Seems like more coaches are going for it on fourth down

Than anything else

In comment 14969319 montanagiant said:

Quote:

Than anything else

If you are going to use ego to determine when you go for it on fourth down, you are going to get burned more often than not.

...

In comment 14969325 Route 9 said:

Quote:

...

He's probably Exhibit B of not quite grasping when to go for it. One week, he seemed to grasp it, the next week he's punting from the opponent 40.

the end of the first half was a mistake. Why kick a FG there? Who cares if you go up by six? They left time on the clock and you just knew the Cowboys were going to go down and score. Go for it and you may come out of it up 17-7 and with little or no time for another Dallas possession before halftime. Instead, up six, poor kick coverage, too much time on the clock, and a halftime deficit.

correct decision on 4th and 3 from the 11 is to kick the FG. Though this doesn't account for score/time specifics. That said, it's close to the gray area. If it was 4th and 2, the "smart" decision is to go for it. I think he was planning to go for it no matter what though, otherwise you don't run on 3rd and 6.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/05/upshot/4th-down-when-to-go-for-it-and-why.html

Coaches praised when they make it and bashed when they don’t. Reid was praised going for it inside his own 35 because he made it. If they didn’t make it the tone of the game could have gone the complete other way would it have been the right decision? I get going for it more often than the coaches have historically, but I don’t think one can be praised and one can be bashed. Both calls seemed to be very risky and if they make it the coach is a genius if not he’s an idiot, but if analytics is making those choices it can’t be viewed this way. It’s right or wrong no matter the outcome based on statistics.

It used to be that coaches were so risk averse about going for it on fourth that it was completely idiotic not to go for it in many scenarios, but now they kinda have gone in the other direction. Pederson’s offense was struggling yesterday and he is in a tie game at 17-17. His defense hadn’t let up a drive more than 50 yards all game and he goes for it on 4th down from WFT 45 yard line—Wentz gets sacked and Redskins get short field and go down and score. The analytics on that one said go, but the decision given the texture of the game was completely idiotic. Bury the WFT inside the ten and let your defense win the game against Haskins.

McCarthy going for it was just completely to ridiculous as well. His defense actually was playing better in second half and making stops. There was no reason not to tie it up. A complete bonehead decision

In comment 14969419 jerseyjokes said:

Quote:

Coaches praised when they make it and bashed when they don’t. Reid was praised going for it inside his own 35 because he made it. If they didn’t make it the tone of the game could have gone the complete other way would it have been the right decision? I get going for it more often than the coaches have historically, but I don’t think one can be praised and one can be bashed. Both calls seemed to be very risky and if they make it the coach is a genius if not he’s an idiot, but if analytics is making those choices it can’t be viewed this way. It’s right or wrong no matter the outcome based on statistics.

The decisions (and resulting criticism) shouldn't be arbitrary. I believe the Chiefs had a 4th and 1 (and the best QB/offense in the NFL). Statistically, I think the correct decision was to go for it.

With Dallas in FG range and a 4th and 3, while it was maybe borderline (see link in prior post), the statistically correct decision was to kick the FG. Probably more so given the game situation (down 3 in the 4th).

In comment 14969419 jerseyjokes said:

Quote:

Coaches praised when they make it and bashed when they don’t. Reid was praised going for it inside his own 35 because he made it. If they didn’t make it the tone of the game could have gone the complete other way would it have been the right decision? I get going for it more often than the coaches have historically, but I don’t think one can be praised and one can be bashed. Both calls seemed to be very risky and if they make it the coach is a genius if not he’s an idiot, but if analytics is making those choices it can’t be viewed this way. It’s right or wrong no matter the outcome based on statistics.

Not correct. Chargers went for it on 4th down twice and failed and that was the right move in both cases.

Analytics don't say go for it on every 4th down; this is where a having a competent coach comes into play. It's a tool, when used correctly, can help your team win.

Let's use baseball for an example, if the numbers say a guy hits to the second base side 90% of the time so you shift your infield to that side; no one is going to kill you if he hits a base hit the other way. It's going to happen 10% of the time. But if you don't shift, and the guy gets a hit to the second base side, people will ask questions.

Conversely, if you set up your defense because you have a hunch that this is one time the guy is going to buck the numbers and fail, you are going to get called out for it for not understanding the percentages.

This is where Mike McCarthy falls. It doesn't say go for it on fourth down just to go for it. Distance, score, and time left in the game all matter.

As the poster above said, 4th and 2? You go for it. One yard does make a difference.

situation, but it's not like the offense was humming along. You were killing them on ground sure, but can you risk running on 4 and 3rd? So he took a situation with a low success percentage to pay off on what seems like a wild, feel it in your gut, hunch.

In comment 14969824 Zeke's Alibi said:

Quote:

situation, but it's not like the offense was humming along. You were killing them on ground sure, but can you risk running on 4 and 3rd? So he took a situation with a low success percentage to pay off on what seems like a wild, feel it in your gut, hunch.

I agree. This is where the feel of the game comes into play. If this was against KC, it makes sense. You can't trade FGs for TDs. But in this case the Os were bad (or Ds were great) so points were at a premium.

was to go for the FG. The Rams offense (specifically Goff) did nothing in the 2nd half after Nolan finally started bringing some blitzes. You tie the game there and let your D get the ball back for you where you'll just need another FG to win.

In comment 14969958 YAJ2112 said:

Quote:

was to go for the FG. The Rams offense (specifically Goff) did nothing in the 2nd half after Nolan finally started bringing some blitzes. You tie the game there and let your D get the ball back for you where you'll just need another FG to win.

Yeah, I think so too. Dallas was going to get the ball back in all likelihood with plenty of time so I didn't see the point of passing up easy chance to tie.

It was also 3 yards (i think) which is more than just a Dak or Zeke dive play.