If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ThePostGame)   Ever screamed at the TV when your favorite NFL team punted on 4th and 1? You will love this article   (thepostgame.com) divider line 99
    More: Interesting, Chip Kelly, NFL, Oregon, fake punt, Billy Beane, devil ball, ThePostGame, Phil Simms  
•       •       •

4079 clicks; posted to Sports » on 08 Nov 2012 at 9:13 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



99 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-08 09:11:14 AM
Andy Reid? Are you listening?
 
2012-11-08 09:19:00 AM
I was wondering how much fail got put into one article. Then at the end he states he was a baseball player. Then it made perfect sense.
 
2012-11-08 09:21:41 AM
FTA: The Ducks didn't convert, but they didn't care, because they knew the following equations would hold true:

Oregon's offense > Arizona's defense
Chip Kelly > Every other coach in college football


Those aren't equations, buddy.
 
2012-11-08 09:25:10 AM
espn.go.com

Approves (this week's TMQ)
.
 
2012-11-08 09:26:12 AM
If its fourth and one at the 25 I want my team to just take the easy 3 every time. If Chip Kelly can prove it works in the NFL and not at a recruiter's paradise that is Oregon, then I'll listen.
 
2012-11-08 09:27:04 AM
You mean this article about something that Gregg Easterbrook has been writing about on an almost weekly basis for the better part of a decade?
 
2012-11-08 09:27:41 AM
Ferentz....
 
2012-11-08 09:32:43 AM
Even if the "science" is right, the writer is obviously in love with the sound of his own keyboard clacking. Get to the point.
 
2012-11-08 09:34:29 AM

joel!!!!!: FTA: The Ducks didn't convert, but they didn't care, because they knew the following equations would hold true:

Oregon's offense > Arizona's defense
Chip Kelly > Every other coach in college football

Those aren't equations, buddy.


The second one also isn't true.

/Bill Snyder > Ever other coach in college football
 
2012-11-08 09:42:34 AM
You can't apply the law of large numbers to a specific football game, in a specific season where you only have 12 or 16 games and one loss can kill you.

Not to mention, the pool of large numbers that stat heads are using to show their probabilities are not relevant to the situtations the stat-heads are trying to change.
 
2012-11-08 09:44:34 AM

Barbaro's Broken Ankle: joel!!!!!: FTA: The Ducks didn't convert, but they didn't care, because they knew the following equations would hold true:

Oregon's offense > Arizona's defense
Chip Kelly > Every other coach in college football

Those aren't equations, buddy.

The second one also isn't true.

/Bill Snyder > Ever other coach in college football


This. Comparing the size and speed of K-State's players next to Alabama's is absolutely laughable, yet the team is #2 in the BCS and controls its own destiny to the title game.
 
2012-11-08 09:45:54 AM

MugzyBrown: You can't apply the law of large numbers to a specific football game, in a specific season where you only have 12 or 16 games and one loss can kill you.

Not to mention, the pool of large numbers that stat heads are using to show their probabilities are not relevant to the situtations the stat-heads are trying to change.


Yeah, but 12 or 16 games =/= 12 or 16 plays. You can certainly apply the law of large numbers within each game, when you have >100 snaps per team.
 
2012-11-08 09:51:39 AM
Yeah, but 12 or 16 games =/= 12 or 16 plays. You can certainly apply the law of large numbers within each game, when you have >100 snaps per team.

No you can't because how many of those 100 snaps are similar situations?

How many snaps are available for a coach going for it on 4th and 4 on their own 20 in the 1st quarter of a 0-0 game?

On the NFL level? 0
On the college level? Very few, only from teams who run gimmick offenses against teams with inferior tallent. (ie Oregon)


The only way this go for it all the time strategy can work is if you have a very dominate, consistant offense... and even then in a short season like football against more level competition like the NFL, it just wouldn't work out.
 
2012-11-08 09:53:18 AM
This will work until every team begins employing the same tactics. Then you'll reach equilibrium and teams will go back to punting or kicking the field goal on 4th down.
 
2012-11-08 09:57:38 AM

Incorrigible Astronaut: yet the team is #2 in the BCS and controls its own destiny to the title game.


No, it doesn't. It will get passed by Oregon after Oregon plays the rest of its schedule (which includes a championship game).
 
RTX
2012-11-08 09:58:16 AM

slayer199: This will work until every team begins employing the same tactics. Then you'll reach equilibrium and teams will go back to punting or kicking the field goal on 4th down.


And those teams will lose.
 
2012-11-08 09:59:36 AM

MugzyBrown: Yeah, but 12 or 16 games =/= 12 or 16 plays. You can certainly apply the law of large numbers within each game, when you have >100 snaps per team.

No you can't because how many of those 100 snaps are similar situations?

How many snaps are available for a coach going for it on 4th and 4 on their own 20 in the 1st quarter of a 0-0 game?

On the NFL level? 0
On the college level? Very few, only from teams who run gimmick offenses against teams with inferior tallent. (ie Oregon)


The only way this go for it all the time strategy can work is if you have a very dominate, consistant offense... and even then in a short season like football against more level competition like the NFL, it just wouldn't work out.



While going for it ALL the time might not be advisable, certainly going for it much more often is. Specifically 4th and short between the 40 yard lines. A punt into the end zone gains a net of 20-30 yards instead of a chance to score.

Plus 4th and goal with less than 5 yards is often a better proposition going for it then kicking a field goal. If you don't get it you are likely to pin the other team deep, decreasing their chance to score and in the long run you will probably convert enough to make it worth it.

The object of the game is to score the most points and giving the ball to the opponent isn't the way to do that (unless you are the bears).
 
2012-11-08 10:03:03 AM

ghall3: If you don't get it you are likely to pin the other team deep, decreasing their chance to score and in the long run you will probably convert enough to make it worth it.


You should especially do it against a team with a bad QB and good KR. Even moreso if you have a decent pass rush. And if you have a RB that almost never gets stopped for a loss (or a big QB).

/Seahawks face the Jets this Sunday - just saying, Pete.
 
2012-11-08 10:03:40 AM

ghall3: While going for it ALL the time might not be advisable, certainly going for it much more often is. Specifically 4th and short between the 40 yard lines. A punt into the end zone gains a net of 20-30 yards instead of a chance to score.

Plus 4th and goal with less than 5 yards is often a better proposition going for it then kicking a field goal. If you don't get it you are likely to pin the other team deep, decreasing their chance to score and in the long run you will probably convert enough to make it worth it.

The object of the game is to score the most points and giving the ball to the opponent isn't the way to do that (unless you are the bears).


I would agree, but only to a point. Different games have different personalities and different teams have different strengths.

Sometimes it makes sense to go for it, others don't. The notorious Bill B 4th down vs the Colts some years back made sense, because his D had been soft and Manning was heating up.

Sometimes you're in a defensive struggle, so you don't give up any chances to score.
 
2012-11-08 10:04:51 AM

I am Jack's user id: [espn.go.com image 250x300]

Approves (this week's TMQ)
.


Came to say this
 
2012-11-08 10:08:03 AM
Also, psychologically, I think I'd go for it on any 4th and goal where a team's defense runs off the field on the 3rd-down stop acting like they just won five consecutive Super Bowls. Just because it's clear they've completely mentally checked out on the drive and you can probably catch 'em unprepared (or at least force a timeout). Pretend to run the kicker on the field to help stoke their excitement, then pull him back (but make sure your team knows it's going to happen so they're prepared).

Don't f*ck around with fake plays where you're using anything but your best.
 
2012-11-08 10:15:20 AM

MugzyBrown: would agree, but only to a point. Different games have different personalities and different teams have different strengths.

Sometimes it makes sense to go for it, others don't. The notorious Bill B 4th down vs the Colts some years back made sense, because his D had been soft and Manning was heating up.

Sometimes you're in a defensive struggle, so you don't give up any chances to score.



Absolutely the strategy has to be incorporated for the style of the team and the game, my main point is that teams are far too conservative and should think like the Pats more often, and earlier in the game rather then just late in the 4th quarter. As TMQ points out regularly....coaches most often coach to not lose their job, not to do what is in the best interest of the team.
 
2012-11-08 10:15:37 AM
Tin cup would go for it, all the time.
 
2012-11-08 10:15:45 AM

kronicfeld: You mean this article about something that Gregg Easterbrook has been writing about on an almost weekly basis for the better part of a decade?


This.
 
2012-11-08 10:23:24 AM
 
2012-11-08 10:30:08 AM
Up 28-27 and faced with fourth-and-1 on the Atlanta 45 with 1:44 left in the game, armed with two highly paid running backs and possibly the greatest short-yardage running quarterback in NFL history, and having gashed the Falcons that day for 5.7 yards per carry, Carolina Panthers head coach Ron Rivera punted. And there was a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of stat analysts suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

There is a famous (for Eagles fans) game where the Cowboys - with Emmit and the huge line went for it on 4th & 1 from their own 30...got stuffed and the Eagles kicked a FG to win it.

It's never that easy.
 
2012-11-08 10:38:46 AM

Incorrigible Astronaut: Barbaro's Broken Ankle: joel!!!!!: FTA: The Ducks didn't convert, but they didn't care, because they knew the following equations would hold true:

Oregon's offense > Arizona's defense
Chip Kelly > Every other coach in college football

Those aren't equations, buddy.

The second one also isn't true.

/Bill Snyder > Ever other coach in college football

This. Comparing the size and speed of K-State's players next to Alabama's is absolutely laughable, yet the team is #2 in the BCS and controls its own destiny to the title game.


No they dont. If Oregon wins out they're going...period. They have Stanford and Oregon state left. Oregon will only go up if they win out.
 
2012-11-08 10:42:05 AM

MugzyBrown: Up 28-27 and faced with fourth-and-1 on the Atlanta 45 with 1:44 left in the game, armed with two highly paid running backs and possibly the greatest short-yardage running quarterback in NFL history, and having gashed the Falcons that day for 5.7 yards per carry, Carolina Panthers head coach Ron Rivera punted. And there was a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of stat analysts suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

There is a famous (for Eagles fans) game where the Cowboys - with Emmit and the huge line went for it on 4th & 1 from their own 30...got stuffed and the Eagles kicked a FG to win it.

It's never that easy.


Right, but that doesn't mean the odds were wrong, nor does that make it the wrong decision.
 
2012-11-08 10:42:17 AM

ScouserDuck: Incorrigible Astronaut: Barbaro's Broken Ankle: joel!!!!!: FTA: The Ducks didn't convert, but they didn't care, because they knew the following equations would hold true:

Oregon's offense > Arizona's defense
Chip Kelly > Every other coach in college football

Those aren't equations, buddy.

The second one also isn't true.

/Bill Snyder > Ever other coach in college football

This. Comparing the size and speed of K-State's players next to Alabama's is absolutely laughable, yet the team is #2 in the BCS and controls its own destiny to the title game.

No they dont. If Oregon wins out they're going...period. They have Stanford and Oregon state left. Oregon will only go up if they win out.


On top of that if UCLA does what they need to do Oregon has a chance to get a win over them for the conference title. That gives Oregon possibly 3 ranked teams left to play.
 
2012-11-08 10:45:00 AM
The math nerds (with effeminate mannerisms) tell me what's the smart play but my gut tells me something else is going to happen.... gonna have to go with my "gut feeling" that we'll pull out a win by punting.

/wait a minute... that sounds familiar somehow.
 
2012-11-08 10:57:29 AM
The first team to build an offense around 4 downs instead of 3 will probably set the scoring record.
 
2012-11-08 11:03:02 AM

SilentStrider: Andy Reid? Are you listening?


That was my first thought.

My second was: Andy Reid would routinely "go for it" on 4th-and-1 or 4th-and-2 by attempting a 25+ yard pass with a non-existent o-line and a QB the holds onto the ball too long.
 
2012-11-08 11:11:11 AM

VvonderJesus: The first team to build an offense around 4 downs instead of 3 will probably set the scoring record.


Yeah. But the first time those large number stats don't pan out in small games, ownership is going to abort. There's too much gut reaction in football.
 
2012-11-08 11:15:05 AM

Joe_diGriz: SilentStrider: Andy Reid? Are you listening?

That was my first thought.

My second was: Andy Reid would routinely "go for it" on 4th-and-1 or 4th-and-2 by attempting a 25+ yard pass with a non-existent o-line and a QB the holds onto the ball too long.


Well yeah, this is true.
 
2012-11-08 11:15:56 AM

SilentStrider: Andy Reid? Are you listening?


i hope not
 
2012-11-08 11:16:29 AM

Rapmaster2000: Right, but that doesn't mean the odds were wrong, nor does that make it the wrong decision.


Correct, it doesn't make the odds wrong, but it was the wrong decision. The play failing directly resulted in the team's lost.

See the odds go beyond 75% chance you make it 25% chance you don't.

It's 75% you make it, and then what happens? What are the odds now that I win or lose tie score late in the 4th with the ball on my 31 yard line.

The 25% if I miss turns into a 99% chance I lose the game.
 
2012-11-08 11:18:07 AM

SilentStrider: Joe_diGriz: SilentStrider: Andy Reid? Are you listening?

That was my first thought.

My second was: Andy Reid would routinely "go for it" on 4th-and-1 or 4th-and-2 by attempting a 25+ yard pass with a non-existent o-line and a QB the holds onto the ball too long.

Well yeah, this is true.


Actually you missed the rest of that scenario... the QB won't get sacked but will run for close to a first down but not make it. Reid will then call a time out to decide whether to challenge the spot of the ball, at the end of the timeout he will then challenge the call which will not get reversed costing him another timeout. Plus all of this will happen in the first 2 minutes of the 2nd half leaving him 1 timeout the rest of the game.
 
2012-11-08 11:21:08 AM

VvonderJesus: The first team to build an offense around 4 downs instead of 3 will probably set the scoring record.


You're right... the defensive scoring record.

The NFL isn't High School or PAC 12.
 
2012-11-08 11:26:41 AM

MugzyBrown: Rapmaster2000: Right, but that doesn't mean the odds were wrong, nor does that make it the wrong decision.

Correct, it doesn't make the odds wrong, but it was the wrong decision. The play failing directly resulted in the team's lost.

See the odds go beyond 75% chance you make it 25% chance you don't.

It's 75% you make it, and then what happens? What are the odds now that I win or lose tie score late in the 4th with the ball on my 31 yard line.

The 25% if I miss turns into a 99% chance I lose the game.


I disagree with calling it the wrong decision. Perhaps I should have said bad decision.

When you are faced with a decision, you make the decision with the available information you have. Only when you fail to use available information that would counter your decision have you made a bad decision. A failure due to information you could not have known doesn't make it a bad decision (as long as the unknown information was a known-unkown, if it was an unknown-unknown then you failed due to ignorance which I'm discounting because I'm assuming a head coach has significantly less unknown-unkowns than a fan).
 
2012-11-08 11:28:00 AM

MugzyBrown: Rapmaster2000: Right, but that doesn't mean the odds were wrong, nor does that make it the wrong decision.

Correct, it doesn't make the odds wrong, but it was the wrong decision. The play failing directly resulted in the team's lost.

See the odds go beyond 75% chance you make it 25% chance you don't.

It's 75% you make it, and then what happens? What are the odds now that I win or lose tie score late in the 4th with the ball on my 31 yard line.

The 25% if I miss turns into a 99% chance I lose the game.


Look at it this way,
You go for it, make it and you have 60% chance of winning the game.
You punt and you have a 10% chance of winning the game.
You go for it and fail you have a 1% chance of winning the game.
 
2012-11-08 11:31:43 AM

Master P but not that one: VvonderJesus: The first team to build an offense around 4 downs instead of 3 will probably set the scoring record.

You're right... the defensive scoring record.

The NFL isn't High School or PAC 12.


In today's NFL, where offenses have a distinct advantage over defenses in regards to the rules, and with the high level of quarterback play all around the league, I think a 4 down offense could flourish.

I'm curious if any team has tried this in the past at the NFL level.
 
2012-11-08 11:35:38 AM

IAmRight: Pretend to run the kicker on the field to help stoke their excitement, then pull him back (but make sure your team knows it's going to happen so they're prepared).


This isn't as easy as it sounds. Once an offensive player enters the field as a substitute, he cannot leave the field until the subsequent snap, kickoff or a timeout. It's a dead-ball illegal substitution, (5-yards) or unsportsmanlike conduct (15-yards and the penalty assessed to the head coach, plus possible ejection) if the referee believes that it was an attempt to deceive the defense.

I do love making football more exciting, but deceptive tactics aren't allowed... yet. (And I would love allowing such deceptions, as long as the rules are clear what you can and can't do.)
 
2012-11-08 11:37:28 AM

MugzyBrown: Yeah, but 12 or 16 games =/= 12 or 16 plays. You can certainly apply the law of large numbers within each game, when you have >100 snaps per team.

No you can't because how many of those 100 snaps are similar situations?

How many snaps are available for a coach going for it on 4th and 4 on their own 20 in the 1st quarter of a 0-0 game?

On the NFL level? 0
On the college level? Very few, only from teams who run gimmick offenses against teams with inferior tallent. (ie Oregon)


The only way this go for it all the time strategy can work is if you have a very dominate, consistant offense... and even then in a short season like football against more level competition like the NFL, it just wouldn't work out.


You don't need to know how many snaps they take 4th and 4 on their own 20 in the 1st. You need to know how frequently the opposing team scores from the 20, how frequently they score from about the 45 (if you punt it) and how likely you are to get more than 4 yards on that play. Everything else is irrelevant. Within a 16 game season you should have enough information to determine this. Also, since 3rd downs are generally treated as 4th downs (you need to get the first down on that play), you can use 3 and 4 situations to determine the likelihood of converting on 4th and 4.
 
2012-11-08 11:40:09 AM

rolladuck: This isn't as easy as it sounds. Once an offensive player enters the field as a substitute, he cannot leave the field until the subsequent snap, kickoff or a timeout. It's a dead-ball illegal substitution, (5-yards) or unsportsmanlike conduct (15-yards and the penalty assessed to the head coach, plus possible ejection) if the referee believes that it was an attempt to deceive the defense.


Okay, then just fake the offense walking off the field. I know that's okay since it worked for the Rams scoring a TD against my Seahawks this year on a fake FG.

/damn you, Rams
 
2012-11-08 11:44:03 AM

ScouserDuck: Incorrigible Astronaut: Barbaro's Broken Ankle: joel!!!!!: FTA: The Ducks didn't convert, but they didn't care, because they knew the following equations would hold true:

Oregon's offense > Arizona's defense
Chip Kelly > Every other coach in college football

Those aren't equations, buddy.

The second one also isn't true.

/Bill Snyder > Ever other coach in college football

This. Comparing the size and speed of K-State's players next to Alabama's is absolutely laughable, yet the team is #2 in the BCS and controls its own destiny to the title game.

No they dont. If Oregon wins out they're going...period. They have Stanford and Oregon state left. Oregon will only go up if they win out.


Keep repeating this enough and maybe everyone will start to believe it.
 
2012-11-08 11:44:08 AM
Look at it this way,
You go for it, make it and you have 60% chance of winning the game.
You punt and you have a 10% chance of winning the game.
You go for it and fail you have a 1% chance of winning the game.


But that's not true.

If you make it you have the ball at your own 30 which is average NFL starting position. There is not a 60% chance of scoring from there with under 2min left in the game. Plus from the 30 if you punt, the other team will get the ball around their 30 as well, giving them the same exact chance of winning as you.

An accurate view would be:

If I make it, I have a 40% chance of winning
If I punt, I have a 40% chance of losing (in regulation)
If I don't make it, I have a 99% chance of losing
 
2012-11-08 11:47:34 AM

FlyRicky: since 3rd downs are generally treated as 4th downs (you need to get the first down on that play), you can use 3 and 4 situations to determine the likelihood of converting on 4th and 4.


This is very very false.

The stress and pressure on both teams is VERY Different on 3rd and 4th down. The situations are not comparable at all.

FlyRicky: and how likely you are to get more than 4 yards on that play.


How many snaps are on file that show the average yards gained per play between the 2012 Bears and the 2012 Texans?

Any other stat is irrelevant. You can make some argument for the relevance of the 2012 Bears stats up to that point, but how many of those snaps were against a D of the same strength of Houston's?
 
2012-11-08 11:48:11 AM

MugzyBrown: Look at it this way,
You go for it, make it and you have 60% chance of winning the game.
You punt and you have a 10% chance of winning the game.
You go for it and fail you have a 1% chance of winning the game.

But that's not true.

If you make it you have the ball at your own 30 which is average NFL starting position. There is not a 60% chance of scoring from there with under 2min left in the game. Plus from the 30 if you punt, the other team will get the ball around their 30 as well, giving them the same exact chance of winning as you.

An accurate view would be:

If I make it, I have a 40% chance of winning
If I punt, I have a 40% chance of losing (in regulation)
If I don't make it, I have a 99% chance of losing


If you consistently make the best decision based on the odds then you have the best chance of winning over time. See blackjack.
 
2012-11-08 11:52:02 AM

thecpt: If Chip Kelly can prove it works in the NFL and not at a recruiter's paradise that is Oregon, then I'll listen.


yep. Pretty easy to drive 150 mph in a Porsche.
 
2012-11-08 11:53:22 AM

MugzyBrown: You can't apply the law of large numbers to a specific football game, in a specific season where you only have 12 or 16 games and one loss can kill you.


This is innumerate nonsense.

Not to mention, the pool of large numbers that stat heads are using to show their probabilities are not relevant to the situtations the stat-heads are trying to change.

Also nonsense.
 
Displayed 50 of 99 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report