4th downs are huge

[Millhouse]

Close games, team that made the right calls won. The team that was wrong, lost

 

[FAL]

Dallas

 

[BuffOrange]

Yep. Bill Barnwell tweeted a "take the points!" screenshot from a bunch of dopes before the Pokes 4th&goal from 1.
I'm sure Phil Simms would've agreed...
It is now 2015. Unbelievable.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Close games, team that made the right calls won. The team that was wrong, lost

Who made the call to tell the refs to pick up the pass interference flag v Dallas after they announced it and were marching it off???

That's your ball game.

 

[Toga]

http://wp.advancednflstats.com/4thdncalc1.php

 

[donniesyracuse]

Close games, team that made the right calls won. The team that was wrong, lost

It is not hard to guess how Shafer and Marrone would have handled those situations.

 

[dasher]

up 3 you want to give a hot dallas team the ball at midfield? Nothing wrong with the punt there. Didn't know the punter would gag.

 

[Millhouse]

up 3 you want to give a hot dallas team the ball at midfield? Nothing wrong with the punt there. Didn't know the punter would gag.

It wasn't the worst call ever but it was still wrong

Your response assumes you won't convert which is dumb. You ignore probabilities.

 

[dasher]

It wasn't the worst call ever but it was still wrong

Your response assumes you won't convert which is dumb. You ignore probabilities.

I play poker. You have pocket 10's. It's fine to go all in with pocket 10's if you are low on chips. It is not fine to call an all in with pocket 10's if you are middle stacked with pocket 10's. Same hand. Different situations. It's fine to go for it when you are behind and it's 4th and one at mid field. It's quite another when you are clinging to ma 3 pt lead at mid field.

 

[rrlbees]

I play poker. You have pocket 10's. It's fine to go all in with pocket 10's if you are low on chips. It is not fine to call an all in with pocket 10's if you are middle stacked with pocket 10's. Same hand. Different situations. It's fine to go for it when you are behind and it's 4th and one at mid field. It's quite another when you are clinging to ma 3 pt lead at mid field.

Good analogy.

 

[Millhouse]

I play poker. You have pocket 10's. It's fine to go all in with pocket 10's if you are low on chips. It is not fine to call an all in with pocket 10's if you are middle stacked with pocket 10's. Same hand. Different situations. It's fine to go for it when you are behind and it's 4th and one at mid field. It's quite another when you are clinging to ma 3 pt lead at mid field.

i can't comment on poker, i don't like card games. this stuff is more like blackjack, i'm guessing, the math is easier and it's all been figured out.

being behind and being ahead are different. in both cases, the odds of picking up 1 yard is good enough the benefits of pushing dallas further back. i'm not even factoring in that it was a bad punt. based on what the average punt would be there, going for it is the right call.

my post was also about the dallas 4th down attempts. the lions punt wasn't the worst i've seen, it was just a little wrong. not slaughtering caldwell for it. punting was a 4% worse decision than going for it

that TD dallas got on the 4th and 1 at the 1 was huge. the 4th and 6 with 6:00 left, i think some nfl coaches punt there.

 

[GoSU96]

i can't comment on poker, i don't like card games. this stuff is more like blackjack, i'm guessing, the math is easier and it's all been figured out.

being behind and being ahead are different. in both cases, the odds of picking up 1 yard is good enough the benefits of pushing dallas further back. i'm not even factoring in that it was a bad punt. based on what the average punt would be there, going for it is the right call.

my post was also about the dallas 4th down attempts. the lions punt wasn't the worst i've seen, it was just a little wrong. not slaughtering caldwell for it. punting was a 4% worse decision than going for it

that TD dallas got on the 4th and 1 at the 1 was huge. the 4th and 6 with 6:00 left, i think some nfl coaches punt there.

The problem is, it isn't blackjack, it is more like poker.

There are so many inputs into the decision beyond statistics. It is far from all figured out.

 

[Millhouse]

The problem is, it isn't blackjack, it is more like poker.

There are so many inputs into the decision beyond statistics. It is far from all figured out.

all those non statistical inputs are just ways for coaches to justify their gut instinct to punt. they're not using them honestly because you never see non statistical inputs pushing coaches into going for it when they shouldn't. most are clearly biased

Dallas's offense and Detroit's defense are equally good, going by the 4th down chart would've been fine.

there's not that many inputs to this stuff. there have been lots of real world examples to go on showing how much having the ball here is worth vs them having the ball there for whatever score and time

 

[BuffOrange]

As long as we're going poker analogy, remember when the old Brick&Mortar players were so dismissive of the young internet crowd who uses a lot more game theory & math? Spoiler alert - the online players ate them for lunch when they started playing live.

Anyway the reactions sorta prove the point that coaches never get blamed for kicking & never get credit for "aggression". The espn postgame show just mentioned how Dallas ran away from Suh on 4th down. They didn't bother to debate on whether going for it and getting stuffed was "too risky" or could've "changed the momentum" - which obviously they would have if they weren't successful.

 

[javadoc]

i can't comment on poker, i don't like card games. this stuff is more like blackjack, i'm guessing, the math is easier and it's all been figured out.

The math in question is statistics, right? So you can't talk only about averages to get the complete picture. Somewhere in there there has to be information about other characteristics of the data set. A basic Gaussian has two independent variables describing it, not only one.

The averages are for all teams, right? So some teams will be more successful than the average, and some less. It doesn't make a lot of sense to base a decision solely on an average that may be weighted significantly by teams better than you are.

Not saying the approach is invalid, but there are other factors that should be included in a case-by-case situational evaluation.

 

[Millhouse]

The math in question is statistics, right? So you can't talk only about averages to get the complete picture. Somewhere in there there has to be information about other characteristics of the data set. A basic Gaussian has two independent variables describing it, not only one.

The averages are for all teams, right? So some teams will be more successful than the average, and some less. It doesn't make a lot of sense to base a decision solely on an average that may be weighted significantly by teams better than you are.

Not saying the approach is invalid, but there are other factors that should be included in a case-by-case situational evaluation.

new england is not inherently better at getting a yard than anyone else. they are much better at having an awesome QB throw long TDs to an awesome TE

obviously football is not a game of cards. there are people involved. some of them might drop the ball, crap their pants, or both.

the teams that are proportionally better at converting don't go for it proportionally more or else you would see the right decisions being made on average.

it's pretty easy to back into the break even probabilities and then use your own subjective wisdom to decide whether your odds are better than that

some of marrone's decision are outrageous even for the worst teams in the league, especially when you're already losing. even if you think you suck, in the 4th quarter, if you want to have any chance of winning, you have to pretend that you don't suck for a minute. otherwise you're just conceding. if the standings were based on point differential, punting could make more sense sometimes. losing by less doesn't help anyone

my blackjack point is that you can have a simple card telling you what to do. if you want to assume that you suck, ok, shift the card a little towards kicking

there is no reason why marrone should be 20x likelier to punt than other coaches on 4th and 1 down in the 4th with fred jackson

 

[Cusefan0307]

Punting is stupid. A Berkeley professor studied this a few years ago, and basically determined that every coach should go for it on fourth down if it is 4th and 4 or less regardless of field position. You aren't maximizing the amount of points you can score if you do punt, and you are increasing the other teams chances of scoring if you do give it to them.

There's times for punting, just not as much as the average college or NFL coach thinks their is.

 

[SUFan44]

Punting is stupid. A Berkeley professor studied this a few years ago, and basically determined that every coach should go for it on fourth down if it is 4th and 4 or less regardless of field position. You aren't maximizing the amount of points you can score if you do punt, and you are increasing the other teams chances of scoring if you do give it to them.

There's times for punting, just not as much as the average college or NFL coach thinks their is.

Or the average Doug Marrone fan on this board thinks.