Down and Distance. Go for it on 4th?

[WarnerToBruce]

Saw this on ESPN site, and I can't believe it is accurate. Is it really OK to go for it on 4th and 2 yards from your own 10 yard line? Holy carp, Batman.

Thoughts?

 

[HitStick]

I think this is based off success percentages. I imagine there’s not a lot of 4th and 2 from your own 10 scenarios, so with a small sample size that could be skewed.

 

[Jacobarch]

Navigating the dynamics of a game involves considering a multitude of variables. Whenever I see sports analytics on BSPN, I can't help but chuckle. What exactly are these analytics based on? The weather, the type of turf or grass, the strengths of the offensive and defensive lines? Where you are on the field matters, as does the ranking of your offense and defense. What's the current score? Is momentum favoring your team or the defense? How long have you controlled the ball? Are the opponents' defenses fatigued or fresh?

The term "analytics" seems like a play on words, and it often feels perplexing. Perhaps that's why teams like the Pats hesitate to go for it on 4th down – maybe it's simply because they suck as a whole. The complexity of the game goes beyond mere statistical analysis.

 

[FrantikRam]

No team to my recollection has gone for a 4th and 2 from their own 10 (not even the Chargers or Ravens who are two of the most aggressive) unless it was necessary.

Having said that - you can kind of understand the analytics behind it:

What percentage of time will the opponent score on you when you punt from your own 10 yard line? I'm not sure what it is, but I would imagine its much higher than when you punt from your own 25.

Conversely, what are the odds of you converting a 4th and 2? Probably 50%?

If teams score on you 50% of the time when you punt from there and you will convert 50% of the time, if your team is built on a strong offense AND you're playing a team with a strong offense, if you squint realllllly hard you can kind of see the logic.

But again.....nobody does that.

 

[gogoat1]

Its a good way to get a head coach fired.
Unless you are down with little time left , never go for it on 4th and 2 from your own 10.
I really can't stand it when the talking heads in a game start talking about "analytics".
What is really stupid is say they go for it anywhere on the field on 4th and short, 1-2 yards. They come out in the shotgun, first problem. And they run out of the shotgun, second problem.
Should be, under center EVERY time. Give the RB a freaking chance. Hard to get momentum for a ball carrier out of the shotgun. Then there is time, you give the D line time to penetrate, then hand the ball off. DUMB.
It cost the Packers the game last week.
I wish McVay would dump those plays too. But that stuff is what he learned and a young coach. Hard to get rid of it. Spread out, MAKE the defense defend maximum territory. That gives the offense more room to do what they need to do. And hand the ball off from under center.
Preferably with a fullback too. I wish McVay would start using them. Shanahan does and we all know how good their run game is. He and McVay come from the same era, not sure why our coach avoids a fullback.

 

[JimY53]

Analytics have made the game more exciting, teams going for it far more often.

My issue is not the analytics but what happens on Twitter when a "good" decision by a coach fails the analytics people say it was just a bad play call.

I guess they forget in the data they base things on there were "good calls" and "and calls". It's baked into the cake. They did whti with Staley a lot. He'd go, get stopped, and it was the play call, not the decision ... generalizing of course, but part of the risk of going for it is a so-called bad call, or a great call by the defense, and all that us built into that.

So while it's been a boon to football, it's still funny to watch the "math" people freak when a play fails. They just need to take responsibility and accept that when there is a 55-45% "go" there is a good chance it will fail. Juts accept it. Just like when it succeeds ... maybe there are "bad" calls that succeed because the nost tackle fell down or something.

 

[Londoner]

Holy carp, Batman.

Looks fishy to me.

 

[Classic Rams]

Holy carp, Batman.

 

[AvengerRam]

ESPN likes to show you its results (ie their “total QBR”) while keeping their methodology secret. To me, that’s worthless. As my 4th grade math teacher used to say, “show your work.”

 

[Alaskan Ram]

Saw this on ESPN site, and I can't believe it is accurate. Is it really OK to go for it on 4th and 2 yards from your own 10 yard line? Holy carp, Batman.

Thoughts?

View attachment 64082

According to the graphic you posted, no.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Saw this on ESPN site, and I can't believe it is accurate. Is it really OK to go for it on 4th and 2 yards from your own 10 yard line? Holy carp, Batman.

Thoughts?

View attachment 64082

In some cases, yes. Like if your kicker sucks and you know that you will need all of them points you can get.

 

[Merlin]

There is no rule or statistic that makes when to go for it an easy decision. Each game, opponent, and situation is different. So is the coach.

 

[Ellard80]

I'm not a fan of the analytics "always go for it" driven decision making.

I was tracking it earlier this year one sunday and I fould like 4 teams that lost from going for it instead of taking points.

I think it's a more complex decision than just down and distance.

Look at Brandon Staley - he was the poster boy for going for it

Didn't win for shit.

 

[JimY53]

ESPN likes to show you its results (ie their “total QBR”) while keeping their methodology secret. To me, that’s worthless. As my 4th grade math teacher used to say, “show your work.”

That is true, the QBR is a black box

But with analytics, there are lots of places you can see the math. There is a real-time bot on Twitter that says what their recommendation is. And all the math is different --- slightly.

Also, when I look at it I get the logic ... if you go and miss, percentages tell you that you will gain more points by going for it than kicking FG or punting ... but I have looked at the math and it is way over my head. Not by a little ...

Mina Kimes is one of the biggest proponents ... and I like her fine, but she's so committed she does not like to budge when challenged. With the comment, Nick Saban made about going for it---he said roughly that analytics don't tell you about what happens if you go and fail.

She rightly pointed out that is the one thing that it does. It takes into consideration all possible outcomes if you go for it and fail. It is baked into the cake. So in that specific case, Saban was wrong. But I think well, he's a legend coach, so he pretty much knows what he's doing

The problem for me is these folks don't like it when coaches don't follow the "advice". They will mock the coaches, there is even a bot that rates every punt on a "Coward index". That was the "93rd percentile of cowardly punts since 1999". That is overboard ... not sure them calling a coach's decision cowardly is more of a projection than anything.

 

[AvengerRam]

That is true, the QBR is a black box

But with analytics, there are lots of places you can see the math. There is a real-time bot on Twitter that says what their recommendation is. And all the math is different --- slightly.

Also, when I look at it I get the logic ... if you go and miss, percentages tell you that you will gain more points by going for it than kicking FG or punting ... but I have looked at the math and it is way over my head. Not by a little ...

Mina Kimes is one of the biggest proponents ... and I like her fine, but she's so committed she does not like to budge when challenged. With the comment, Nick Saban made about going for it---he said roughly that analytics don't tell you about what happens if you go and fail.

She rightly pointed out that is the one thing that it does. It takes into consideration all possible outcomes if you go for it and fail. It is baked into the cake. So in that specific case, Saban was wrong. But I think well, he's a legend coach, so he pretty much knows what he's doing

The problem for me is these folks don't like it when coaches don't follow the "advice". They will mock the coaches, there is even a bot that rates every punt on a "Coward index". That was the "93rd percentile of cowardly punts since 1999". That is overboard ... not sure them calling a coach's decision cowardly is more of a projection than anything.

I can understand the math just fine - if the equations are provided. Not a fan of the “trust me, it’s all in there” assertions.

 

[JimY53]

I can understand the math just fine - if the equations are provided. Not a fan of the “trust me, it’s all in there” assertions.

Then you can explain it to me ... I think the equation is in there ... but this is a couple of years old ... I think the right chart may look different now

Math Says Go For It on Fourth Down

We’re in week 16 of the NFL season and playoffs are close on the horizon. We’re also in college bowl game season. With that in mind, let’s consider a key decision that faces coaches multiple times a game: should they go for it when faced with fourth down? On fourth down, a coach has three […]

johnmjennings.com

 

[AvengerRam]

Then you can explain it to me ... I think the equation is in there ... but this is a couple of years old ... I think the right chart may look different now

Math Says Go For It on Fourth Down

We’re in week 16 of the NFL season and playoffs are close on the horizon. We’re also in college bowl game season. With that in mind, let’s consider a key decision that faces coaches multiple times a game: should they go for it when faced with fourth down? On fourth down, a coach has three […]

johnmjennings.com

View attachment 64137

The equation uses abbreviations that are undefined, so I can’t evaluate it from what is in the article.

It does not, however, appear to factor in the increased likelihood that the opponent will score if a fourth down effort fails in a situation in which the other option is to punt.

If you are evaluating a single drive in a vacuum, going on 4th is more favorable/lower risk (i.e. drives as time is running out). During the course of a game, though, you have to consider the opponent’s subsequent drive. As noted, it doesn’t appear that the analysis cited does that.

 

[Snaz]

Saw this on ESPN site, and I can't believe it is accurate. Is it really OK to go for it on 4th and 2 yards from your own 10 yard line? Holy carp, Batman.

Thoughts?

View attachment 64082

According to this graph no. I don't think it's an option until 87 yards to go. So that's a 13.

 

[JimY53]

The equation uses abbreviations that are undefined, so I can’t evaluate it from what is in the article.

I will try and find another one with more detail ... that was just first one I found.

 

[Gandalf]

2 points behind at your own 10 with 30seconds left.