Two Plus Two For Two (Points)

Bjorn · #1 12-04-2006, 10:20 AM

Personally I'd much rather see an argument and a campaign for correct 4th down strategy. The situation mentioned here simply doesn't come up often enough to be of much use and even when it does it's not that huge a difference maker.

Seen over a season routinly punting on 4th and one probably is about a hundred times worse an error.

In both cases current coaching "wisdom" is mathematically wrong but only one (the 4th down thing) i a big leak, simply because of the difference in frequency.

I also think the 4th down thing is a much easier "sell", many football fans (even of the non-math variety) allready want their teams to go for it more on 4th down and even even more hope that their opponents won't go for it on 4th and short.

/Bjorn

shemp · #2 12-04-2006, 05:47 PM

Is there any disparity in the success rates of leading and trailing teams (in the data)? Also, is the 40-45% likelihood of success roughly similar for all teams (conversely, 55-60% defensive failure rate)?

It seems the model in use here is crude enough that it should be one ingredient to the decision, but far from the only one.

George Rice · #3 12-04-2006, 07:00 PM

I think that some coaches already do this a lot, especially when just out of field goal range. Bill Parcels comes to mind. Of course your success at running the ball thusfar has an impact on that decision.

But this can be taken too far. Yesterday the Giants went for it 4th and 1 at about the 24 yard line. The game was tied at 7 with 1:30 left in the first half. This would have been a probable 41 yard field goal for the lead going into the half. They lost 3 yards and gave Dallas the ball at the 27 yard line with 1:13 to go (Dallas would up kicking a field goal before half).

The Giants gave up a good chance of scoring the go-ahead score before the half. And even if they made the first down, there's no gurantee they'll score a touchdown, although they will run some more time off the clock.

But otherwise, I think the main factors are your kicker's range and the score. Most coaches realize there's no point in trying a low prob FG and giving the other team the ball with good field position. But many don't give making the first down enough weight compared with punting with what frequently amounts to a 10 or 15 yard net gain (if there's a touch-back or decent run-back).

Bjorn · #4 12-05-2006, 10:55 AM

Personally I liked the Giants decicion to go for it there because of the time management situation. If you go for the field goal Dallas will usually get at least a field goal themselves. Going for it here and succeding gives you a decent shot at 14-7 halftime or at the very least 10-7, kicking the field goal will usually result in a 10-10 tie at best.

Essentially its not just about your gain of EV (in points) but also the fact that you potentionally get to deny Dallas a possesion by converting.

Give or take a minute (maybe even half a minute) of clock time and my oppinion is often different.

I do however strongly disagree with the playcalling, runing an outside run play straight at perhaps the defence's best player on a critical 4th down play doesn't seem very smart to me.

/Bjorn

jah7_fsu1 · #5 12-12-2006, 07:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Seen over a season routinly punting on 4th and one probably is about a hundred times worse an error.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to expand on this? I think their are way to many factors involved to make such a statement. The type of game, field position, etc, etc, etc. Or were you approaching it from a mathmatical standpoint?

Bjorn · #6 12-12-2006, 10:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seen over a season routinly punting on 4th and one probably is about a hundred times worse an error.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to expand on this? I think their are way to many factors involved to make such a statement. The type of game, field position, etc, etc, etc. Or were you approaching it from a mathmatical standpoint?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously you shouldn't allways go for it on 4th and one and all the other stuff you mention will have to be factored in. However there are several statistical studies indicating that in terms of mathematical expectation there are many, many more situations that call for teams going for the first down than what is currently beeing done and that in most cases the "default play" on 4th and short is to go for it rather than punt.

/Bjorn