Is Math All an NFL Coach Needs?
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 09. 2024
- Use code FIVEPOINTS14 for up to 14 FREE MEALS across your first 5 HelloFresh boxes plus free shipping at bit.ly/3roPaFW
Decisions make or break you as an NFL coach. Punting in enemy territory. Going for it on 4th down. Analytics can help. And the math can tell you things that may shock you. Let's find out.
Follow me twitter: / fivepointsvids
Don't forget to like my page on Facebook:
/ fivepointsgaming
I would very much like it if you subscribed for my somewhat funny sports videos.
"...unless you are the vikings, you are more likely to make the field goal"
Harsh!!
But true. 😥
Pain lol
Well the vikings make it if its vs the lions
So true but also just straight up pain
@@TheFunStuff000 yes true
So true unless lion
I think you should do a video on how often the flip of a coin actually determines the OT winner in the current era and if the winner of the coin toss should actually choose to play defense in OT.
If this is a joke lmao then pardon my stupidity but there is no situation in the history of mankind where it's advantageous to defend first. Even if you have a hall of Fame defense and a Rec league offense.
@@aok2075 I think the vikings chose to defend against the bucks one time. It worked out for them
In the playoffs one year the broncos won the toss and decided to go with the wind instead of taking the ball. The broncos ended up winning with a fg. So wind also plays a factor. But it would have to be some crazy wind
@@hogrider7461 crazy wind I guess
@@richrancy Defending first still doesn't help if you have to score a field goal. Just go for the field goal straight away, there's no benefit to letting them have a chance first. Good defense or not
Video idea: Coaches/coordinators that weren't good in college but were good in the NFL.
🤔
Good idea I’m just trying to formulate my list honestly but five point knows more then me.
I like this. A little switch up as opposed to good in college but bad in nfl
I e Cliff Kingsbury
Why not coaches/coordinators who were great at both levels?
As a professional analyst for several years, and life-long nerd... I *live* for these kinds of vids. Also always up for a Jon Bois shout-out. Also... what do the Ravens do about any of these analytics, because the "go for it" math is skewed by Lamar Jackson, but the "send out the kicker" math is *also* skewed, because Justin Tucker is the best kicker in history?
I'd rather they think of it not as skewed but that they have their own unique set of probabilities that correspond to them on what might work and what mightn't. Surely it can't be too difficult to just rebuild the model by replacing the probabilities of success of 4th downs and field goals
Adam Vinatieri has enterd chat
@@789french5 Tucker's the most accurate kicker in NFL history, and now he's also got the longest kick in NFL history. it's just a matter of time before he gets the scoring record, too.
@@darkhawk4863 he's still got to clutch a superbowl winner before he beats out the GOAT.
+Vinny didn't have all the insane technology of today during his prime years. Look at kicking over the past 30-40 years, teams have invested so much more into the phase of the game.
Specialized cleats, more domes, AV had shitty turf and a random backup guy to hold and *maybe* a dedicated long-snapper for most of his career.
I'm a Colts fan so him coming from the Pats doesn't help his case personally for me.
But objectively: he paved the way for kickers today.
It's 100% possible to appreciate and like them both ya know.
@@789french5 If you're the goat because you have better technology, you're still the goat. You wouldn't say Bill Russell is the goat because Michael Jordan had better shoes and played on a better court with a better diet.
I don't know, as a Ravens fan, I highly approved of that punt.
That comment is basically how my friend thinks through these decisions. Math isn't his best thing. He'll say "What is the other team hoping you do? Do the opposite." If I were on the Ravens defense I'd be celebrating this punt.
You missed the biggest question: when you’re losing with time for one play left and receiving a kickoff, do you return the kick, or run one last play from the 25?
Seeing as most kicks sail out of the end zone you'd always start at the 25. Then again a smart kicker and special teams coach would say to purposely kick short or squib kick it another way (like it travels 20 then hits the turf and flops like a fish out of water) in which case you can't fair catch it and it could touch a player before getting tothe return man making it a live ball and thus running out the clock before a return can be tried.
That's not even close to the "biggest" question, but okay.
@@CONSOLETRUTH2 it’s always a live ball on a kickoff (once it passes 10 yards)
@@Sixsince-dd2eu he was talking about how the clock doesnt start until someone touches it.....not whether the opposing team could field the ball
One wonders what the Lions-Falcons “Todd Gurley’s accidental touchdown” situation would look like under mathematical probability analysis.
Or the Giants-Patriots Super Bowl accidental touchdown. Now you have a case where it worked out (Giants) and a case where it backfired (Falcons).
If maths teachers used relevant stuff like this in class I'm sure that students would be more engaged in class
Fr
This is basic arithmetic lol
Always funny to me when people say shit like this. "omg if you were my teacher I would have passed 7th grade!" Yeah, if school were 20 minutes long, your teacher has exactly one student at a time, and can proceed no matter what with no disturbances from the students, you'd learn a lot more. That shit isn't realistic, and it's not a fair comparison. If youtube was that much better at producing top students, then we'd have more top students right now, because...wait for it...WE HAVE CZcams!
@@B3Band THIS COMMENT!!!! lol not to mention 99% of the time ppl say "oh i wish they taught this in school, or I never learned that etc" it ACTUALLY was taught in class and they just werent playing attention.
Albert Einstein would be a great head coach in today’s NFL.
Was Einstein really a genius or just way above his time? I think he’d still be way above average today but I’m not sure he could hang with Elon.
@@thatguy4872 Yes, Einstein was really a genius. Elon Musk doesn't know a fraction of the math that Einstein did, and he hasn't fundamentally redefined physics as Einstein did. But he's also not a theoretical physicist, so comparing them doesn't even really make sense. It's like comparing an automotive engineer with a car mechanic. A great mechanic can't necessarily design a car, and a great engineer can't necessarily repair one.
@@burke615 but elon gets bitches
HE IS NOT A LEADER OF MEN
I kinda think Einstein might be better at Baseball operations because that is even more mathed to hell than Football.
To add to the 2pt at the end.
If you miss the the first you can still reach 14 and tie the game with the second. However if you went 7 then 7 you still have to hold the opponent to zero AND score in overtime. Going for two once and making it requires you to score less times in order to attain a victory.
The way I think of it is this: Assuming you score two touchdowns and hold the opponent to nothing, and assuming PAT kicks are automatic and 2pt attempts are 50/50, you have...
50% chance to win by 1 (by making the first 2pt attempt and making a PAT the second time)
25% chance to go to OT (by missing the first 2pt and making the second)
25% chance to lose by 2 (by missing both 2pt attempts)
Compare this to a 100% chance of going to OT if you kick two PATs. Sure, by going for 2 you incur extra chance of losing, but you also incur an even bigger chance of winning. And the added chance of winning is bigger than the added chance of losing - even though the average points is the same (50% times 2 points vs 100% times 1 point) - because... who cares if you lose by 2? It's a loss. Who cares if you only won by 1 point? It's a win! And as the team who has scored a touchdown and now gets to try, you have the opportunity to set up the probabilities in your favor.
"you'll never see the extra point become obsolete"
The Rams had a game in Week 1 of their first season back in LA where they did not have a kicker, so they went for 2 on every touchdown. And they scored a LOT of touchdowns that day!
Funny bc today the Steelers kicker Boswell got concussed and didn’t have a backup kicker so they went for 2 on the Tds
@@pansexualdickhaver6878 just be glad your rivals the ravens can't math correctly and love the 2 point conversion
@@nautgamingnautgaming9949 haha. I’ve been loving it all season😂 #TitanUp
Reminds me of this documentary I watched "The Coach That Never Punts."
Coach Kelley is just DIFFERENT! He always onside kicks, he always goes for 2, and he NEVER punts.
he coaches for a private high school.....
Won several state titles
Love the video, but I’m confused with one part of your math at 6:05. Wouldn’t (0.3*-1.8) equal -0.54, making the EPA 1.21? In turn, wouldn’t that conclude that taking the FG in this scenario is better than going for it bc 1.21>0.38?
But this concept is really cool!!
Yeah that one hurt my soul LOL.
Yea I think your calculator needs new batteries
Came here to say that...
yeah, and they're making a 20 min video out of it
Numbers never fail yet flesh and blood does this why teams choose not to go for a conversion when numbers say different
My brain hurts after watching this, those numbers came at me like a Ray Rice in a elevator combo
Does that mean you're going to defend him in an interview if enough people see this video?
Oh like when Lafleur called for a field goal instead of going for a touchdown in the championship game last year.
That was stupider than not giving the ball to lynch on the one yard line
Lafleur is generally great on fourth down decisions but that one was so bad
There is a lot of pressure on head coaches let’s be real
So what. They're getting paid millions. Be prepared 😁
What about when you come up with a great play call but when players don’t execute it?
To clarify why a made field goal has an EPV+ of 2.5- making a field goal necessarily results in a kickoff, the average EPV of all kickoffs (including onside kicks) being -0.5 points. It's confusing, but EPV is meant to measure how much a play gives you an advantage over your opponent, not your raw score, and so a field goal attempt necessarily resulting in either an overturn or a kickoff makes a serious difference when accounting for the fact that you retain possession with a first down.
As a Falcons fan I hoped this would make me feel better about the super bowl.... It did Not
The thing we're missing, is how your individual team's offense/defense impacts these numbers.
If you have a top 5 offense but a bottom 5 defense, you should factor for that and increase how often you go for it.
Conversely, if you have a terrible offense but a great defense, you should be more willing to punt the ball away and give your defense a chance to work their magic.
I'm thinking you assign a coefficient based upon your individual team's circumstances, but I'll let someone better at it than I figure out the specifics there.
Same with the Hail Mary... If you have Aaron Rodgers at QB but a bum at Kicker, you go for it. But if you have your backup QB but the best kicker in the league, you probably should Kick.
This is why I took honors statistics because this all makes sense to me and nerds me out.
FivePoints: Mike Vrabels call to punt it on 4th and 2 against Baltimore was bad because of math.
Me: What the hell do you need math for?!?! That's Action Jackson across the field, why the 🤬 are you giving it back to him knowing it probably won't make a difference whether they start on the 10 or near midfield?
Edit:
14:52: 🤣 I'm dying. You called Michael Badgley Nathan Badgley.
It’s like when the Ravens went for it on 4th against the Chiefs. You don’t want to give Mahomes the ball back under any circumstance.
@@aresef yea I think coaches need to realize that any top 10 QB maybe even top 15 is dangerous enough to drive down the field to at least get a field goal. So if you’re at least on your like 40 and it’s a 4th and short I’m going for it
The critical flaw of analytics is that football games are played by men, not computers.
The biggest problem with the 2pt conversion math is you open yourself up to variance game-to-game. Sure, you may score a few extra points over the course of a season, but your win/loss record doesn’t care about your overall season points - just which number is bigger on that day. If you’re always going for 2 and get on the bad side of variance, you lose. If you get on its good side, most of the time you’re simply winning “more.” Kicking the extra point guarantees that you keep pace with your opponent in the vast majority of cases.That’s why it’s important to contextualize the numbers within how the game works.
Coaches are slow to adapt, but I’m glad they’ve gotten more bold recently.
Yeah the Eagles being successful in 2017 while being aggressive really made a lot more teams do some research and realize how important being aggressive is
Colts fan know, especially under Reich that "GO FOR IT" can lose you some critical games ;(
Tucker would make 99% of those 55 yard field goal
It would be fascinating to see a team base everyplay off analytics and see how they do
Don't give the Fumble Dimension ideas.
We're still gonna argue over how good/bad their players are so it won't come out clearly unfortunately
The issue is that the rare plays with high success rates are that way because they’re rare. There is a small study group to begin with. Teams would adapt to the irregular play that works right now, and then it would be the same difference.
If they were the only ones doing it they would win everything if they had a solid team too
Wow, the last part reminded me of playing freshman football. The school I went to was only in it's 4th year of being open when I was a freshman (1994) and since the very first game of the schools first year, the freshman coaches had 1 rule: WE NEVER KICK. So, regardless of any, and I mean ANY situation (save for the kick off of course) there was never a kick. So we never punted, never kicked a field goal, and always went for two. Sounds crazy but at the end of the season my freshman year, the freshman team had a perfect 44-0 record with an average point differental of nearly 20 per game. In fact the freshman teams first loss was due to a missed 2 pt. conversion with no time left of the last game of my senior year meaning when I graduated in 1998 (god I feel old) the freshman team was 87-1.....not bad for never kicking except on kickoffs.
Surprised there wasn't anything on the Packers decision to kick a field goal to lose the NFC championship but I guess that's like beating a dead horse
Hi, FPV. I’m a professional mathematics tutor and a fan of this channel. There are some math issues, which some other commenters have already pointed out. I’m not sure what you can do to correct this. I suppose you could redo the video or post an update. If you decide to do either, I’d be happy to consult for you and help make sure all the math is correct! Please reach out!
Also, the EVP and EPV appear interchangeably throughout the video. :-(
As a charger fan I'm proud to have staley on no matter if it fails I love his "math"
he doesnt make decisions based on math.....he has made some of the worst 4th qtr time management ive seen since kyle shanahan
Math correction on the Tucker portion. It should be +1.21 for Tucker kicking the 55 yarder.
14:45 Really sad to not see Sebastian not on that list.... That guy is a beat... And this is from a Miami fan.... I remember him back from college...
Teaching arm chair athletes about the math of going for it on 4th down = Fivepoints will need some serious donations this week
next we need to see the frustrating math of clock management
You know he’s going to roast the falcons lol
Teams are getting more wise to intentionally NOT scoring a TD (and the defense NOT trying to stop the TD) just to waste more time and get a walk off score 🤔
Heres the problem with the math: its not consistent in every situation, team, player, matchup, etc. Coaches cant just go off analytics for all ther decisions, there is nuance that numbers have great difficulty in factoring in. Like if the jets get a 4th and 4 against the cardinals this year, their percentage is probably 20% maybe. The opposite, cardinals 4th and 4 against the jets, % is probably 75%. Matchups matter, and is why ranking teams as better or worse isnt accurate cuz a "better" team could matchup terribly against another.
True
Ya, but I still think analytics could cover that also. The formula needs to be adjusted to account for independent variables such as kicker power/accuracy, offensive rating, and defensive rating
When a team plays against one that is much better than them, the pressure to be more aggressive should be higher. They need to maximize their chances with the ball in their hands and drive up the amount of variance in the game, especially if they play a team that generally isn’t aggressive on fourth downs. It’s one way they can give themselves an edge when at a talent disadvantage
And their are fourth down models that factor in team strength based on pre game spread
19:41, "Hey I know that guy"
What always bothered me is when teams take a TO in the second half to avoid a delay of game when it's like 3rd and long(lets say 9 yards or more) or like 2nd and 15 or worse. To me the time out is more valuable than the 5 yards you're sacrificing on a possession you're unlikely to get the first down on anyway. Does the math agree with that or am I wrong?
I've always thought this but never seen it mentioned anywhere.
Rodgers wastes so many timeouts due to the play clock. Has his entire career. Definitely one of my pet peeves. Especially when he's just trying to get them to jump offsides and then we are going to punt anyways. We just completely wasted a timeout for no reason. Just take the penalty if we're going to punt.
I'd say yeah an entire extra play (utilizing the middle of the field) is worth way more than 5 yards. TO > 5yds
I didn't understand a fucking thing. Fantastic video. Still enjoyed it 😄
You should have mentioned the one high school football coach that goes for it on 4th down every single time, and it led to his team actually performing better than normal teams that would punt the ball deep in their own territory. I don’t know how much math would’ve been able to help with this video, but I think it was something that should be worth noting. His team actually did really well too.
Pulaski academy in arkansas, they win state titles all the time. They beat bigger schools all the time.
The coach was kevin kelley. He left n took a job at a college in sc, he left that job after one season.
The fact you referenced John Bois made me so God damned happy
Screw analytics... you ALWAYS take the points. ALWAYS.
"...Jon Bois...renowned mathematician"
You forgot "elite storyteller".
As someone who's watched the search for the saddest punt ever multiple times this makes me smile. It does fail to fit in to the appropriate message though, sad punts work out for teams
Kirk and Brian Ferentz need to watch this. That bowl game loss was painful to watch.
now i finally understand how my dog feels when i talk to him
Great video... Analytics dont calculate the intangibles, tho. If you had Rodgers or Brady at QB, Henry at RB, a couple of great recievers, a great tight end and an amazing O-line, you go on every 4th down... However, if all of them are having a "bad day", you kick and punt.
“Punting inside the opposing team territory is not how you win games”
*iowa Hawkeyes have entered the chat*
I love these studies of math and probabilities and such. But overall, I have a couple of thoughts. And I'm building this off the example of the MIT blackjack team...
1) Some of these situations do not come up frequently enough; over the course of a season, you can hit on a some of these, but in a game, it may not come up enough to make a major difference in one game / one hand. In Vegas, you have a shoe with 6-8 decks in it... playing thought it, the odds for various strategies can be in your favor; with a single deck, and a reset each hand, the odds change a lot.
2) And remember, the other side has full access to math in the NFL... they may not use it, but they can do it. They calculate their own odds and it can change up their strategy. When you're talking straight math, it doesn't, in my opinion, change up the other sides' decisions... like a Vegas blackjack dealer, there are firm rules on how they have to react. The math works fitting within these specific rules, within these expected reactions from the other side. But if the dealer (again, using the MIT blackjack team as the example), was allowed to count "10s" and base their moves on their perception of what's in the shoe, that could dramatically change the outcomes.
I love using factual information to make strategical decisions. Every fan should look at football and a lot of other things like this.
F=m*a
Distance= Speed/Time
Nice to see the Surrender Index brought up.
You fr had to do us so dirty at 4:45 😭 being a Vikes fan is exhausting dude
If only you knew what would happen in the final chargers game. So many good fourth down conversions
These EPVs are based on averages, right? So, the standard deviation is hidden. If we suppose the std dev is very high, then wouldn't it be smarter to know whether you are on the higher or lower end when making these decisions? Basing it on the average may make sense for the non-existent Perfectly Average Team, but when you know your offense sucks but your defense is strong, it might not make sense for your team right now...
The variance is definitely important. It’s unfortunate that most mainstream football math analysis ignores it. However, there’s a good general rule in sports/games/competitions when it comes to play by play variability: the better team (on paper) should prioritize low variability options, the worse team (on paper) should prioritize high variability options.
There’s 2 main reasons for the “better” team to reduce variability (which is really just the same reason): Knowledge and predictability. Having a predictable outcome lets you easily game plan. The knowledge you gain from having a predictable outcome lets you better adjust your game plan to account for what needs to be done in the remainder of the game. If you are the better team, you are able to use both these advantages more effectively.
If you are not the better team, you want to negate these advantages. High variable plays (like going for 2 over an extra point) create more uncertainty on a per game basis even though the expected value is very close to an extra point long term. You get much larger point swings, and if lucky enough in one game can get a total game swing if enough points to win an otherwise lost game. It’s kinda a “screw it, I’ve got nothing to lose” mentality. What’s the difference of losing by 7 or losing by 27 if all that counts is the L. And if you get lucky you win by 3. The more outmatched you are, the more “luck” you need to create the upset. “Luck” is just variance under another name.
Honestly, bottom tier teams that have ok-ish to good offenses should be going for 2 nearly every time, which isn’t a standard analysis that you’d get if you didn’t incorporate variance into the strategy.
“Taking the points” for field goals when the “math” says to go for it, especially early in the game, is still a completely valid strategy. Without variance, the calculated expected points per play should not be accepted as the ideal way to determine the correct decision.
16:10 BRUTAL 😂
I just knew Jon Bois would make it into this video
so expected points was part of what drove the decision to say "fuck the norms" in Super Bowl 52 and run the Philly Special.
The Lions couldn't even bother to try to block the 66 yard field goal
i think vrabel recognized the defense would be defending run because its obvious that's what they will do so he punted because he wasn't going to pass so it was the safest option in his mind likely.
I read this as "using Meth to solve nfl coaching dilemmas" and now I would like an investigation plz
The only objection I would like to raise is the observation that punting is not "cowardly" or "spineless". A punt is an offensive play, one that is designed to pin the opponents back in their own territory. This is understood most clearly by the CFL teams, who regularly use the punt as an offensive weapon.
To frame punting as cowardly is to introduce an unnecessary psychological bias, which is the last thing you want to do if you are trying to promote a more rational approach to the game.
My madden game just went up 10x thanks.
I'll be so great in madden that it'll get recognized by scouts. I'll transform the game as we speak.
Thank you
I like how at the end he says "or the Lions."
Cody Parkey isn't even that bad, it's just that when he misses, it's in spectacular fashion lol
The only football game I’ve ever watched was SuperBowl 43 and I still watch nfl videos on CZcams.
brandon staley be like the madden player that always goes for it
At 6:44 you said if you miss the field goal from the 38 yard line your opponent gets the ball on their 38 yard line which is not true. After a missed field goal the other team gets the ball from the exact point where the kicker actually kicks the ball which is approximately 7-10 yards behind the line of scrimmage.
Coughlin was terrible the whole way through. He succeeded in spite of himself. A true shield guy.
All these stats assume the mean NFL offense of all time vs the mean NFL defense of all time. I’d like to see some even more advanced versions of this that account for a specific team’s average yards per play or drive and PPG, although there might not be a large enough sample size for that stuff to matter until weeks 16 and 17 of a season haha
Just gonna say, Henry was not running the ball well at all that game and the passing game didn't have a spark. Their defense had been controlling the game up to that point. Made sense in the moment to punt
Mike Tomlin needs to watch this
Genuine question from a math nimrod - at what point do these numbers go from a solid outcome to a tangential number which in reality has no bearing whatsoever on a single game?
I love the surrender index. Jon is a savage with math
NFL Coaches on 4th and long: If it’s within the 30 yard OPP line, FG. Otherwise, go for it.
That 1 4th and 10 decision around the 35: I GOTTA GO FOR IT!
Why is the expected point value of a made field goal 2.5? A made field goal should always be 3 points, no?
I’m not a mathematician by any stretch of the imagination, so if I’m being dense just say so, but I feel as though two point conversion analytics are a bit skewed in general. I feel as though they happen significantly less often than XP’s, usually only occurring when a team is down two late, or some similarly dire situation. In short, I feel like circumstance skews the analytics a bit to make it seem like a better decision than it actually is. I feel like momentum plays a part in this as well as we have to consider that, in most late comebacks that culminate in that final 2-point attempt, the team attempting the 2-point conversion has already built up quite a bit of late momentum and scored some unanswered points. I understand that’s somewhat intangible, but I feel like that team with the momentum is more likely to score the 2-point than the team that just scored on their opening drive at the start of the game.
TLDR: I feel like the analytics ignore too many aspects of the game to just be taken as absolute doctrine. Punting in enemy territory is still stupid, but going for 2 every time is also not the greatest idea.
I'm willing to bet money that if we created a Negative Staley (who always takes the opposite of what the analytics says) and put him up against a Positive Staley (who always takes the analytic option), the Negative Staley would still win.
I love me some surrender index analysis. Cheers!
There should be a weighted avg added to the calculation based on the previous plays within the same game [0 on the first play of course]
The Vikings should go for 2 every time. It’s probably easier for dalvin or theilen or Jefferson to get 2 yards than it is for whatever piece of shit they have at kicker
Expected points of a “made” field goal would always be 3 at 5:30
Staley went for it on 4th so much because Fangio never ever ever ever never EVER went for it while he was here with the broncos. (And even now he still doesn’t)
One needs Scott Steiner to calculate the math here.
The surrender index makes a comeback!!!! Unreal
You touched on it late in the video... But what a lot of "mathematicians" don't factor in is.... ALL the numbers are skewed. Only good teams with good running backs, or good O-Lines, or all-world QB's, are going on 4th and short..... Bad teams are NOT. Thus, ALL the data on 4th down attempts is overly optimistic..... There has never been a time, in the NFL, where a "theoretical" .500 team decided to go for it on every 4th down, where we could really see, what were the results.....
We all remember the Kurt Warner Rams, when their kicker was hurt, and they started going for 2 after every TD... And the results were really good, and the whole world starting asking these questions.... But again, we're talking about a very productive offense.....
People have tried to look at high school and college, where there are a couple programs who decided to "never punt", or to "go for 2 every time", but.... Again, that decision is not made in a vacuum.... A coach evaluates his team, and says hey, our punter really stinks, lets just go on 4th....
I like your video. Very informative for the casual fan. But in reality, I think it's very dangerous, to "project" this data out, into the darkness of the unknown..... Cards coming off a deck, are random.... There is a LOT more going on, in a football game.... If you KNOW, as a coach, that Derrick Henry is massively gassed, and tweaked his knee 3 plays ago.... That changes everything.... Your right guard, had a knee coming in, but he played, and he's been cheating to the inside all game, and it's working... but in the 4th quarter, the defense seems to have figured it out, and he's getting destroyed on running plays.... this all makes a difference.... field goals, punts, 4th down attempts, are much more than cards coming off a deck.... If on 4th down, a coach could draw a card off a deck, well sure, the numbers all make perfect sense..... but that's not how it works....
Good teams are also winning late int he 4th, so there's always a balance. Shitty teams that are losing in the 4th more often than winning are skewing the numbers down by going for it just to go for it, because the coach doesn't want to get fired sooner for being a coward. There's a reason why they use huge sample sizes like this. It's almost like the people being paid to analyze these situations know what they're talking about, and the random youtube keyboard crew isn't the more reliable source of information.
So based on analytics, kicking field goals is stupid most of the time. Just save a roster spot, sign a punter who can kickoff and rarely kick the 4th & 15 field goal at the 20, and go on practically every 4th down and 2 point conversion
Even if you adopt a minimal kicking strategy, the likelihood that your kicker when you do actually need them being able to contribute over someone sitting way back on the depth chart as the very last roster spot to backup your backup is way higher.
So much math I feel like I'm watching baseball
After watching this video....I NEED A DRINK.
The Football Gods favor the bold. But sometimes, the foolish succeed.
The math on one play is not the determinant; it's the expectation of victory (which BTW is 1 minus expectation of loss) for each outcome of a choice. For one thing, what is the chance you blow a won game by taking the preferred expected value choice on one play? What if the expectation on 4th and 1 at the 2 yard line is great, but 3 points essentially locks victory?
Like in that case going for it, and probability of winning is 78% if succeeds, but 53% if fails. Let's go Falcons, eh?
Quite so. Early on in the game, chance of winning aligns pretty neatly with points (and expected points). Toward the end of a game, there's much more room for potential discrepancies, as you've pointed out. Hence FivePoints's comment about going for 2 "in the first three quarters" of all games - because in the fourth quarter, you're gonna want to stick to those well-defined rules of when to go for 1 or go for 2. Similarly, as you've said, toward the end of a game kicking a FG is the obvious move when you're down by 3 or less and in field goal range.
I would NOT call a 9.7% chance a possibility. I'd call it a PLAUSIBILITY.
The sample size for analytics in football just isn’t as robust (or significant enough) as they are in something like baseball or basketball.
The last time I was this early, the Steelers were 11-0
Idk. Unlike hard math this is statistical. There are x factors when you add actual humans to it. Sure the majority of time going for it is probably the thing to do but who are you playing against. How do you factor in whether you are playing against the worst defense in the league vs the best?
I'm all for going for it on 4th down.... That would make the game interesting lol
EV is useful over millions of simulations. EV is used in poker as well, consistent +EV decisions will ON AVERAGE net a player profit. EV correctly determines that over the long term play (X) is better. In live poker, you can play 1k hands in a day, and there is always another hand. Because of this, you are THRILLED to get all the money in with a 1-3% edge on your opponent. In football this is not the case. This math could maybe gain you 1.5 W's in the regular season at best but it all goes out the window when it's win or go home and the sample size is 1.
Of course the other flaw is that if a TD is scored in OT, the game ends eliminating the need to make a decision to kick or go for 2.
For the field goal vs Hail Mary, I'd rather see a team is down 10 points,do you go for the Hail Mary or field goal first. Say ball is on opp 30 yard line and its 4th and 2. Most teams seem to take the field goal first but I feel like it's usually the wrong call. I feel like get the td first then try to get the field goal and maybe math will support me on that.
You’re right! 4th down models suggest going for it and trying to get a touchdown first. 4th and 2 on opponent 30 is still a good chance to score a touchdown and you may not get a good chance like that on the next drive