Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
pecorino

First offensive play-what do you want?

First offensive play of the game. Which do you prefer?  

83 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

Awwww look at you and your little conveniently cherrypicked couple plays from a one game sample. Adorable. Shame it doesn’t mean anything in a discussion across thousands of games. Hell, scroll through the game log yesterday and you’ll see 2nd and 1 was converted several times. You just chose to only mention the misses. The Titans converted 2nd and 1 into first downs twice and picked up 14 yards in the process on their very first drive alone!

Wasn’t cherry-picking. 

Just the most recent 2 examples. Several commented on it in the in-game topic.

the condescension is a nice touch though, thanks. :rolleyes: 

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Wasn’t cherry-picking. 

Just the most recent 2 examples. Several commented on it in the in-game topic.

the condescension is a nice touch though, thanks. :rolleyes: 

I mean you only talked about a couple times when short yardage wasn’t converted and didn’t mention the several times it was. And actually there was a more recent short yardage situation within the same game- the one Henry pounded in for a touchdown end of the first half. Definitely cherry-picking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Cobbler1 said:

I mean you only talked about a couple times when short yardage wasn’t converted and didn’t mention the several times it was. And actually there was a more recent short yardage situation within the same game- the one Henry pounded in for a touchdown end of the first half. Definitely cherry-picking. 

I never said the examples of short yardage conversion were invalid. Not once. I didn’t imply it, nor should you have inferred it from any of the words I typed. 

What i clearly said was that converting a 2nd or 3rd & 1 isn’t as easy as some claim. It’s certainly not a given.

in that game of the 3 examples, 66.6% of them failed, so it still supports the point. 

 a straightforward point that you missed.

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I never said the examples of short yardage conversion were invalid. Not once. I didn’t imply it, nor should you have inferred it from any of the words I typed. 

What i clearly said was that converting a 2nd or 3rd & 1 isn’t as easy as some claim. It’s certainly not a given.

in that game of the 3 examples, 66.6% of them failed, so it still supports the point. 

 a straightforward point that you missed.

Lol no. You said it was very difficult to get one yard in real football. You didn’t say it wasn’t as easy as some think. Not once to take your own actual words. And you cited 2 examples of failure as validation of that. Meanwhile there were several examples of success in that very game. And that very game represents a tiny tiny tiny portion of the entire sample. So in reality it means nothing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, I was thinking about this recently before seeing this thread.  I haven’t read through all of the thread but the conclusion I came to was it depends on the scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 1/3/2020 at 1:05 PM, Hot Sauce Guy said:

This sport has been around for a long time.

as far as I can tell, on anything but 3rd and short yardage conversions, the goal of every offensive play is to score a touchdown.

even screen passes to a WR or RB or TE for a loss are intended to be scoring plays. They’re designed to suck a defense in & dump off to an open man who could conceivably take advantage of the defense’s aggression & score.

every running play, the team wants to score. Obviously they don’t succeed at a high %, but the goal of football is to put points on the board. 

i don’t think I’ve ever heard of any offensive coordinator deliberately aiming short of a 1st down. 

and if they did instruct an offensive player to stop at 9 yards instead of diving/stretching/reaching for 10, it should immediately be posted in the “post here when coaches do something stupid” topic. 

After having read through some of the thread I have no intention of jumping in the middle of your debate but I will point out that people have recently (say last 10 years) have come to the conclusion that not scoring when on offense and allowing scoring when on defense are optimal in certain situations - this is somewhat similar, assuming we ignore the OP rules.

Edited by AAABatteries
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Great topic. Let me pose it a different way.

Our practical goal is to extend the drive with more first downs until eventually score.  So one way to look  at it would be, what are the odds of extending the drive with different down and distance.  Using some dated data that looked at this specifically, but going with it for sake of argument. 

From 2002 to 2006, 66% of the time, the downs starting with a 1st and 10 ultimately resulted in another first down or a TD.   So we could ask, how many yards to go on 2nd down gives us greater than that 66% chance of gaining a 1st down or TD?  The answer from the same data set was 5.5 yards.  So all other things being equal, 2nd and 5 is more likely to see your drive extended another set of downs than a 1st and 10 is. But 2nd and 6 is less likely.   (For 3rd down, 1.5 yards was the 66% success rate break even point.) 

Though we have to look at what we end up with.  Let's say we only get 1 yard on 2nd down. Now we're 1st and 10 at the same yardline as our other choice and we still face those same odds of extending the drive.  But it's also true we might pick up more than 1 yard in which case our 1st and 10 occurs further up the field and is preferable if achieved.

 

One can argue 2nd and 1 (or inches)is the best possible situation (other than 1st and short) for a number of  reasons. The difference between 1st and 10 and 2nd and 10 is a lot worse than the difference between 2nd and 1 and 3rd and 1. Which means 2nd and 1 is a great chance to take a shot downfield, where the QB can be told to play it safe and throw it away if it isn't there. The defense is in a tough spot having to defend against the short gain, which may increase the chances of a favorable matchup. And if they don't stack the line enough the play can be changed to an even higher chance of picking up the 1st with a run. 

That is all subjective though. My gut on that is I'd rather have the 2nd down.  Others have mentioned, the best way to look at it is probably expected points.  Looks at the situation like this one suggest that gaining 9 yards on first down ultimately results in more expected points on average than gaining 10 yards on first down. 

Incidentally this is a different look by the same author that I got the 1st and 10 equates to 2nd and 5.5 based on success rate from.  It's interesting to see the expected points for a 10 yard gain on first down on that graph are about equal to a gain on 1st down that leaves you with 2nd and 5 which further supports that part.

 

Edited by GregR
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, GregR said:

Great topic. Let me pose it a different way.

Our practical goal is to extend the drive with more first downs until eventually score.  So one way to look  at it would be, what are the odds of extending the drive with different down and distance.  Using some dated data that looked at this specifically, but going with it for sake of argument. 

From 2002 to 2006, 66% of the time, the downs starting with a 1st and 10 ultimately resulted in another first down or a TD.   So we could ask, how many yards to go on 2nd down gives us greater than that 66% chance of gaining a 1st down or TD?  The answer from the same data set was 5.5 yards.  So all other things being equal, 2nd and 5 is more likely to see your drive extended another set of downs than a 1st and 10 is. But 2nd and 6 is less likely.   (For 3rd down, 1.5 yards was the 66% success rate break even point.) 

Though we have to look at what we end up with.  Let's say we only get 1 yard on 2nd down. Now we're 1st and 10 at the same yardline as our other choice and we still face those same odds of extending the drive.  But it's also true we might pick up more than 1 yard in which case our 1st and 10 occurs further up the field and is preferable if achieved.

 

One can argue 2nd and 1 (or inches)is the best possible situation (other than 1st and short) for a number of  reasons. The difference between 1st and 10 and 2nd and 10 is a lot worse than the difference between 2nd and 1 and 3rd and 1. Which means 2nd and 1 is a great chance to take a shot downfield, where the QB can be told to play it safe and throw it away if it isn't there. The defense is in a tough spot having to defend against the short gain, which may increase the chances of a favorable matchup. And if they don't stack the line enough the play can be changed to an even higher chance of picking up the 1st with a run. 

That is all subjective though. My gut on that is I'd rather have the 2nd down.  Others have mentioned, the best way to look at it is probably expected points.  Looks at the situation like this one suggest that gaining 9 yards on first down ultimately results in more expected points on average than gaining 10 yards on first down. 

Incidentally this is a different look by the same author that I got the 1st and 10 equates to 2nd and 5.5 based on success rate from.  It's interesting to see the expected points for a 10 yard gain on first down on that graph are about equal to a gain on 1st down that leaves you with 2nd and 5 which further supports that part.

 

Marry me? This post will be our vows. Can’t wait to see people argue against MATH because they saw 3rd and short fail a couple times in a game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GregR said:

Great topic. Let me pose it a different way.

Our practical goal is to extend the drive with more first downs until eventually score.  So one way to look  at it would be, what are the odds of extending the drive with different down and distance.  Using some dated data that looked at this specifically, but going with it for sake of argument. 

From 2002 to 2006, 66% of the time, the downs starting with a 1st and 10 ultimately resulted in another first down or a TD.   So we could ask, how many yards to go on 2nd down gives us greater than that 66% chance of gaining a 1st down or TD?  The answer from the same data set was 5.5 yards.  So all other things being equal, 2nd and 5 is more likely to see your drive extended another set of downs than a 1st and 10 is. But 2nd and 6 is less likely.   (For 3rd down, 1.5 yards was the 66% success rate break even point.) 

Though we have to look at what we end up with.  Let's say we only get 1 yard on 2nd down. Now we're 1st and 10 at the same yardline as our other choice and we still face those same odds of extending the drive.  But it's also true we might pick up more than 1 yard in which case our 1st and 10 occurs further up the field and is preferable if achieved.

 

One can argue 2nd and 1 (or inches)is the best possible situation (other than 1st and short) for a number of  reasons. The difference between 1st and 10 and 2nd and 10 is a lot worse than the difference between 2nd and 1 and 3rd and 1. Which means 2nd and 1 is a great chance to take a shot downfield, where the QB can be told to play it safe and throw it away if it isn't there. The defense is in a tough spot having to defend against the short gain, which may increase the chances of a favorable matchup. And if they don't stack the line enough the play can be changed to an even higher chance of picking up the 1st with a run. 

That is all subjective though. My gut on that is I'd rather have the 2nd down.  Others have mentioned, the best way to look at it is probably expected points.  Looks at the situation like this one suggest that gaining 9 yards on first down ultimately results in more expected points on average than gaining 10 yards on first down. 

Incidentally this is a different look by the same author that I got the 1st and 10 equates to 2nd and 5.5 based on success rate from.  It's interesting to see the expected points for a 10 yard gain on first down on that graph are about equal to a gain on 1st down that leaves you with 2nd and 5 which further supports that part.

 

This is exactly what I was looking for. Many thanks. It answered my secondary question, too, which is: How many more yards beyond ten does a team need to get to make it better than just getting nine? This author shows that you need to get 16 (!) yards on first down to yield the same number of expected points as getting nine. My intuition put it at closer to 12 or 13. Very good article--thanks again.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.