Falcons OC pulls a Hacket. What a stupid call on 4th and
- Thread starter Deano
- Start date
OrangeXtreme
The Mayor of Dewitt
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 217,176
- Like
- 380,021
690West
Moneyline Master
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2011
- Messages
- 11,554
- Like
- 20,860
From the deadspin article. perfect.
Hindsight is wonderful, and I'm sure every gambler would love to have that arrow of time-violating advantage. But by any conceivable measure, it was the right call. A fourth-and-a-yard succeeds 74 percent of the time, and Michael Turner was not a yard away. The distance was an entire order of magnitude less. If you can't move the ball a few inches when you have to, you're not winning many football games. Which doesn't mean you don't have to try.
Brian Burke at Advanced NFL Stats has picked the perfect day to unveil the Fourthdownulator, a handy little application that allows you to plug in the situation and decide whether going for it makes statistical sense. Before running the fourth-down play, the Falcons' win probability stood at 47 percent (it would've risen to 57 percent if they had picked up the first down). Had they chosen to punt, that figure would've dropped to 42 percent. The difference is slight but undeniable, and becomes starker when you take into account both the Falcons' success at running the ball all day and the threat presented by the Saints' offense with decent field position.
(An aside spurred by a discussion in the comments at Advanced NFL Stats. In six overtime games this year, the team winning the coin flip is 1-5 and consistently gets worse starting field position after a kickoff than the opponents who get to receive a punt. The Falcons had to take touchbacks twice, while the Saints started on their own 27. Burke thinks that the new kickoff rules are an effective OT equalizer, even more so than the new playoff overtime rules that we have yet to see put into practice.)
If there was a failing on Mike Smith's part yesterday, it was calling a play where the handoff is made five yards behind the line of scrimmage, facing 11 men in the box. We talked re: Tebow about NFL defenses being able to stop what they know is coming, and there wasn't even a token attempt to send a receiver wide to spread out the defense. And of course, it's the safety Malcolm Jenkins who's able to cheat up and make the first hit on Turner. Maybe this is why coaches are so hesitant to go for it on fourth down: not because they might be unsuccessful, but because everyone's going to break down why.
The whole "job security" question is a traditional reason coaches won't go for it on fourth; the other is the mythical notion that to do so is to send a message to your defense that you don't trust them to make a stop, which always seemed like the worst sort of armchair psychology. In fact, that's exactly what Daryl Johnston cited on the Fox broadcast yesterday: that by not punting, Mike Smith was demoralizing his defense. So, Nate, fighter of safeties: Is the division in the locker room that great that you really have to worry about hurting a unit's feelings with the playcalling on the other side?
Hindsight is wonderful, and I'm sure every gambler would love to have that arrow of time-violating advantage. But by any conceivable measure, it was the right call. A fourth-and-a-yard succeeds 74 percent of the time, and Michael Turner was not a yard away. The distance was an entire order of magnitude less. If you can't move the ball a few inches when you have to, you're not winning many football games. Which doesn't mean you don't have to try.
Brian Burke at Advanced NFL Stats has picked the perfect day to unveil the Fourthdownulator, a handy little application that allows you to plug in the situation and decide whether going for it makes statistical sense. Before running the fourth-down play, the Falcons' win probability stood at 47 percent (it would've risen to 57 percent if they had picked up the first down). Had they chosen to punt, that figure would've dropped to 42 percent. The difference is slight but undeniable, and becomes starker when you take into account both the Falcons' success at running the ball all day and the threat presented by the Saints' offense with decent field position.
(An aside spurred by a discussion in the comments at Advanced NFL Stats. In six overtime games this year, the team winning the coin flip is 1-5 and consistently gets worse starting field position after a kickoff than the opponents who get to receive a punt. The Falcons had to take touchbacks twice, while the Saints started on their own 27. Burke thinks that the new kickoff rules are an effective OT equalizer, even more so than the new playoff overtime rules that we have yet to see put into practice.)
If there was a failing on Mike Smith's part yesterday, it was calling a play where the handoff is made five yards behind the line of scrimmage, facing 11 men in the box. We talked re: Tebow about NFL defenses being able to stop what they know is coming, and there wasn't even a token attempt to send a receiver wide to spread out the defense. And of course, it's the safety Malcolm Jenkins who's able to cheat up and make the first hit on Turner. Maybe this is why coaches are so hesitant to go for it on fourth down: not because they might be unsuccessful, but because everyone's going to break down why.
The whole "job security" question is a traditional reason coaches won't go for it on fourth; the other is the mythical notion that to do so is to send a message to your defense that you don't trust them to make a stop, which always seemed like the worst sort of armchair psychology. In fact, that's exactly what Daryl Johnston cited on the Fox broadcast yesterday: that by not punting, Mike Smith was demoralizing his defense. So, Nate, fighter of safeties: Is the division in the locker room that great that you really have to worry about hurting a unit's feelings with the playcalling on the other side?
TDTOrange
Starter
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 1,294
- Like
- 1,763
As someone who had the Saints in my pick'em pool last week, I loved the call. There are times to go for it on 4th down, even deep in your own territory. That wasn't one of them. It's too easy for defenses to sell out to stop a run on a do or die play. I don't know if it's always been this way, but it seems like no one can punch in a run at the goalline with any consistency, that was basically the same idea. Now had they called a play-action with a TE sneaking out, that woulda been ballsy, and probably wide open.
Punt the ball, play defense and get it back, those guys get paid too. They stopped the Saints on O a number of times during the game, do it again. But like I said, it worked for me!
Punt the ball, play defense and get it back, those guys get paid too. They stopped the Saints on O a number of times during the game, do it again. But like I said, it worked for me!
