Why BB "goes for it on" 4th Down

[Captain Cliche]

For those of you that missed it:

High School OT.com - High school team refuses to punt

Don't think that anything he does is random. All this crap about not trusting the defense.
He has enough "house chips" to call these kind of plays and he doesn't give a rats ***** what the media fall out may be if it fails.

"For most coaches, the decision on whether to go for it on fourth down has more to do with feel for the game - and job security - than stats."

I am willing to bet he calls more defensive time outs than any other active coach, too.

 

[Jared]

Greg Easterbrook of TMQ has been beating this drum for a while. The stats say that in general if you never punt, and just go for it on every fourth down, you are more likely to win.

I'm ok with BB going for it every fourth.

 

[Fencer]

According to his data, a team that takes over the ball at its opponent's 10 or closer has a 92 percent chance of scoring a touchdown. A team that gains possession between its opponent's 40-yard line and its 31 has a 77 percent chance of scoring a touchdown.

I doubt it's that high in the pros. I doubt red zone TD % is quite that high, and the actual number should be lower than the red zone one.

The point on strategy is excellent, although I'm a bit cynical just because we're focusing this week on the fact that 3rd-and-long is not necessarily a catastrophe when you're facing a soft defense ...

 

[Calciumee]

Because he has MASSIVE BALLS!!!

Also, anyone think that he wants to continue the drive, and does have trust in the D on a shorter field, if the O don't get it?

 

[pencilneckgeek]

Here's the quintessential statistical study on NFL 4th down strategy

Brian did individual analyses of 4th and 2 and last week's 4th and 1 and came to the conclusion that 4th and 2 was decidedly the way to go, whereas last week's 4th and 1 was more of a wash.

There's much more to be said about in-game factors affecting a decision to go for it or not, but the analysis is compelling just the same.

 

[Steamer86]

Because he has MASSIVE BALLS!!!

Also, anyone think that he wants to continue the drive, and does have trust in the D on a shorter field, if the O don't get it?

I agree. It's the super-sized stones, almost Stonehengeian.

 

[Calciumee]

I agree. It's the super-sized stones, almost Stonehengeian.

Bigger than Stonehenge! If they were slightly smaller than SH, you'd be left disappointed!

 

[voluntarysaftey]

I heard a talk from Jeff Ma (of 21 / MIT blackjack team fame), and his talk is about making decisions based on data; and not judging results based on a single success point.

In his talk, he mentions last year's 4th & 2 against Indy, and how it was the right decision. He mentions he talked with Bill Simmons), who argued it was absolutely the wrong decision. When he asked Bill why it was wrong, Bill said because it failed (judging decision by result).

He says BB knows the approximate probability of winning if you go for it vs winning if you punt, and choose the best action.

He also mentioned the Saint's suprise onside kick in the Superbowl, and said that the probability of suprise onside kicks vs expected onside kicks is much different, and the Saint's were right to try the onside. Although if you are always doing a suprise kick once a game, or after every half, it becomes less of a suprise and the probabilities would change over time.

Now the key point -- how is it that BB know the stats, but every other coach doesn't? He says most coaches are well aware of the statistics -- its just that their motivations don't align with correctly using the probabilities. Coache's are motivated by keeping their job -- that generally means winning. But when there's a choice between 2 decisions -- one if that goes wrong you will be blamed (4th & 2), and one that if it goes wrong you won't (punting and letting the other team march down the field), most coaches will go for the decision that helps them keep their job.

 

[Triumph]

Greg Easterbrook of TMQ has been beating this drum for a while. The stats say that in general if you never punt, and just go for it on every fourth down, you are more likely to win.

I'm ok with BB going for it every fourth.

4th and 15?

 

[SuperPatsFan]

Even though conventional wisdom is to be ultra-conservative and punt or kick the FG on 4th down, the NFL is so competitive that teams will look for any edge to win. If the right decision, in terms of maximizing points scored and winning probability, is to go for it on 4th down in many situations, I expect to see an increase in teams going for it.

 

[RayClay]

I think he just likes to say "go for it"!

Seriously, it depends on the other offense, the condition of our defense, etc. as far as field position vs aggressively controlling the game.

The relevant problem these days (and for too long) is, can we get a yard when we need to?

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

4th and 15?

Hail Mary Pass. Tell the QB to throw the ball even if he thinks it might get picked off.

An int is the same as a punt. Best case the reciever makes a catch or draws a PI flag.

 

[sieglo]

Hail Mary Pass. Tell the QB to throw the ball even if he thinks it might get picked off.

An int is the same as a punt. Best case the reciever makes a catch or draws a PI flag.

Worst case it's incomplete and your field position sucks.

 

[Lansdowne]

It depends on time of possession. If the Pats' D is gassed because the other team has their offense marching down the field frequently, and our offense has gotten mostly 3 & outs, I would expect BB to go for it like he did last week to seal the game.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

Worst case it's incomplete and your field position sucks.

True. But there is something to be said for risking field position for the opportunity to maintain possession. Particulary if you are team like the NEP which has a stronger offense than defense.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

most coaches will go for the decision that helps them keep their job.

And, thankfully, Robert Kraft is smart enough to know that there isn't a better coach out there, so BB's job is secure.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

4th and 15?

IIRC, those statistical studies found that 4th-and-very long (20+) was definitely NOT worth it, but even the 4th-and-13 in That Game, the odds were on going for it.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I doubt it's that high in the pros. I doubt red zone TD % is quite that high, and the actual number should be lower than the red zone one.

The point on strategy is excellent, although I'm a bit cynical just because we're focusing this week on the fact that 3rd-and-long is not necessarily a catastrophe when you're facing a soft defense ...

I'm very skeptical about that number as well, but also admit it's based on different data, not just in level but also the fact that it's based on going for it all the time (4 downs vs. 3 downs). Considering the worst team in the NFL averages 4.2 yards per play, it wouldn't surprise me if the numbers were at least pretty favourable for going for it, though not that high.

I'd also be interested to see how it impacts TOP as well as the impact on the defenses. For every conversion on 4th down, you basically buy yourself another 2 minutes of TOP (assuming no turnovers). The league average for 3rd down conversion is 38%. If you convert on 4th even half the time, you pick up another 2 minutes. If you don't, your defense is on a shorter field but out there less often. Over the course of a game, how does that impact things?

I don't really know what to make of it, but it would be really great if someone tried it at the NFL level. One of the arguments against the new overtime system was that if the second team got the ball and knew they had to score a TD, they would go for it all the time on 4th down which would increase their odds of winning. But there's nothing stopping a team from trying that at any point.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I don't really know what to make of it, but it would be really great if someone tried it at the NFL level. One of the arguments against the new overtime system was that if the second team got the ball and knew they had to score a TD, they would go for it all the time on 4th down which would increase their odds of winning. But there's nothing stopping a team from trying that at any point.

The second team never needs a TD: if the first team scores a TD, it's over; if they score a FG, a FG ties the game and the game continues; if they don't score, a FG by the second team will win the game.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

The second team never needs a TD: if the first team scores a TD, it's over; if they score a FG, a FG ties the game and the game continues; if they don't score, a FG by the second team will win the game.

Whoops. Good point there. I was thinking about the 4th down attempts when one would normally punt, say it's 4th and 2 at your own 22 but you need to score to extend the game. But you're totally correct. I need to not post until my second coffee of the day.