Philly aggression on 4th down backfiring this year

[Doomsday101]

Last season Philly and Pederson was praised for his aggression for going for it on 4th down. It paid off last season they ranked 2nd in going for it on 4th down and converted 65% of the time ranking 3rd. However this season things are a bit different Philly still in 2nd in the NFL in 4th down attempts but have dropped to 50% conversion rate ranking 17th. Clearly that has hurt Philly this season.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

That type of coaching is stupid. Eagles would have at least two more wins if it wasn’t for Peterson.

 

[Crown Royal]

I don't have an opinion on this particular instance, but just because they haven't been successful in the standings doesn't mean that this tactic is wrong. In football (and in life) you can make all the right decisions and still fail.

Heck, it's possible that without going for it they would have lost even more games.

You're supposed to hit 16 in blackjack if the dealer shows less than 6. That doesn't mean you won't bust out.

 

[Doomsday101]

I don't have an opinion on this particular instance, but just because they haven't been successful in the standings doesn't mean that this tactic is wrong. In football (and in life) you can make all the right decisions and still fail.

Heck, it's possible that without going for it they would have lost even more games.

You're supposed to hit 16 in blackjack if the dealer shows less than 6. That doesn't mean you won't bust out.

No but hitting 50% a drop off from 65% is a pretty big drop, we are talking about giving the ball up or not taking the points when you have them pretty much in hand.

 

[Future]

What's the yards per?

 

[Crown Royal]

No but hitting 50% a drop off from 65% is a pretty big drop, we are talking about giving the ball up or not taking the points when you have them pretty much in hand.

Maybe. Maybe the 50% of the time they did make it it led to a win.

Most definitely the 50% drop is a big deal, but that's their offense in general. It's just not as good as it was last year, on earlier downs or 4th down. And last year, if they were unsuccessful, the defense was good enough to handle it anyway.

 

[Doomsday101]

Maybe. Maybe the 50% of the time they did make it it led to a win.

Most definitely the 50% drop is a big deal, but that's their offense in general. It's just not as good as it was last year, on earlier downs or 4th down. And last year, if they were unsuccessful, the defense was good enough to handle it anyway.

I'm just pointing out being overly aggressive is a 2 edge sword. Last year they went for it at a high pace and converted it 65% of the time but looks like that same aggression has also hurt Philly this season. Sometimes getting settling for a 3 is not that bad and can make the difference in a game.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Last season Philly and Pederson was praised for his aggression for going for it on 4th down. It paid off last season they ranked 2nd in going for it on 4th down and converted 65% of the time ranking 3rd. However this season things are a bit different Philly still in 2nd in the NFL in 4th down attempts but have dropped to 50% conversion rate ranking 17th. Clearly that has hurt Philly this season.

Has it?

They've gone for it on 4th down 16 times and converted 8.
Two of the failures were in the 2nd half of the NO blowout, down 24+ points. Those didn't matter.
Another was the 4th-and-7 pass to Ertz that gained 6-and-a-half yards in the final minute of the Cowboys game. They had to go for it there.
Another came with 30 seconds left, down 4 to Carolina. Again, they had to go for that.
Another came down two TDs to Tampa Bay with 9 minutes left. I would argue they had to go for that one too. After they failed, TB went three-and-out and they got the ball right back.
Another one came in the Washington game, where they went for it on 4th-and-goal at the one and didn't get it. The 'Skins went three and out, Philly got the ball right back with great field position and drove for the go-ahead TD. That's the whole argument for going for it down at the goal line: even if you don't get it, you're more likely to score next than your opponent is.
That leaves two. One was the 4th-and-1 against the Cowboys at the DAL 20 in the 2nd quarter. That failure cost them 3 points. Of course, they lost by 7. The other was another 4th down failure against TB, 4th-and-4 at the TB 49, down 13 points in the 3rd quarter. I certainly won't fault them for going for that one.

So on nearly all their failures, they were situations where they had to go for it. And yes, the failures hurt them, but the decisions didn't: there was no alternative.

 

[JustChip]

I'm just pointing out being overly aggressive is a 2 edge sword. Last year they went for it at a high pace and converted it 65% of the time but looks like that same aggression has also hurt Philly this season. Sometimes getting settling for a 3 is not that bad and can make the difference in a game.

Excellent post. Many were quick to laud the Colts for going for it in OT at home against the Texans because "you play to win the game". However, they essentially handed the Texans the win vs. a tie. Right now, that loss instead of a tie very well may be the reason the Colts miss the playoffs. Going for it on 4th requires situational awareness beyond simply where you are on the field. It requires properly assessing the non-quantifiable conditions as well as properly identifying the reward AS WELL AS the risk.

 

[Doomsday101]

Has it?

They've gone for it on 4th down 16 times and converted 8.
Two of the failures were in the 2nd half of the NO blowout, down 24+ points. Those didn't matter.
Another was the 4th-and-7 pass to Ertz that gained 6-and-a-half yards in the final minute of the Cowboys game. They had to go for it there.
Another came with 30 seconds left, down 4 to Carolina. Again, they had to go for that.
Another came down two TDs to Tampa Bay with 9 minutes left. I would argue they had to go for that one too. After they failed, TB went three-and-out and they got the ball right back.
Another one came in the Washington game, where they went for it on 4th-and-goal at the one and didn't get it. The 'Skins went three and out, Philly got the ball right back with great field position and drove for the go-ahead TD. That's the whole argument for going for it down at the goal line: even if you don't get it, you're more likely to score next than your opponent is.
That leaves two. One was the 4th-and-1 against the Cowboys at the DAL 20 in the 2nd quarter. That failure cost them 3 points. Of course, they lost by 7. The other was another 4th down failure against TB, 4th-and-4 at the TB 49, down 13 points in the 3rd quarter. I certainly won't fault them for going for that one.

So on nearly all their failures, they were situations where they had to go for it. And yes, the failures hurt them, but the decisions didn't: there was no alternative.

They still manage to go for that the vast majority of the time and yet are not as successful. I'm sure they had to go for it when trailing last year as well. Vs Dallas they were in a position early in the game to get points they instead went for it, Dallas shut them down so they give up points and hand over some momentum. I have nothing against going for it on 4th I do think Philly can get overly aggressive and it can help but it can hurt just as well.

 

[Crown Royal]

Has it?

They've gone for it on 4th down 16 times and converted 8.
Two of the failures were in the 2nd half of the NO blowout, down 24+ points. Those didn't matter.
Another was the 4th-and-7 pass to Ertz that gained 6-and-a-half yards in the final minute of the Cowboys game. They had to go for it there.
Another came with 30 seconds left, down 4 to Carolina. Again, they had to go for that.
Another came down two TDs to Tampa Bay with 9 minutes left. I would argue they had to go for that one too. After they failed, TB went three-and-out and they got the ball right back.
Another one came in the Washington game, where they went for it on 4th-and-goal at the one and didn't get it. The 'Skins went three and out, Philly got the ball right back with great field position and drove for the go-ahead TD. That's the whole argument for going for it down at the goal line: even if you don't get it, you're more likely to score next than your opponent is.
That leaves two. One was the 4th-and-1 against the Cowboys at the DAL 20 in the 2nd quarter. That failure cost them 3 points. Of course, they lost by 7. The other was another 4th down failure against TB, 4th-and-4 at the TB 49, down 13 points in the 3rd quarter. I certainly won't fault them for going for that one.

So on nearly all their failures, they were situations where they had to go for it. And yes, the failures hurt them, but the decisions didn't: there was no alternative.

Well done.

 

[Doomsday101]

Excellent post. Many were quick to laud the Colts for going for it in OT at home against the Texans because "you play to win the game". However, they essentially handed the Texans the win vs. a tie. Right now, that loss instead of a tie very well may be the reason the Colts miss the playoffs. Going for it on 4th requires situational awareness beyond simply where you are on the field. It requires properly assessing the non-quantifiable conditions as well as properly identifying the reward AS WELL AS the risk.

I agree. We look at the offensive stats on 4th yet there is a defensive stat on the other side. Dallas for instance is the #1 ranked defense vs 4th down, we give up 25%. It is one thing running a lot of 4th downs vs team like the Giants who have given up 85% on 4th down as opposed to going for it vs Dallas who is the best team at stopping 4th downs. People treat it as a 1 way stat for the offense, it's not.

 

[JD_KaPow]

They still manage to go for that the vast majority of the time and yet are not as successful. I'm sure they had to go for it when trailing last year as well. Vs Dallas they were in a position early in the game to get points they instead went for it, Dallas shut them down so they give up points and hand over some momentum. I have nothing against going for it on 4th I do think Philly can get overly aggressive and it can help but it can hurt just as well.

Sure, it can help and it can hurt, as can punting or kicking field goals. It's all about playing the probabilities. Obviously, they've been less successful in their execution, not just on 4th down but overall: that's why they're only 6-6 this year. But I don't see where you can fault any of the decision-making this year. There were two cases where (a) one (not me) could argue that they should have made a different decision and (b) they didn't convert. But neither of those is a big head-scratcher: a 4th and 1, and 4th-and-4, down 2 TDs at the opponent's 49. And we don't know what would have happened in those cases if they had punted or settled for the FG.

 

[Crown Royal]

Sure, it can help and it can hurt, as can punting or kicking field goals. It's all about playing the probabilities. Obviously, they've been less successful in their execution, not just on 4th down but overall: that's why they're only 6-6 this year. But I don't see where you can fault any of the decision-making this year. There were two cases where (a) one (not me) could argue that they should have made a different decision and (b) they didn't convert. But neither of those is a big head-scratcher: a 4th and 1, and 4th-and-4, down 2 TDs at the opponent's 49. And we don't know what would have happened in those cases if they had punted or settled for the FG.

In other words, they have struggled not because of their aggression on 4th down, but the fact that their offense isn't so good and is putting them into that situation in the first place.



It's a beautiful day that we're arguing not about the Eagles being bad, just why they are bad. I love it.

 

[Doomsday101]

Sure, it can help and it can hurt, as can punting or kicking field goals. It's all about playing the probabilities. Obviously, they've been less successful in their execution, not just on 4th down but overall: that's why they're only 6-6 this year. But I don't see where you can fault any of the decision-making this year. There were two cases where (a) one (not me) could argue that they should have made a different decision and (b) they didn't convert. But neither of those is a big head-scratcher: a 4th and 1, and 4th-and-4, down 2 TDs at the opponent's 49. And we don't know what would have happened in those cases if they had punted or settled for the FG.

Just showing that Philly went for it more than most last year and was praised and why not they converted at a high avg than most. This season is no different in being at the top of the league in going for it but not at the same success rate, it is a 15% drop off. As for 3s in a league where the margin of victory is often a 1 score difference those 3 can have a big impact at the end of the game.

 

[Doomsday101]

In other words, they have struggled not because of their aggression on 4th down, but the fact that their offense isn't so good and is putting them into that situation in the first place.



It's a beautiful day that we're arguing not about the Eagles being bad, just why they are bad. I love it.

Not being as good and yet continue to do it is not the brightest ideal. Early in the Dallas game they went for it and they got stuffed, Cowboys were able to keep them off the board and it build momentum for the other them. I'm not opposed to going for it on 4th but there is no doubt when it comes to 4th down Pederson does it more than most. It can help you no doubt but yes it can hurt just as much.

 

[Crown Royal]

Not being as good and yet continue to do it is not the brightest ideal. Early in the Dallas game they went for it and they got stuffed, Cowboys were able to keep them off the board and it build momentum for the other them. I'm not opposed to going for it on 4th but there is no doubt when it comes to 4th down Pederson does it more than most. It can help you no doubt but yes it can hurt just as much.

Interestingly enough right after they failed to convert is the same drive Garrett went for it on 4th down with the Jeff Heath punt sneak. Going for it eventually led to a field goal.

And at that point in the game it was 3-0 Dallas. You take the tie or accept that you are down 3 against a team that just got lambasted by the Titans, pinning their anemic offense at their own 20.

Yeah, they took points off the board, but in the moment it was a fine decision. The Cowboys defense wasn't known as what it is today.

 

[Bullflop]

Any team takes it chances when 4th down decisions to go for it is accepted as preferable. Knowing when it's reasonable to go for it and when not to is the secret to maximizing your chances. That's basically the long and the short of it. Here's hoping we make the right decision, if and when it's our turn.

 

[Crown Royal]

Man I just read through that entire play by play of the eagles game. This defense is stingy.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Not being as good and yet continue to do it is not the brightest ideal. Early in the Dallas game they went for it and they got stuffed, Cowboys were able to keep them off the board and it build momentum for the other them. I'm not opposed to going for it on 4th but there is no doubt when it comes to 4th down Pederson does it more than most. It can help you no doubt but yes it can hurt just as much.

If you do it right, it will help you more than it will hurt you.

And it's not true that "not being as good and yet continue to do it is not the brightest idea." It's only true if your success rate has dropped below the break-even rate. And that's highly dependent on the situations you're in. At 50% success rate this season, given the situations they've been in, I'm pretty sure the odds would still say to go for it. And they've been better than 50% when they've chosen to go for it, vs. having to go for it. You really need to focus only on the times where they had an actual choice.