Fourth Down Bot

[Freak Out]

http://www.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2013/11/28/fourth-downs/post.html

[oldbutnotdeadyet]

When does he/it take over for McCarthy?

[Guiness]

Wouldn't we all love to see a team going for it on 4th and 3 from their own 8!

[channtheman]

I've actually seriously considered this before. I would think a team like the Packers would benefit more from going for it every time the ball is say on the 50 yard line and it was a reasonable distance. The number of times we keep the ball would be worth the risk of turning it over on downs.

[Freak Out]

Wouldn't we all love to see a team going for it on 4th and 3 from their own 8!

:) That's exactly what I was thinking! Imagine the press conferences after the game: well....I read an NYT story about going for it on 4th down and said fuck it! Lets roll! I would like to see it put to the test though. With a fully healthy GB offense I think it would work. :)

[sharpe1027]

It is amazing that nobody has the stones to implement this.

[channtheman]

It is amazing that nobody has the stones to implement this.


Too many pussies, and not the good kind.

[bobblehead]

Ah, metrics. Expected value in this case. This is very similar to a financial formula, thus my area of expertise. But the details you ask. Well, the details are in the assigned values and how you come up with them. How exactly did he decide what success and failure are worth?

In finance, this would be similar to deciding what % return you would get if you followed course A vs. the % for course B. The talent isn't in doing the simple calculation after those numbers are decided, its in actually getting the % correct in the first place.

Lets talk something most of you relate to better. Fantasy football. Should I take Adrian Peterson or Arian Foster? I project AP to get 1800 yards and 11 TD's. Foster to get 1650 yards and 15 TD's. Based on my leagues scoring who should I take. Any idiot can run the numbers from here, but the idiot that wins in fantasy football is the guy who actually projects their respective stats correctly. The idiots who win in the NFL coaching battles are the idiots who actually calculate their chances of success correctly. I bet MM, or Belicheat forecast that better than the stat guy who came up with going for it on 4th and 3 from you own 30. Lets see, you get the 3 and you MIGHT move downfield and get a FG. You don't get the 3 and you give up a 47 yd. FG even if the other team doesn't move the ball one inch....unless they foolishly go for it on 4th and 10 and give it back to you without scoring.

[bobblehead]

PS...the metrics used are based on what coaches do NOW. In other words they calculate the EV from a given situation based on league wide average which is an average based on coaches NOT going for it inside their own 30. If coaches do start going for it from that position then the EV could drastically change.

[Patler]

Here is a coach that follows a "never punt" philosophy. He also onside kicks most of the time.

http://spacecoastdaily.com/2013/11/video-coach-who-never-punts-explains-his-strategy/

[channtheman]

Here is a coach that follows a "never punt" philosophy. He also onside kicks most of the time.

http://spacecoastdaily.com/2013/11/video-coach-who-never-punts-explains-his-strategy/

The hidden positive being you don't have to have a punter on the roster. Now you can take that 6th WR or 4th TE with no remorse.

[Guiness]

PS...the metrics used are based on what coaches do NOW. In other words they calculate the EV from a given situation based on league wide average which is an average based on coaches NOT going for it inside their own 30. If coaches do start going for it from that position then the EV could drastically change.

I was wondering about that as well. The article says that the chart is based on results from actual games. Well, we all know the sample size of NFL coaches going for it from their own 8...zero! Seems to me that the chances of success are based on all attempts on 4th and 3, regardless of field position, which, of course, may or may not bear out when it is actually tried. Defenses smelling blood in the water, feeling slighted, etc.

I notice the 4th down bot says to go for it, even on 4th and 6 from the opponent's 46. Holmgren using that chart in 2004 might've prevented one of more heartbreaking plays in Packer history.

[sharpe1027]

PS...the metrics used are based on what coaches do NOW. In other words they calculate the EV from a given situation based on league wide average which is an average based on coaches NOT going for it inside their own 30. If coaches do start going for it from that position then the EV could drastically change.

That's not a good argument against it. If you implement it first, won't the numbers hold unless/until other coaches followed suit? You can always change your strategy once they do, assuming it actually does drastically change the EV (which it may not).

As for the argument that it is not correct because the experts are making more informed decisions than the stats say, perhaps. However, history is full of examples of very smart people ignoring the evidence in favor of their preconceived notions of the best way to do something.

That being said, I do agree that the EV used may have some holes. A win or a loss is the same whether you win by 30 or 1, but the EV gives more weight to margin than consistency. Thus, I think the EV used would favor a strategy that could lead to more losses but with big blowout victories to counterbalance the losses.

[woodbuck27]

Week 3

The Situation:

It's the 4th quarter with 4:01 remaining on the clock. The Packers are up 3 points on the score board. Packers 30 - Bengals 27.

The Packers have the ball on the Bengals 30 yard line with 4th down and 1 to go. A FG puts the Packers six up and their in decent range.

Mike McCarthy decides to go for a 1st down. Rookie RB Jonathan Franklin coughs up the ball to the Bengals. They score seven points off of that turnover and the Packers never recover.

The final SCORE Bengals 34 - Packers 30.

After that Packer lossNYT 4th Down Bot would have patted MM on the back and said ...." Good calls out there Mike ! " Do you regret calling that 4th and one when the team was up 3 points with about 4 minutes remaining in the fourth? I thought that was the right call Mike.

MM would have smiled and responded: " I thought so NYT 4th Down Bot, Yea Yea " Does MM pause and reflect?

Nope ! Because Mike's an offensive guru ... an offensive genius. Someone said or wrote that 'fact' down for all Packer and NFL fans to know.

Mike McCarthy goes on ... " In a situation like that and a FG leaving it at a one possession game. I have to go for it."

No hesitation from Mike.

NYT 4th Down Bot ... " Right Mike !"

They turn and look at the SCORE BOARD.



What did the Packer fans think? Do you recall it? If necessary this will help refresh your memory:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/fans-have-plenty-of-time-to-second-guess-mike-mccarthy-during-bye-week-b99105433z1-225135512.html

Fans plenty of time to second guess Mike McCarthy during bye week.

BY: Michael Hunt / In My Opinion

PACKERS !

[run pMc]

Woodbuck, I remember at the time thinking taking the 3 points was good, since it basically forces the Bengals to move down the field and get a TD to win...so there's some value in taking the points.
However, I also remember thinking "the way they are running the ball, and the field position, I like the call...I hope it works"...and then worst possible outcome happens.

I think if you have a 4th and short and you're on the other team's side of the field it's a good idea. I'm not so sure about 4th and 3 from your own 8...especially with how the NFL offenses are (and how the game is called by refs). It's the risk of failing to convert, with prospects of giving someone like Peterson or Megatron 4 cracks at the end zone from the 8. With how GB's defense has regressed, that could get ugly.

[Patler]

Doesn't the chart of what coaches do most often also agree with what MM did? He simply did what most coaches would have done, and 4th Down Bot agreed.

[channtheman]

From the video Patler posted, I found it interesting how the coach argued punting from the 8 yard lane only decreased the opponents chances of scoring a TD by about 15% or something like that. I would love to see a coach in the NFL try something like this. I think a couple of adjustments would be needed, but think about how your play calling changes if you know you are going for it on 4th down? Now the opposing defense has to make you go 4 and out. I think with the way the rules are in the NFL in favor of offenses, this could definitely work.

[pbmax]

PS...the metrics used are based on what coaches do NOW. In other words they calculate the EV from a given situation based on league wide average which is an average based on coaches NOT going for it inside their own 30. If coaches do start going for it from that position then the EV could drastically change.

Advanced NFL Stats has data going back to 2000 I believe. I would hope teams have better data to supplement those findings. Teams should be able to determine whether they are weak, league average or strong at short yardage. That would help them determine where their best point of leverage is.

Coaches can then design plays specifically for those situations. Plays that the D cannot easily prep for, taking their game planning and minimizing its impact.

[bobblehead]

That's not a good argument against it. If you implement it first, won't the numbers hold unless/until other coaches followed suit? You can always change your strategy once they do, assuming it actually does drastically change the EV (which it may not).

As for the argument that it is not correct because the experts are making more informed decisions than the stats say, perhaps. However, history is full of examples of very smart people ignoring the evidence in favor of their preconceived notions of the best way to do something.

That being said, I do agree that the EV used may have some holes. A win or a loss is the same whether you win by 30 or 1, but the EV gives more weight to margin than consistency. Thus, I think the EV used would favor a strategy that could lead to more losses but with big blowout victories to counterbalance the losses.

You are down 28-30 and just scored a TD. There is 6 seconds on the clock. You can go for 2 (an EV of about .6 iirc) or kick the point (an EV of .999). You kick the extra point and lose. A lot of things can't be calculated by a stat machine. A lot can. I do agree coaches should go for it more often on 4th and 4 or less. I also think that on 3rd and 12 in 4 down territory it would be nice to try and gain 8 once in awhile instead of trying for 14 twice. I do not think you should ever go for it on 4th down from you own 30 (unless the game is over if you don't score).

[bobblehead]

Doesn't the chart of what coaches do most often also agree with what MM did? He simply did what most coaches would have done, and 4th Down Bot agreed.

and he lost

[pbmax]

From the video Patler posted, I found it interesting how the coach argued punting from the 8 yard lane only decreased the opponents chances of scoring a TD by about 15% or something like that. I would love to see a coach in the NFL try something like this. I think a couple of adjustments would be needed, but think about how your play calling changes if you know you are going for it on 4th down? Now the opposing defense has to make you go 4 and out. I think with the way the rules are in the NFL in favor of offenses, this could definitely work.

Its starting to creep in, though not to the 8 yard line extent. Coaches are more frequently eschewing a punt and running a play on fourth down inside the opponents territory but outside optimum FG range. The obvious idea that a punt, esp. a touchback, nets you very little yardage and a turnover on downs isn't as bad as a missed FG (which backs the LOS up seven yards).

Even a failure gives your defense a fighting chance.

[bobblehead]

From the video Patler posted, I found it interesting how the coach argued punting from the 8 yard lane only decreased the opponents chances of scoring a TD by about 15% or something like that. I would love to see a coach in the NFL try something like this. I think a couple of adjustments would be needed, but think about how your play calling changes if you know you are going for it on 4th down? Now the opposing defense has to make you go 4 and out. I think with the way the rules are in the NFL in favor of offenses, this could definitely work.

If your playcalling changes then the assumptions change.

[pbmax]

I was wondering about that as well. The article says that the chart is based on results from actual games. Well, we all know the sample size of NFL coaches going for it from their own 8...zero! Seems to me that the chances of success are based on all attempts on 4th and 3, regardless of field position, which, of course, may or may not bear out when it is actually tried. Defenses smelling blood in the water, feeling slighted, etc.

I notice the 4th down bot says to go for it, even on 4th and 6 from the opponent's 46. Holmgren using that chart in 2004 might've prevented one of more heartbreaking plays in Packer history.

His expected Expected Points model considers down, distance, field position and the next points scored. His publicly available data goes back to 2002, but I think I have read that his calculations for EP use data from 2000 forward.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2010/01/expected-points-ep-and-expected-points.html

Once you have a point value for field position, down and distance, you can compare results for the next play and determine expected points added (or subtracted) by the result of that play.


Suppose the offense has a 1st and 10 at midfield. This situation is worth +2.0 EP. A 5-yard gain would set up a 2nd and 5 from the 45, which corresponds to a +2.1 EP. Therefore, that 5-yard gain in that particular situation represents a +0.1 gain in EP. This gain is called Expected Points Added (EPA). Likewise, a 5-yard loss on 1st down at midfield would create a 2nd and 15 from the offense’s own 45. That situation is worth +1.2 EP, representing a net difference of -0.8 EPA.

[woodbuck27]

Woodbuck, I remember at the time thinking taking the 3 points was good, since it basically forces the Bengals to move down the field and get a TD to win...so there's some value in taking the points.
However, I also remember thinking "the way they are running the ball, and the field position, I like the call...I hope it works"...and then worst possible outcome happens.

I think if you have a 4th and short and you're on the other team's side of the field it's a good idea. I'm not so sure about 4th and 3 from your own 8...especially with how the NFL offenses are (and how the game is called by refs). It's the risk of failing to convert, with prospects of giving someone like Peterson or Megatron 4 cracks at the end zone from the 8. With how GB's defense has regressed, that could get ugly.

I'm basing my comments on later game situations or under 5 minutes remaining in the 4th Qtr.

I believe you decide on your options at 4th and 3 yards from your own 8 yard line:

a) punt b) go for it and move the chains:

Is based in the time remaining on the clock in the 4th Qtr. If it's late in the fourth Qtr. or under 4-3 minutes you go for it.

If the clock is nearing the 2 minute warning; inside the 2 minute warning. You must go for the 1st no matter how many yards you need on 4th down.

Does that make sense to you?

PACKERS!

[pbmax]

If your playcalling changes then the assumptions change.

That is true, but staying with the status quo when you have leverage because the conditions might change if you change is just paralysis.

Its also possible to monitor results around the League (and your own) to determine whether the model has begun to shift due to changes in strategy or tactics.

[pbmax]

Woodbuck, I remember at the time thinking taking the 3 points was good, since it basically forces the Bengals to move down the field and get a TD to win...so there's some value in taking the points.
However, I also remember thinking "the way they are running the ball, and the field position, I like the call...I hope it works"...and then worst possible outcome happens.

I think if you have a 4th and short and you're on the other team's side of the field it's a good idea. I'm not so sure about 4th and 3 from your own 8...especially with how the NFL offenses are (and how the game is called by refs). It's the risk of failing to convert, with prospects of giving someone like Peterson or Megatron 4 cracks at the end zone from the 8. With how GB's defense has regressed, that could get ugly.

Your second scenario is what Belichick did versus Manning when Manning was tearing through his defense the entire second half and he was out of adjustments.

On 4th and 2, he went for it inside his own 20. Reasoning that 40 yards of net field position will cost the Colts about 45 seconds to chew through and give them several shots at the end zone. If we make it on fourth down, we can run out the clock.

I thought it was the right decision then.

[Freak Out]

Week 3

The Situation:

It's the 4th quarter with 4:01 remaining on the clock. The Packers are up 3 points on the score board. Packers 30 - Bengals 27.

The Packers have the ball on the Bengals 30 yard line with 4th down and 1 to go. A FG puts the Packers six up and their in decent range.

Mike McCarthy decides to go for a 1st down. Rookie RB Jonathan Franklin coughs up the ball to the Bengals. They score seven points off of that turnover and the Packers never recover.

The final SCORE Bengals 34 - Packers 30.

After that Packer lossNYT 4th Down Bot would have patted MM on the back and said ...." Good calls out there Mike ! " Do you regret calling that 4th and one when the team was up 3 points with about 4 minutes remaining in the fourth? I thought that was the right call Mike.

MM would have smiled and responded: " I thought so NYT 4th Down Bot, Yea Yea " Does MM pause and reflect?

Nope ! Because Mike's an offensive guru ... an offensive genius. Someone said or wrote that 'fact' down for all Packer and NFL fans to know.

Mike McCarthy goes on ... " In a situation like that and a FG leaving it at a one possession game. I have to go for it."

No hesitation from Mike.

NYT 4th Down Bot ... " Right Mike !"

They turn and look at the SCORE BOARD.



What did the Packer fans think? Do you recall it? If necessary this will help refresh your memory:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/fans-have-plenty-of-time-to-second-guess-mike-mccarthy-during-bye-week-b99105433z1-225135512.html

Fans plenty of time to second guess Mike McCarthy during bye week.

BY: Michael Hunt / In My Opinion

PACKERS !

He should have thrown to the endzone instead.

[woodbuck27]

He should have thrown to the endzone instead.

That was an option with Aaron Rodgers.

Is that an option with Matt Flynn as your QB?

[bobblehead]

Anyone watch the Eagles/Vikes today? Chip Kelly did it all. Went for it on 4th and inches. Went for 2 in the 3rd quarter. Onside kick too early. It changed the complexion of the game and they got crushed.