PDA

View Full Version : Why Did McCarthy Call That Pass (Short, Deep, Middle, Boundary)?



pbmax
11-07-2011, 09:55 AM
Before you ask that question, read and remember this from last week's SI cover story:


Before win number 7 this year in Minnesota, there was Super Bowl XLV in Dallas, a 31--25 win over the Steelers last Feb. 6 in which Rodgers threw for 304 yards and three touchdowns and was named the game's MVP. The first touchdown of the night came with 3:44 left in the first quarter, as the Packers faced third-and-one on the Pittsburgh 29-yard line. The play call into Rodgers's helmet was a screen pass. Nelson was to run a straight clear-out pattern to take the top off the Pittsburgh coverage and was categorically not to be thrown the ball.

Nelson arrived in Green Bay from Kansas State in 2008, the year Rodgers became the starter. "Missed all the drama," he says. "I've never even met Brett Favre." Nelson learned right away that a ball could come his way at any time, including when a screen pass was called in the Super Bowl. "We get up there, and Aaron signals me: tap to his helmet," says Nelson. "That means he's coming to me."

Rodgers recalls, "We needed a play to get us going. I liked the matchup, Jordy on [Steelers cornerback] William Gay. I do remember thinking at the top of my drop, I better make this one work." Besides the touchdown, Nelson caught eight other passes for a total of 140 yards, a performance that included four drops but otherwise defined him as a major player in the NFL.

He didn't even audible in a recognizable way. Made one signal and changed the target of the play. The play you see on the TV cannot be tied directly to the coach without knowing what was called and what was run (and if different, why it was run).

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1191783/1/index.htm

Noodle
11-07-2011, 11:20 AM
Great point, PB. This is why I try hard to stay out of "why did he call that" debates. We really don't know what was called, what options were available within the context of the call, and what each player's assignment was. Unless you know all that (and we almost never do), then you really don't have a basis for having much of an opinion.

But then, that's why Al Gore invented the Internets -- strongly held but poorly informed opinions need a home too.

mraynrand
11-07-2011, 12:19 PM
It's probably better to frame it as 'I would have liked to have seen them run x' rather that 'I would like to see Stubby hung upside down from the Holmgren Way street sign for calling that play.'

Joemailman
11-07-2011, 12:22 PM
Questioning the playcalling is the fan's prerogative. I probably did it more with Holmgren than I do now.

gbgary
11-07-2011, 12:26 PM
no running plays on third and short!

pbmax
11-07-2011, 02:10 PM
no running plays on third and short!

That's another one. During one of those late drives Rodgers went run/pass option to Jennings for next to nothing. I think the DB sneaked up further than it looked initially.

pbmax
11-07-2011, 04:51 PM
Its a good week to put some meat on the skeleton of knowledge. Here is a breakdown of run/pass ratio against the odds of a team winning the game. Essentially, what is a team's run/pass ratio when they are winning versus losing?

The first set of data and graph are for the league. Next up: the Packers and the decidedly un-shell like play calling.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2011/11/runpass-distribution-by-win-probability.html

Fritz
11-07-2011, 06:06 PM
PB you keep introducing actual numbers and analysis into this otherwise belief-driven emporium of teeth-gnashing.

Fritz
11-07-2011, 06:13 PM
But I didn't get the article. So they're trying to tie the probability of winning to the number of passes versus runs, right? But they tie that to in-game conditions, right? What I don't get is how you can get an in-game winning probability based on a run-pass ratio. By their numbers, because in-game, before they get a big lead in the second half, the article says the Packers pass more than most teams. Now on the formula, that means their WP would go down. But the article says their
WP doesn't go down.

I. Don't. Get. This. Article. At. All.

gbgary
11-07-2011, 07:21 PM
I. Don't. Get. This. Article. At. All.

me too. makes my brain hurt.

Upnorth
11-07-2011, 10:45 PM
What this says to me is that the higher the currently existing probability for a team to win the more likely the coach is to call a safe play. Runs are traditionally seen as the safe bet, so go with the low yeild high percentage play. The previous plays had given the lead, now is the time to protect it.
Don't take it as an endorsement of the run to win theory, this is observational, not predictive.

pbmax
11-08-2011, 09:58 AM
What this says to me is that the higher the currently existing probability for a team to win the more likely the coach is to call a safe play. Runs are traditionally seen as the safe bet, so go with the low yeild high percentage play. The previous plays had given the lead, now is the time to protect it.
Don't take it as an endorsement of the run to win theory, this is observational, not predictive.

This. They are not saying winning is dependent on the run or pass, nor the run/pass ratio. They are saying that teams are more likely to be conservative and run the ball when ahead.

The X-axis is the likelihood that a team is going to win a game. Either because they have a huge lead or a lead late in the game, etc. When a team is in a position to win the likelihood of a run increases substantially.

Compared with the league averages, McCarthy runs more when more than 90% likely to win. He runs less when the odds to win range from 40 to 80% and runs more than the league when the team is up against it, 20-40% likely to win.

bobblehead
11-08-2011, 09:59 AM
I will never forget calling for Holmgren's head when he was stupid enough to call for TJ Rubly to pass the ball in that situation. My friends told me it might have been an audible and I laughed in their faces. NO WAY a 3rd string QB calls an audible in that situation.

mraynrand
11-08-2011, 10:09 AM
I will never forget calling for Holmgren's head when he was stupid enough to call for TJ Rubly to pass the ball in that situation. My friends told me it might have been an audible and I laughed in their faces. NO WAY a 3rd string QB calls an audible in that situation.


He did.