Can someone explain the analytics that say going for it on 4th at 0-0 is the right call?

[CowboyRoy]

Yes!!! Even worse when they have shown they can’t pick up a damn yard when they need to giving the team they are playing quick momentum. It alarmist burned them in the Pats game as well.

And these freaking punt block nonsense. Just let them punt the damn ball!!!!

Last time it was running into the kicker that killed us. Cowboys make that stop and get the ball back and the offense scores and its a completely different game.

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

There are some smart fans on this site who can maybe explain this better. I've seen the articles and the websites that show you the percentage. The analytics guys seem to say it's almost always a good call to be aggressive and go for it on 4th early in the game?

When McCarthy decided to go for it on 4th in the Pats game at 0-0, I thought we may have lost the game with that decision. Having watched the Parcells Tree in Dallas, I know how those teams play against high-powered offenses. They're looking for mistakes like that so they can grind it out. It was a good win though, and everyone forgot about it, especially when the analytics guys said it was a good call.

But what about momentum? And just psychological 'getting points on the board.' Having watched the Boys since the early 80's, it always feels like there is this sense of relief in the stadium, on the TV, etc when you score first blood. FG or TD, and sometimes just going through your first series, doesn't matter. AND it seems to settle the players down. Playing in front of 100k people every game - no matter how many years of experience - I would guess much of our roster comes in with some butterflies and needs to settle down. From my own personal sports experience, I know once you get the sweat and the intensity going, you're in the zone, but that START of the game is always weird.

I'm all for being aggressive later in the game with a high-powered offense that has momentum (which oddly enough seem to be the decisions the analytics guys seem to frown on the most) but at 0-0? I would always go conservative.

" analytics helps us see insights and meaningful data that we might not otherwise detect. " - oracle.com via google

its not a simple decision to make, but if the trends and patterns in the data say its there. then, there it is .

its a percentage, in hindsight you might change your mind .

 

[Jake]

There are some smart fans on this site who can maybe explain this better. I've seen the articles and the websites that show you the percentage. The analytics guys seem to say it's almost always a good call to be aggressive and go for it on 4th early in the game?

When McCarthy decided to go for it on 4th in the Pats game at 0-0, I thought we may have lost the game with that decision. Having watched the Parcells Tree in Dallas, I know how those teams play against high-powered offenses. They're looking for mistakes like that so they can grind it out. It was a good win though, and everyone forgot about it, especially when the analytics guys said it was a good call.

But what about momentum? And just psychological 'getting points on the board.' Having watched the Boys since the early 80's, it always feels like there is this sense of relief in the stadium, on the TV, etc when you score first blood. FG or TD, and sometimes just going through your first series, doesn't matter. AND it seems to settle the players down. Playing in front of 100k people every game - no matter how many years of experience - I would guess much of our roster comes in with some butterflies and needs to settle down. From my own personal sports experience, I know once you get the sweat and the intensity going, you're in the zone, but that START of the game is always weird.

I'm all for being aggressive later in the game with a high-powered offense that has momentum (which oddly enough seem to be the decisions the analytics guys seem to frown on the most) but at 0-0? I would always go conservative.

If you're on Twitter this is an interesting follow.

 

[Haimerej]

If you're on Twitter this is an interesting follow.

Looks like the potential negative outweighs the positive. As anyone who has ever played at any level could tell you.

 

[VaqueroTD]

If you're on Twitter this is an interesting follow.

Great find! Going to get it.

 

[T-RO]

As no one has stepped up to explain the logic, I'll happily do so.

Every situation is different so I'll just take the first drive. It's 4th and one on the Broncos 38. If you punt there's a good chance the ball goes into the end zone and you gain a mere 18 yards of field position. If you are fortunate maybe you gain 28-36 yards. Still not much.

If you fail the opponent doesn't have much better field position than after a nice kick off return.

18-25 yards of field position is not a big deal in today's NFL. Possessions, meanwhile are everything. You want points. I'm guessing confidence in Greg-the-leg isn't real high right now to make 55 yard FG.

League-wide data tells you that you will convert that 4th and 1 about 65% of the time. Dallas has a better-than-average line and offense so you really like your chances.

This was the first drive of the game and there was no data to suggest Dallas was going to struggle running the ball so much, which they clearly did today.

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

As no one has stepped up to explain the logic, I'll happily do so.

Every situation is different so I'll just take the first drive. It's 4th and one on the Broncos 38. If you punt there's a good chance the ball goes into the end zone and you gain a mere 18 yards of field position. If you are fortunate maybe you gain 28-36 yards. Still not much.

If you fail the opponent doesn't have much better field position than after a nice kick off return.

18-25 yards of field position is not a big deal in today's NFL. Possessions, meanwhile are everything. You want points. I'm guessing confidence in Greg-the-leg isn't real high right now to make 55 yard FG.

League-wide data tells you that you will convert that 4th and 1 about 68% of the time. Dallas has a better-than-average line and offense so you really like your chances.

This was the first drive of the game and there was no data to suggest Dallas was going to struggle running the ball so much, which they clearly did today.

good explanation .

 

[KJJ]

We should have taken the three points on 4th and 2. Makes you wonder if they don’t have confidence in Greg Zuerlein from short range. Those two failed 4th down conversions swung the momentum in their favor and they never relinquished it.

 

[MichiganCowboyFan]

We would have still been down 30-3 if we kicked the FG there and lost 30-19.

 

[Darthkuriboh]

We were 0-3 today.

What if that happens in the playoffs.

If you’ve watched McCarthy over the years, he tends towards more aggression during the season and less in the post season.

 

[VaqueroTD]

As no one has stepped up to explain the logic, I'll happily do so.

Every situation is different so I'll just take the first drive. It's 4th and one on the Broncos 38. If you punt there's a good chance the ball goes into the end zone and you gain a mere 18 yards of field position. If you are fortunate maybe you gain 28-36 yards. Still not much.

If you fail the opponent doesn't have much better field position than after a nice kick off return.

18-25 yards of field position is not a big deal in today's NFL. Possessions, meanwhile are everything. You want points. I'm guessing confidence in Greg-the-leg isn't real high right now to make 55 yard FG.

League-wide data tells you that you will convert that 4th and 1 about 65% of the time. Dallas has a better-than-average line and offense so you really like your chances.

This was the first drive of the game and there was no data to suggest Dallas was going to struggle running the ball so much, which they clearly did today.

I knew T-Ro would come through. Thanks bra. I'm convinced you're a Belichick intern in RL.

 

[nmcowboys]

*** that !! Line up and beat the dude in front of you...it happens all day long in the nfl

 

[lqmac1]

With how we have been playing, you would expect to convert that. You’re also playing a team who’s been struggling and hasn’t really been dynamic offensively this year so I’m sure there wasn’t much fear. Wasn’t a bad call imo, just not our day.

 

[plasticman]

This is totally against all football logic. Therefore.................

I smell Jerry Jones's hand in this.

Don't think he doesn't play a part in the gameplan. The Cowboys have been his X-box game in seasons past.

 

[TequilaCowboy]

There are some smart fans on this site who can maybe explain this better. I've seen the articles and the websites that show you the percentage. The analytics guys seem to say it's almost always a good call to be aggressive and go for it on 4th early in the game?

When McCarthy decided to go for it on 4th in the Pats game at 0-0, I thought we may have lost the game with that decision. Having watched the Parcells Tree in Dallas, I know how those teams play against high-powered offenses. They're looking for mistakes like that so they can grind it out. It was a good win though, and everyone forgot about it, especially when the analytics guys said it was a good call.

But what about momentum? And just psychological 'getting points on the board.' Having watched the Boys since the early 80's, it always feels like there is this sense of relief in the stadium, on the TV, etc when you score first blood. FG or TD, and sometimes just going through your first series, doesn't matter. AND it seems to settle the players down. Playing in front of 100k people every game - no matter how many years of experience - I would guess much of our roster comes in with some butterflies and needs to settle down. From my own personal sports experience, I know once you get the sweat and the intensity going, you're in the zone, but that START of the game is always weird.

I'm all for being aggressive later in the game with a high-powered offense that has momentum (which oddly enough seem to be the decisions the analytics guys seem to frown on the most) but at 0-0? I would always go conservative.

I had thought it was always that you want to put the points on the board first. But that could be old school....i like old school sometimes. Even then, i did not mind to go for it but the play selection was what i did not agree with. Hurry up offense to just to go off tackle....and then no Hulk package even considered on these short yardage situations. Everything did not make sense today.

 

[Hoofbite]

I’m okay with skipping the FG the first time. 2nd one was absolutely stupid.

 

[conner01]

I don't mind it as much as everyone seems to.

The first one was right
Too long for FG
The second time we was in FG range

 

[conner01]

I’m okay with skipping the FG the first time. 2nd one was absolutely stupid.

Exactly
The second one was in FG range in a close game

 

[T-RO]

I would also add this relative to VTD's original post:
The score of a game shouldn't really impact play calling that much until late 4th quarter, unless the lead is massive and the opponent out-classed.

You want to maximize points per drive. Stack up a lead. Don't let up. Thoughtfully going for it on 4th down is not desperation. It is simply Vulcan logic.

 

[Kingofholland]

I honestly don't have a problem with being aggressive, but for an offense that generally moves up and down the field we really seem to struggle in short yardage situations. 4th and short, goal line, and 2 pt conversions are really challenging. I don't know if it's the play calling or execution, but I have more confidence with the other team picking up in those situations than us.

Part of it may be the offensive line not getting good push like they used to. However, 2 of them today were bad passes by Dak, but it seems we've been forced to switch to passes in those situations due to lack of effectiveness of the running game.