jazzy, the bottom line is, coaches will still make ALL decisions. This just gives them better information to make those decisions. A “gut feeling” can still be made of course. But I would hope it would be an “informed” decision.

Take Barry Switzer’s “gut feeling” about 4th and 1 on the Cowboys own 29 yard line at Philly in ’94. We all remember that that play got stuffed and the eagles turned that into points and a huge momentum swing. IF the analytics showed going for it on 4th and 1 from your own 29 had a high chance of success, that gut feeling was ok even if it didn’t work. On the other hand, if the data shows it has about a 20% chance of success, is that a good “gut feeling” or not?

Also- the analytics info is all given to coaches ahead of time. The analytics people aren’t screaming in the coach’s ear from the press box during the game.

 

[Diehardblues]

The analytics which coaches use to decide to go for it on 4th down which we’ve seen McCarthy use is against the norm. And I’d argue has overall hurt us providing momentum swings for opponents.

The analytics going for 2 point conversion is generally detracting as well going against the norm which can place future decisions on PAT, etc in jeopardy.

Just don’t think these two portions or segments of using analytics pans out long term. Are there isolated situations they could work, of course . But I’d argue thus far they haven’t helped us. And leave us baffled .

 

[CouchCoach]

A good HC is going to draw on a number of streams of input like from his coaches, analytics, knowledge of the other HC and his gut.

Not many HC’s are like the originator of this at Pulaski High in AR that became an overnight celebrity. He replaced coaching with analytics.

Since that HC lives where the Joneses used to live and still have allegIances, they were on this very early on. Very much aware of this coach.

 

[CouchCoach]

If Lincoln Riley is using analytics to enhance his defenses somebody needs to tell him the algo is broken.

His idea of defense is just keep scoring more and put pressure on them to keep up.

He is not the first to do that.

Defense wins championships is the slogan but not all believe it.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

The only problem with analytics is that a lot of people call them "made up stats." lol

 

[CouchCoach]

Jazzy, the bottom line is, coaches will still make ALL decisions. This just gives them better information to make those decisions. A “gut feeling” can still be made of course. But I would hope it would be an “informed” decision.

Take Barry Switzer’s “gut feeling” about 4th and 1 on the Cowboys own 29 yard line at Philly in ’94. We all remember that that play got stuffed and the eagles turned that into points and a huge momentum swing. IF the analytics showed going for it on 4th and 1 from your own 29 had a high chance of success, that gut feeling was ok even if it didn’t work. On the other hand, if the data shows it has about a 20% chance of success, is that a good “gut feeling” or not?

Also- the analytics info is all given to coaches ahead of time. The analytics people aren’t screaming in the coach’s ear from the press box during the game.

I don’t think analytics affected Switzer with that decision. Having that offense, particularly Emmitt and that OL would have had me considering doing that.

And the machismo of coaches and the sport says 4th and 1, how can we not get 1 yard?

 

[Whyjerry]

His idea of defense is just keep scoring more and put pressure on them to keep up.

He is not the first to do that.

Defense wins championships is the slogan but not all believe it.

Most overrated coach alive in my opinion.

 

[CowboyRoy]

One of the most misunderstood topics in the sports world is the use of analytics. Misinformation about what analytics is all about abounds which I hope to clarify here. In the last 5-10 years, top shelf head coaches like Bill Belechick, Nick Saban, Doug Pederson, Lincoln Riley, and many others are recognizing its help in making better decisions based on facts not just feelings.

With that in mind, here are some basics about what analytics is and isn’t.
First a brief description of what it is:

• Analytics is quite simply the collection and sorting of factual data about situations and personnel for your team and opponents. It shows you the best options for success based on factual data. It uses the data to show which strategies and personnel have the best chance for success on both sides of the ball in multiple situations.
  • For example- if you are playing the egirls, analytics could show you if your defense is in a 3rd and 3 or less, which defensive alignments have had the most success against Philly in that particular situation.
  • Another example- analytics could pick up that your next week’s opponent is very vulnerable to a deep ball on 2nd down and long. It may go against typical thinking.
• Analytics uses data to inform coaches and players using terms like “percentage of potential success” for specific plays, alignments, down and distance, etc.
• Analytics helps with preparation in these areas:
  • Player Performance Analysis: Tracks players' movements and actions on the field, giving insights into a player's situational strengths and weaknesses. This data can be used to optimize training programs, identify areas for improvement, and make informed decisions about optimizing a player’s playing time. It can also help a Coach be better informed when to use a particular player in certain situations.
  • Game Strategy Optimization: By analyzing data on opposing teams and their players, coaches can develop better informed game plans that take less time. The data collected on opponents can identify the weaknesses of an opposing team in certain situations, down and distance tendencies and adjust tactics accordingly. It’s all about making better informed decisions.
  • Injury Prevention: By tracking data on players' movements and physical exertion, and when injuries tend to occur, teams can identify players who are at risk of injury and take steps to prevent them.
• Analytics is a tool to make you better in preparation decisions, as well as in-game situational football. It is a tool to enhance decisions, not make decisions.

What it is NOT:

• Analytics does NOT replace coaching or a coaches decisions or player responsibilities to execute. In fact it actually makes their decision making better informed because they have more information to make good decisions.
• Analytics do NOT replace a coach‘s “gut feeling”. It may actually support that “feeling” or provide cautionary data for that feeling.
• People working in analytics are NOT replacing coaches or making in-game decisions. They do NOT have authority over coaches, players or other members of the organization.
• Analytics do NOT replace game film study. (But it does make it faster and enhance its findings)
• Analytics is NOT artificial intelligence (”A.I.”)

This is certainly not everything about analytics. And any fan is welcome to not agree with analytics and its use. But we should all at least have discussions based on the facts of what it is and is not. I keep seeing many fans talk about analytics as if coaches are no longer making decisions and/or the players are no longer required to think and execute plays as they always have. That is simply inaccurate.

Im not convinced about it. Definitely can be good in certain situations such as tendencies and weaknesses, but the situational stuff comes back to YOUR team. Like you may find that nickel defense against the Eagles on 3rd and 3 works well, but if your nickel defense sucks, then its moot. And if you follow the analytics you will get toasted.

Definitely have to be an expert in using the data in conjunction with your teams strengths and weaknesses.

 

[CowboyRoy]

My concern is will a coach, or do they, go with the analytics in a certain situation over the gut feeling.

Say 4th and 1, at the 38, and the analytics say go for it against a particular defense, what are the odds of making it. As opposed to ... we have a 260 RB, give it to him ... or kick the FG, we have a good K. I know the score and situation comes into account as well.

Or does it come down to that or not. Is someone in the coaches ear feeding him the analytics. Or do they have all of that before hand, and possibly in the game plan.

Still a lot to take into account and to learn as well.

Yep some moron HC blindly using analytics is doomed. I would rather have a coach use his own instincts based on his team and momentum.

 

[jazzcat22]

Yep some moron HC blindly using analytics is doomed. I would rather have a coach use his own instincts based on his team and momentum.

Like Jimmy, he knew his team. He knew what player could do what in whatever situation.

 

[CouchCoach]

Most overrated coach alive in my opinion.

He was the main reason Jimmy and Booger wanted to go into coaching.

He didn’t really want to coach the Cowboys, he tried to get them to reconcile.

He was not the same coach coming out of retirement he was at OU.

 

[McKDaddy]

One of the biggest fallacies of analytics is when they start coming with these terms like "expected outcome". For example, I don't care if every "number" is rock solid for what the Ravens defense has done the first 6 weeks of the season if Ray Lewis wasn't in the lineup. If he is back, it invalidates any data collected while he was out.

There just isn't a way to account for all the human variables.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

Analytics is NOT artificial intelligence (”A.I.”)

Do think AI will find its way into the game some in the future? I do, just a matter of time.

 

[Vtwin]

An adjustable wrench is a tool. It can be a valuable tool at times. It can also be a crutch and if you use it all the time you are going to round some nuts off.

That's the way I see analytics in football.

 

[JD_KaPow]

One of the biggest fallacies of analytics is when they start coming with these terms like "expected outcome". For example, I don't care if every "number" is rock solid for what the Ravens defense has done the first 6 weeks of the season if Ray Lewis wasn't in the lineup. If he is back, it invalidates any data collected while he was out.

There just isn't a way to account for all the human variables.

Well, obviously. Nobody, least of all analytics folks, would argue that the performance when your best player is out predicts performance when your best player is back in. With the information you have (e.g. prior year data) you can start to make estimates about the difference in performance that you'd expect. But it also doesn't "invalidate" data from previous games. There's still stuff to learn about the guys who were out there, and that can inform how you deploy the defense when Lewis is back.

 

[jterrell]

This is generally a good description.
The keynote is ALWAYS missing though.

** IT IS BASED ON PREVIOUS DATA and does not constitute real-time actualization through opponents ALSO having access to that previously compiled data.


Real world example:

4th and 3 from the 30-yard line. --48 yard FG or go for it or punt.
Analytics. Go for it.

Defenses: Spend a tremendous amount of time preparing for 4th down in that area of the field with yardages between 1 and 5 to gain.

analytics 2 years later: DO NOT GO FOR IT YOU GOOFS.

 

[reddyuta]

It shoud be commended they are atleast trainstioning to a new milleniam but i am highl skeptical they will actually use this data in real time coaching decisions .