y66 Posted October 19, 2013 Report Share Posted October 19, 2013 Chip Kelly appears to be off to a good start. "In his first NFL coaching stint of any kind, Kelly has produced the first offense in league history to rack up at least 425 yards in each of its first six games" -- reported by Geoff Mosher on Wednesday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 19, 2013 Report Share Posted October 19, 2013 Wrong time of year for this I know, but just saw the '2nd and 2' topic. You were 7 points behind in the game. You have just scored a touchdown, very late in the game ... there are scant seconds left, not enough to give the other team a chance to score. You can (1) elect to kick the 98% (or whatever) 1-point conversion, and play sudden-death, or (2) take your chances now with a 2-point conversion. Seems to me (1) is a 50% proposition, so if your chances of scoring the 2-pointer are greater than 50%, you should go for that. I do believe I googled that awhile back, and the chances of scoring a 2-pointer were in the low 50's, but I might be misremembering. The thing is, I've never heard this option discussed by any announcers, nor seen it discussed in print. Or maybe I'm overlooking something, and it is just a stupid idea.America is different of course, but this would be unthinkable in my country. Why? because televisions want over times!, and they have the power, Tevisions control the Federation who controls the referee, as soon as some idiot starting decreasing their rates for some silly reason their team would start suffering from extraneous referee's decisions, none of them very obvious, but all of them on the same side. My soccer team was 'sent' to second division just after the president started to have too many political aspirations 10 years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 19, 2013 Report Share Posted October 19, 2013 http://i.imgur.com/uWFgf7U.png Figure 6. (Left) The optimal decisions. (Right) The most popular decision from actual NFL games given a certain fourth down situation.(Red = punt, Green = go for first, Blue = field goal attempt.) Coaches overuse the punt (instead of going for the first down) on their own side of the field, and perhaps go for the first down too much on the opponents side when they should settle for the field goal in fourth and short situations Very interesting study I am not an expert, but looking at a radical example such as 4th&1 where the ball is almost on your own endzone (top left corner), it looks like the clock should be a very important factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted October 19, 2013 Report Share Posted October 19, 2013 I am not an expert, but looking at a radical example such as 4th&1 where the ball is almost on your own endzone (top left corner), it looks like the clock should be a very important factor.It is impossible to have 4th & 1 and be located almost in your own endzone. That is why that part of the graph is in black. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted October 19, 2013 Report Share Posted October 19, 2013 Wrong time of year for this I know, but just saw the '2nd and 2' topic. You were 7 points behind in the game. You have just scored a touchdown, very late in the game ... there are scant seconds left, not enough to give the other team a chance to score. You can (1) elect to kick the 98% (or whatever) 1-point conversion, and play sudden-death, or (2) take your chances now with a 2-point conversion. Seems to me (1) is a 50% proposition, so if your chances of scoring the 2-pointer are greater than 50%, you should go for that. I do believe I googled that awhile back, and the chances of scoring a 2-pointer were in the low 50's, but I might be misremembering. The thing is, I've never heard this option discussed by any announcers, nor seen it discussed in print. Or maybe I'm overlooking something, and it is just a stupid idea. There are examples of this. If I remember correctly, many years ago, Nebraska played Miami in the Orange Bowl. This was before college football had overtime, so a tie result was possible. Nebraska, trailing by 7 with very little time remaining, scored a touchdown. Rather than play for the tie (with the game likely to end in a tie), Nebraska played for the win and went for 2, failing. I have not seen this in the pro game. Perhaps someone can come up with an instance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted October 19, 2013 Report Share Posted October 19, 2013 NFL success rate for 2-point conversions is slightly below 50% (though see advanced NFL stats for an interesting discussion about run versus pass success rates; seems to me an example of the NBA "always want my best player to take the last shot" fallacy).There is an interesting case where it's clearly right to go for two, but noone ever seems to do it: trailing by 14 later in the 4th quarter, you should always go for two if you score a touchdown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted October 19, 2013 Report Share Posted October 19, 2013 America is different of course, but this would be unthinkable in my country. Why? because televisions want over times!, and they have the power, Tevisions control the Federation who controls the referee, as soon as some idiot starting decreasing their rates for some silly reason their team would start suffering from extraneous referee's decisions, none of them very obvious, but all of them on the same side. My soccer team was 'sent' to second division just after the president started to have too many political aspirations 10 years ago.I'm not sure I understand this at all. How did the television industry come to control the national soccer federation? Also I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "some idiot starting decreasing their rates". What rates? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 20, 2013 Report Share Posted October 20, 2013 I'm not sure I understand this at all. How did the television industry come to control the national soccer federation? Also I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "some idiot starting decreasing their rates". What rates? ?Clearly tv and media rights control the money in usa sports... I assume this is true in worldwide soccer. decreasing rates? I guess these might mean they have a rooting interest in large cities, population? tv gives huge money to LA...tiny money to KC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted October 21, 2013 Report Share Posted October 21, 2013 If you consider going for it on 4th down at the 10-yard line, you are comparing an (essentially) 100% field goal with a an uncertain outcome of sometimes turning the ball over on downs, sometimes kicking a field goal, and sometimes a touchdown. So in the latter case, you only have to subtract the value of "opp's possession after kickoff" weighted by some probability. So the two mistakes don't cancel out. Isn't that obvious?Obviously the opponents gain possession after all of these results, not just one of them. In two cases, the value of that possession is identical, and in the third case slightly less. Field position will matter of course: a field goal after going for it is only possible if there is a first down to be had, and the value of loss of possession on downs varies with position as well. I suppose if a 1st down is possible, then other drive outcomes become possible also (turnovers, etc). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted October 21, 2013 Report Share Posted October 21, 2013 Obviously the opponents gain possession after all of these results, not just one of them. In two cases, the value of that possession is identical, and in the third case slightly less. Field position will matter of course: a field goal after going for it is only possible if there is a first down to be had, and the value of loss of possession on downs varies with position as well. I suppose if a 1st down is possible, then other drive outcomes become possible also (turnovers, etc). It really sounds like you think I am dumb. Well, that may well be right, but I am not (yet?) quite as dumb as to make the mistakes you think I am making.This "study" subtracted the value of the opponent's field position after turning the ball over on downs; it did not subtract the value of the opponent's field position after scoring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted October 21, 2013 Report Share Posted October 21, 2013 OK cherdano, I misunderstood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.