538: You ran the ball on first down. You’re already screwed.

[Punching Bag]

16 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

I get what you're saying, but the thesis isn't team specific. The article is more about probability and statistics than it is about football. As you stated, every team has a unique set of circumstances.

 

Probability and statistics should include those circumstances.  

[PlayoffsPlease]

I think there are at least one significant flaws in the design of the 538 analysis. 

 

 It does not seem to take into account situations.  Pass-Pass-Pass is likely very successful for teams that are trailing big in the second half facing a prevent defense.  I am not sure you can compare the results of rush-rush-pass on the opening series against that. 

 

[nedboy7]

3 hours ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Looked at all data from 2009 - 2018. 

 

People make fun of sites like 538 and PFF. But they take the time to crunch math on every play of every game.

 

A majority of fans watch the game once with a beer in their hand and a sandwich in the other. 

 

I’ll take the engineering mindset all day over emotional fans. 

 

Thats today’s science. “But I feel the numbers are wrong” 

[jimmy10]

It makes sense from a statistical standpoint, but the sample size in football is so small (16 games) that I understand why coaches are loathe to go with the numbers. As opposed to baseball (162 games) where you most definitely see the statistical trends play themselves out over the course of a season. 

[row_33]

16 hours ago, The Senator said:

 

Those are some very granular analytics, which I’m in no position to dispute.

 

To me, rush-rush-pass sounds like the old Chuck Knox philosophy, obviously very outdated in today’s NFL.

 

Mike Leach would never rush on 1st down.  

 

Nor 2nd, 3rd, or 4th. ?

.

 

 

To dispute?

 

you have to put the situation of the game at exactly that time and score and momentum and injuries into each variable category to make an honest effort to determine effectiveness

 

a team that is a huge underdog will probably lose if they run the ball on first down a lot 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 12, 2019 by row_33

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

I suppose it depends if Josh Allen is running with the football, or if Kyle Orton is running (er, sliding) with the football.  ?

[The Frankish Reich]

3 hours ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Looked at all data from 2009 - 2018. 

 

People make fun of sites like 538 and PFF. But they take the time to crunch math on every play of every game.

 

A majority of fans watch the game once with a beer in their hand and a sandwich in the other. 

 

I’ll take the engineering mindset all day over emotional fans. 

I'm a big fan of 538 and other analytics-heavy sites, but this one is a very superficial analysis. For example:

 

Kansas City, the most dominant passing team in the league, was successful 53.3 percent of the time with rush-rush-pass. But the Chiefs ran the sequence just 15 times all season for a total share of 9 percent of all plays — 7 percentage points below league average — and they were mostly unsuccessful with the first two plays in the chain. When the Chiefs called back-to-back runs on first and second down, the second run was successful just 47.7 percent of the time. This suggests that the success of their third-down passes owes itself more to the strength of the Chiefs passing game and quarterback Patrick Mahomes than to the running plays that led up to them.

 

18 hours ago, quinnearlysghost88 said:

My head is spinning. That all felt kind of ambiguous. Rush-Rush-Pass is a weak sequence, yet good teams can execute it well. Right. If you have good players, your sequence doesn't matter as much. We have a 43% success rate with R-R-P. The Rams? 60% KC? 53%. Someone like New England has a 39% because they never R-R-P. They're constantly throwing on 1st down. Their frequency is at the bottom (along with other good teams). If you have a stellar line and RB, then you can R-R-P to your heart's content. 

Exactly.

[BringBackOrton]

Football is resistant to analytics because defensive alignment, offensive alignment and talent are rarely accounted for. If R-R-P is “effective” 70% of the time versus a nickel alignment in a 10 offensive set, then “run on first down and you’re screwed” is an embarrassing conclusion.

[K-9]

Doesn’t matter what you do on first down if you end up in unmanageable third downs, especially if you’re playing behind the chains. 

[Orlando Tim]

39 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

 

Thats today’s science. “But I feel the numbers are wrong” 

No one is saying the numbers are wrong but they are without context and therefore are not very useful. In college army runs every play to great success but i would bet the similar pattern will appear over the entire scope of college football. Football has too much contextual situations to apply this kind of overall thinking. 

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

Is this the same 538 by Nate Silver who said Hillary was going to blow Trump out the water?  

[mannc]

22 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

Football is resistant to analytics because defensive alignment, offensive alignment and talent are rarely accounted for. If R-R-P is “effective” 70% of the time versus a nickel alignment in a 10 offensive set, then “run on first down and you’re screwed” is an embarrassing conclusion.

So all the NFL teams that have invested millions of dollars on analytics and are making multi-million dollar decisions based on analytics (which is almost all of them) are just throwing away their time and money?  Ok...

Edited January 12, 2019 by mannc

[mabden]

OJ Simpson;

 

Run Right for 4 yards, Run Left for 4 Yards, Run up the Middle, for 3 yards, First Down. 

[vorpma]

You play to win - rush, pass, special teams, defense; good coaches and good teams win any way possible. This utter fascination with Arena Football League Offense and screw the defense cracks me up; somehow I just don't see the Patriots coaching staff developing a game plan based on fans desire to view a "pass heavy/light up the scoreboard" game! Then the silly argument only high scoring offense wins in the new era or 2018; it won in the 1950's too! 

[JerseyBills]

A major component is how you are as a 3rd down offense. Allen and Co were good on 3rd&5 or less and their chances at a first down dropped dramatically beyond that. If we can get to 3rd and short , With his running ability, we'll be okay, regardless if we Rush -rush or pass-pass , 3rd down is key 

Edited January 12, 2019 by JerseyBills

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

7 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

 

The context is they are for an entire year. So some context gets lost. But.... yes there is information in there that can be helpful.  

 

She did. It’s just that we don’t have a true democracy. She won 3million more votes. And just because someone is wrong doesn’t mean everything that come out from then on is false. Nice logic. 

 

Resistant to analytics?  Wow. I think that’s the embarrassing statement actually. 

 

You are correct and that's by design.  We are a Constitutional Republic, but you knew that already!

[MJS]

If you are doing anything at a high enough frequency for defenses to easily guess what you will do next, that's a problem. The offense should be mixing it up as much as possible.

 

There are some obvious exceptions. For instance, if you are getting 6-7 yards a pop running it and the defense just can't stop you, you run it until they stop you a couple times. Also, certain down and distance situations usually require a pass (like 3rd and 10+).

[VW82]

I can't stand RRP play calling sequences though it's different when you have players like Wilson, Allen, or Jackson. I can at least see the logic of trying to win using RPO or option/wildcat if you think they can't stop the run. At some point Carroll should have spread the field and let Wilson play QB. 

 

I hope we're all done with designed Allen runs. I'm fine with him scrambling for big gains when defenses given him the middle of the field. The best thing we can do for Josh is give him a line and a running game to work from using play action. Sometimes that means RRP.   

[LSHMEAB]

2 minutes ago, VW82 said:

I can't stand RRP play calling sequences though it's different when you have players like Wilson, Allen, or Jackson. I can at least see the logic of trying to win using RPO or option/wildcat if you think they can't stop the run. At some point Carroll should have spread the field and let Wilson play QB. 

 

I hope we're all done with designed Allen runs. I'm fine with him scrambling for big gains when defenses given him the middle of the field. The best thing we can do for Josh is give him a line and a running game to work from using play action. Sometimes that means RRP.   

Other than sneaks(which is too effective not to use), I hate Allen's designed runs. I don't have the stats, but they were not particularly effective if memory serves. He's at his best when the play breaks down and he takes off from there.

[DCOrange]

3 hours ago, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

Is this the same 538 by Nate Silver who said Hillary was going to blow Trump out the water?  

 

By the time Election Day rolled around, 538 gave Trump a 29% chance of winning. New York Times tracked a bunch of sites that do similar calculations and the other contemporaries gave Trump a 15%, 8%, 2%, and 1% chance while Vegas gave him an 18% chance. So while Trump defied the odds according to everyone, 538 gave him more of a chance than anybody else.