4th and 1

[pbmax]

Geeze, I just posted almost the identical thing in another thread at the same time! Great minds, PB...great minds!

I almost get the sense that all the preseason prep for the first four games works against him if the offense does not unfold as expected.

[Patler]

Conventional wisdom would imply that a 40 yard pass on 4th and 1 with what could be your season on the line is a poor play call and that's exactly why it should have worked. I have a much bigger issue, conceptually, with a few of the other play calls.

The problem I have with it is that it ignores the probability of completing that long of a pass, even if the other team is fooled. It's like playing for the 52 yard field goal. You are putting your game in the hands of a play with only a 50-50 chance of succeeding. QBs simply don't routinely connect on throws that long at a very high percentage.

That's fine if your only goal is to fool the other team. Good teams win also by executing better than the other team with basic plays designed to get minimal yardage.

[Patler]

I almost get the sense that all the preseason prep for the first four games works against him if the offense does not unfold as expected.

In previous years he has used the bye week to retool his offense, and historically they have played very well after the bye. This was only one game, so I guess we need to see how they rebound next week.

[bobblehead]

they've done this for several years. need a short high percentage pass for a first down and they go deep. it's maddening.

We also maddeningly drive it into the D and fail...and throw high percentage passes for a first down. If you never take advantage of a D leaving your guys single covered on the edge in 3rd/4th and short they will continue to stack the middle and take away the "high percentage" plays, thus making them not so high percentage.

[3irty1]

The problem I have with it is that it ignores the probability of completing that long of a pass, even if the other team is fooled. It's like playing for the 52 yard field goal. You are putting your game in the hands of a play with only a 50-50 chance of succeeding. QBs simply don't routinely connect on throws that long at a very high percentage.

That's fine if your only goal is to fool the other team. Good teams win also by executing better than the other team with basic plays designed to get minimal yardage.

We are definitely a finesse football team which is the likely source of most of the fans frustrations (including me). We don't seem to do anything well without fooling the other team. All I'm saying is that part of me respects MM for keeping literally the entire playbook open. Its an overall offensive mindset that forces your opposition to defend against everything, all the time which is usually impossible.

I also think that Packer fans underestimate just how hard it is to take that one yard whenever you want it. Only a few teams with elite power running games can do this. Unfortunately the Packers are only a few years removed from having such a power running game. I'm with you though that sucking at it is no reason not to try it. Otherwise what is the purpose for having Quinn Johnson and Dimitri Nance on the roster? Surely not their stellar special teams play.

[bobblehead]

I posted the stats on close games on the old packerrats site; McCarthy is below .400 in close games including play offs.

Statistical lies. What is his record in "non close" games?? I would argue that he never gets blown out, but often blows the other team out.

[sharpe1027]

The problem I have with it is that it ignores the probability of completing that long of a pass, even if the other team is fooled. It's like playing for the 52 yard field goal. You are putting your game in the hands of a play with only a 50-50 chance of succeeding. QBs simply don't routinely connect on throws that long at a very high percentage.

That's fine if your only goal is to fool the other team. Good teams win also by executing better than the other team with basic plays designed to get minimal yardage.

I posted this in the other thread, but now that you give the long bomb a chance a 50-50, I think it is even more relevant:

To be fair, the best way to assess the percentages would be to compare the percentage of the Packers getting a TD in both situations, not just whether or not they convert the 4th down. What's their percentage chance of converting a 4th and 1? 50%? Next, what is there percentage chance of scoring a TD with a first down on the 30 yard line with under 2 minutes and 2 timeouts , your back QB and having only scored 3 points the entire game? A generous 50%? IDK about the accuracy of those percentages, but they would comes out to only 25% chance. The odds of completing a 30 yard pass with the Jennings match-up? I'd say it is probably close to 25%.

[Patler]

I also think that Packer fans underestimate just how hard it is to take that one yard whenever you want it. Only a few teams with elite power running games can do this. Unfortunately the Packers are only a few years removed from having such a power running game. I'm with you though that sucking at it is no reason not to try it. Otherwise what is the purpose for having Quinn Johnson and Dimitri Nance on the roster? Surely not their stellar special teams play.

But it doesn't have to be a run. It can be a higher percentage throw than a 40 yard toss.

[Patler]

To be fair, the best way to assess the percentages would be to compare the percentage of the Packers getting a TD in both situations, not just whether or not they convert the 4th down. What's their percentage chance of converting a 4th and 1? 50%? Next, what is there percentage chance of scoring a TD with a first down on the 30 yard line with under 2 minutes and 2 timeouts , your back QB and having only scored 3 points the entire game? A generous 50%? IDK about the accuracy of those percentages, but they would comes out to only 25% chance. The odds of completing a 30 yard pass with the Jennings match-up? I'd say it is probably close to 25%.

I have no idea what the percentage is on a 40 yard throw, I just threw 50-50 out there to show that chances aren't so great and to compare to the 50+ fieldgoal attempt we discussed. That is about 53%. I suspect for a 40 yard throw it is actually less than 50%.

However, assuming you do something "safe" to get the first down, and get another to get into the red zone, the Packers last year were highly successful at scoring TDs from the redzone. Not so high this year. But I would still like to see Flynn have 4 chances to complete a 20 yard throw for a TD rather than 1 chance at 30-40 yards to end the game.

Heck, I would sooner see them get the first down at the 30, then have four opportunities to throw deep, rather than just one of the same length before turning it over on downs.

[sharpe1027]

Intuitively, I would have agreed with you; however, I think the bomb may have been just as statistically successful at getting a TD as trying for short yardage on 4th, regardless of what my gut tells me. They scored 3 points all game, had their backup QB in and had limited time.

I assume that your four opportunities is somewhat tongue in cheek since there is almost no chance at Detroit leaving Jennings to run straight down the field with man coverage and no deep help on any of those four opportunities.

[Patler]

I assume that your four opportunities is somewhat tongue in cheek since there is almost no chance at Detroit leaving Jennings to run straight down the field with man coverage and no deep help on any of those four opportunities.

Only partly. If they give a lot of attention to Jennings, there should be guys with single coverage in intermediate areas, like the crossing route in which Driver was open and Flynn missed him high. If deep isn't open, pickup another 5-15.

[mmmdk]

Statistical lies. What is his record in "non close" games?? I would argue that he never gets blown out, but often blows the other team out.

No!

Stats don't lie; they are often manipulated. Pretty hard to manipulate a win-loss column unless you believe in various excuses for the losses and not even Stubby would fall that low.

[bobblehead]

No!

Stats don't lie; they are often manipulated. Pretty hard to manipulate a win-loss column unless you believe in various excuses for the losses and not even Stubby would fall that low.

Yes, they often lie. Statistically there is a correlation between the NFC winning the superbowl and the stock market increasing. Does that mean you should invest the nest egg on that statistic? No, if they move the superbowl to December 1st you will find your statistic to suddenly fail in a big way.

[bobblehead]

Only partly. If they give a lot of attention to Jennings, there should be guys with single coverage in intermediate areas, like the crossing route in which Driver was open and Flynn missed him high. If deep isn't open, pickup another 5-15.

But patler....on THAT play they left Jennings single covered and attacking that was the right play. And now you are arguing that they should have passed it into the teeth of the defense.

[LEWCWA]

That's a low percentage 4th and 1 throw no matter who is throwing it.

I don't think that is a low percentage throw. Any QB getting payed should be able to hit that pass virtually everytime. Jennings was wide open, he just needed to get the ball to him easy pitch and catch.