The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

So now you are the Giants coach and you run the ball and get stopped?

do you:

1) kick the field goal and go up six points and make it a touchdown game?  The risk here is a big play on a kickoff return

or

2) run the ball again on fourth down and try to get the touchdown?

Run the ball again on 4th down. If you don't get it you are up by 3 and the Cowboys have to go about 70 yards for a decent chance to tie the game and the key is that's to TIE the game. You are still in it as long as you don't give up a 99 yard TD drive.

agreed

Disagree completely.

You take the points.

Assume he will get stuffed again on 4th down.  Clock stops after the turnover.  No benefit to running the ball there.  You spend the same amount of time to take the points and make them score a TD to win.

Being afraid of a big kick return is more manageable than letting them tie the game from the 35 yard line.  They need to earn every yard.

Intuition feels like you should kick it, but I bet the smart money and statistical play is to go for it.

Statistically, you save "19" yards (assuming he gets stuffed at the one, and the kickoff results in a touchback, which most do).  But on the other end you give up 35 yards allowing them to tie the game from farther away.

If you just got stuffed 3 times from the 1 yard line, there is no confidence that doing it again on 4th down would be successful.

If I'm the coach, I take the points.

Just an exercise, Brian.  Please give me your best estimates as a percentage of the following things, considering the time remaining.  Just treat each instance as independent and give me your best guess.

If NY goes for it, that they get the TD on 4th down:
If NY kicks the FG, that they convert:
If Dallas has to start their drive from the 1, that they score a TD:
If Dallas has to start from the 1, that they move into FG range:
If in FG range, Dallas converts the FG (a weighted average of all distances):
If NY kicks-off, that Dallas drives the field for a TD:
If the game goes to Overtime, that Dallas wins:

We went through this in another thread though. I don't think it is possible or relevant to have a statistical analysis done with arbitrarily made up numbers. In this exercise Brian may think they have a 54% chance which really means nothing to the discussion if the statistics show it is a 32% chance in actuality.

Re: Onside kickoffs, watching a game the other day the announcer said it was a 8% chance of the kicking team recovering the ball.  So for those that call for an onside kick on EVERY kickoff its not a great plan.

Of course the following percentages are based on ZERO facts and pure conjecture...

If NY goes for it, that they get the TD on 4th down: Considering they got stuffed three times in a row, I'd say 15-20% or less.
If NY kicks the FG, that they convert: 99%
If Dallas has to start their drive from the 1, that they score a TD: 10-12%
If Dallas has to start from the 1, that they move into FG range: 35-50%
If in FG range, Dallas converts the FG (a weighted average of all distances): 80%
If NY kicks-off, that Dallas drives the field for a TD: 25%
If the game goes to Overtime, that Dallas wins: 50%

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time, it works every time.

OK.  I'll work on the math.  But just off the top of my head, I see one number that I consider to be pretty far off.

I think that NY gets 1 yard more than 20% of the time.  You think that it takes them, on average 5 downs to get 1 yard running the ball...not likely.

In terms of odds of Dallas either moving into FG range or getting a TD, the low end of your estimate seems OK: 45%, but the high end 62 seems pretty high.

Even by statistical definition, they ran the ball on 1st, second, and third down unsuccessfully.  Stuffed all three times.  Even if they got in on 4th down, by definition, it is a 25% success rate.

It's not the time, it's the field position. You get stopped on the 1, they have to go 65 to 70 yards for a FG to TIE the game and your defense has a chance to sack them in the endzone if they are passing out of their own endzone. If you kick the FG and you kick off the BEST you can hope for is that they don't get a return and have to go 80 yards to WIN the game. I like my odds in the first scenario better then I like my odds in the second scenario.

The yardage they need to get to score will be about the same either way, maybe 15 yards difference and while a FG is easier to get than a TD, all they have done is TIE the game. You are still in the game. It's probably going to overtime if anything. In your scenario if they drive for the TD (like the Cowboys did) you now lose rather than going to overtime. I think you are wrong. Your odds are better if you give them the ball on the 1 up by 3 then kick off up by 6.

I look at it the other way around, you are giving up about 15 yards of field position that they need to go to score, however instead of scoring a TD, they are only kicking a FG to tie. That's MUCH better then being down by a point. They are going to be less aggressive getting to the endzone knowing that an INT seals the game for you whereas they can kick the FG to TIE it. In your case there's no reason not to be aggressive and go for the TD because anything less, they lose.

That's not how statistics work.

If I flip a coin 10 times and get heads twice, that doesn't mean a coin flip has an 80% chance of being tails.

I know how statistics work.  Thanks for the lesson.

But this isn't a random process with a bimodal distribution like a coin flip is.  This is influenced by non-random skills and events.  Success rate absolutely applies.  If I approach a someone's house when they're not home and try to open the front door, is there a 50/50 chance I get in (locked or unlocked) or is it statistically more likely that the door is locked?

Brian, you said that "by statistical definition," if they successfully ran the ball on 4th down that would mean they have a 25% success rate on 1-yard runs.  That's not statistical probability; that's short-term history.

Using the same logic, since they failed on the 2 runs they did try, we must conclude that they had a 0% success rate, and that any further runs would be a waste of time.

BINGO.
You can keep trying it, you might get lucky once or twice, but if you tried it three times and failed, why would you do it a 4th time?

This is precisely why a play action pass was called on 3rd down, and not another run.  It wasn't working, try something else.

According to reports the back was told not to score on the first two carries. You can't say it wasn't working if that report is accurate. No one was trying to make it work.

In this hypothetical situation, I'm assuming the coach is not a moron and prefer to eat up seconds rather than take a 10 point lead.  If they wanted to not score, why wouldn't they just take a knee?  That story sounds really silly to me.

because 3 is too small of a sample size to ever tell you anything meaningful.  You could have an 80% overall success rate and have 3 fails in a row. 

Plus if you only do your highest percent plays every time,  they will soon fail. What I mean by this is NEP isa better passing team, than running,  and their best receiver is Gronk, but if Brady threw to Gronk on every single play,  NE would lose.