Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Inspired by the end of the NE-SF game.
Last edited by a moderator:
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Down by 10 with 40 seconds to go (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ignoratio Elenchi
- Start date
It's first down, I assume? (Definitely not fourth down, which would make it too easy?)
Last edited by a moderator:
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
CalBear
Footballguy
I think the tricky bit here is that if you're playing for the tie, kicking the FG right away is definitely better. But kicking right away loses the possibility that you get two TDs and win in regulation.
I'm willing to discount that, though, based on the way plays are likely to be called after recovering an onside kick down by 3. I think you only get a TD on a lucky break, so it's pretty low probability. I'd say the value of time is higher than the value of the two-TD possibility.
I'm willing to discount that, though, based on the way plays are likely to be called after recovering an onside kick down by 3. I think you only get a TD on a lucky break, so it's pretty low probability. I'd say the value of time is higher than the value of the two-TD possibility.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Pretty sure the game's still going to continue if you don't kick a FG.
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
Kneel down. You're going to lose anyway.
Not Sleeping
Footballguy
Well, as a Niners fan I would have loved to see them burn more clock going for the touchdown. I think that means the FG was the correct play.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
If it's not 4th down, I line up in field goal formation and then pass deep (hopefully the holder is a QB). If it's incomplete, then I regroup and kick the FG. Definitely worth a shot. Would only burn a few seconds off the clock and you could end up in much better shape.
With 20 seconds left, you should kick the field goal for sure. (If you take a shot at the end zone, even if you score a touchdown immediately and then recover the onside kick, you won't have time to get in field goal range after that. You'll have to make two hail marys for the win instead of making one field goal plus a hail mary for the tie, which overall gives you a lesser chance of winning.)
With 40 seconds left, I still think you should probably kick the field goal first, but it's a closer decision. You'll either make the field goal, recover the onside kick, and then have time for maybe three shots at the end zone for the tie ... or you'll have time for two shots at the end zone, followed by an onside kick, followed by one play to get in field goal range, followed by a field goal to tie. (If the play designed to get you into field goal range results in a touchdown somehow, you'll win it right there instead of going to overtime. That's a bonus that roughly makes up for having time for one less shot at the end zone in case the first two hail marys are unsuccessful.)
With 60 seconds left or more, I'd take a couples shots at the end zone before kicking the field goal.
With 40 seconds left, I still think you should probably kick the field goal first, but it's a closer decision. You'll either make the field goal, recover the onside kick, and then have time for maybe three shots at the end zone for the tie ... or you'll have time for two shots at the end zone, followed by an onside kick, followed by one play to get in field goal range, followed by a field goal to tie. (If the play designed to get you into field goal range results in a touchdown somehow, you'll win it right there instead of going to overtime. That's a bonus that roughly makes up for having time for one less shot at the end zone in case the first two hail marys are unsuccessful.)
With 60 seconds left or more, I'd take a couples shots at the end zone before kicking the field goal.
Last edited by a moderator:
Lovie?
CalBear
Footballguy
No, it's:- score TD from ~50 yards out with ~35 seconds left, then win in overtimeOR- score hail mary TD from ~50 yards out with ~5 seconds left on clock.PLUS- get into FG range after recovering onside kick with 10-20 seconds left on clock, then win in overtime.
CalBear
Footballguy
No, they think they're smarter than [insert name of other coach who made the opposite decision].Belichick has not done extensive statistical analysis on this situation. The difference, if any would be between something like a 5% chance of winning and a 5.5% chance of winning. There's not an obvious answer for anyone, including the all-powerful, all-knowing Belichick, oh, and wasn't he also going to figure out how to stop Colin Kaepernick?
TwinTurbo
Footballguy
Yeah kicking the FG first puts you in a best case scenario of tie and force overtime, unless you are also the type of riverboat gambler that goes for a 2 pt conversion after the TD. With a first down and 40 sec left, I would go for the TD first. It puts more pressure on the other team's defense to force a mistake and you still leave a very small chance open to win in regulation.
Insein
Footballguy
Yes but your chances of winning it will have ended if you miss. At least you know right there and if you make it, preserved the most time. Again it does have some relevance if its a 45+ yarder or a 30-45 yarder. IF you gte a quick hit that lands you inside the 10 with 40 seconds left, I'd be more inclinced to take at least 1 shot at the end zone, but FG is needed either way so might as well take the chip shot and save time. The onsides is the hardest part of the equation.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Greg Schiano wants to see you after the game.
Well, he lost, so obviously he was wrong.And I probably am smarter than Belichick, he just knows more about football.
Ignoramus
Footballguy
You're joking, right?I guess you have done the analysis since you know the answer to within a half percent probability.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Since this is a football question...
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
As in similar threads about strategy (e.g. the down by 15... one) there's no value to "keeping yourself in the game" or "learning if it's over" prior to the clock hitting 0:00. The goal is simply to maximize your chances of winning, not maximize your chances of figuring out whether or not you lost as soon as possible. I'm not saying kicking the FG is the wrong play. But "you know then and there if the game continues" doesn't seem like a valid argument in favor of kicking. Either it increases your probability of winning (relative to going for a TD), or it doesn't.'Insein said:
rick6668
Footballguy
If it's first and goal from the 1 with 30 seconds left, I think you take your shots in the end zone.In last nights game, the Pats had a 2nd and 10 from the 23 after spiking it to stop the clock with :38 left.I think I might have taken 2 shots at the endzone from there. You likely waste around 12 seconds if you don't get the TD, and then another 3 on the kick. This would leave you with ~:23 seconds for the onside. Either scenario has a pretty low success rate, so I'm not sure if either scenario is much better than the other with that amount of time left. The more time left, the more likely you should try for the TD first until 4th down.packseasontix
Footballguy
I look at it this way:
:38 left
1 normal mid-level pass lands you in the end zone
now with
:30,:25,:15 left
onside kick you need to move the ball 20 yards to kick game tieing FG
or
:38 left
kick the field goal
now with
:35 left
drive 60 yards and need a TD
I would rather need to hit 2 - 20 yard passes than move the ball 60 yards with :30~40 second even with Brady...
:38 left
1 normal mid-level pass lands you in the end zone
now with
:30,:25,:15 left
onside kick you need to move the ball 20 yards to kick game tieing FG
or
:38 left
kick the field goal
now with
:35 left
drive 60 yards and need a TD
I would rather need to hit 2 - 20 yard passes than move the ball 60 yards with :30~40 second even with Brady...
Warrior
Footballguy
a) 5.5% is 10% higher than 5%. So yes, if your hypothetical #'s are correct, that is clearly the way to go. Every time.b) He makes the decisions. The players carry it out. If he calls for a 30yd FG and the kicker misses it, are you going to blame that on BB too? Silly argument.'CalBear said:
packseasontix
Footballguy
Also I guess this seems like a no brainer for me.
23 yards + 20 yards to get a shot at field goal = 43 yards
Field goal + 60 yards to get a TD = 60 yards
I would rather move the ball a shorter distance
23 yards + 20 yards to get a shot at field goal = 43 yards
Field goal + 60 yards to get a TD = 60 yards
I would rather move the ball a shorter distance
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
True but which is easier to do first, kicking a short FG or completing a TD pass?
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear
Footballguy
5% is not the answer; I'm saying that the chance of winning in either situation is extremely low, the difference between the two approaches is even smaller than that, and I'm sure the exact situation is not something that any NFL coach has analyzed to the point where he knows the "correct" answer. Put it another way: Let's assume Belichick is omniscient and therefore knows he increases his chances of winning by 0.325% by kicking the FG first when there are 40 seconds on the clock. What about if there are 50 seconds? 60? 120? Even if you accept that kicking the FG first is correct with 40 seconds, obviously that's not what would happen with 2:00 left, so there's a cross-over point. In a game situation, the coach will make a gut call; it won't be based on extensive analysis, and I would be surprised if it would be the same every time the coach got into the same situation.'Ignoramus said:You're joking, right?I guess you have done the analysis since you know the answer to within a half percent probability.'CalBear said:
packseasontix
Footballguy
Its not what is easier to do first, its what is easier to do overall. I would say going for the TD first is overall the easier option. Even if you run 3 plays and don't score a TD now you kick the FG and still have 15-20 seconds to throw it deep for the hail mary TD.
Warrior
Footballguy
Despite your attempts to make up falsities, yes, I'm sure Belichick has had someone do the exact analysis that you're talking about. In fact, common sense tells me that. To not do so would be very foolish when you're the head coach of a top NFL franchise.Please stop. You're making yourself look bad.5% is not the answer; I'm saying that the chance of winning in either situation is extremely low, the difference between the two approaches is even smaller than that, and I'm sure the exact situation is not something that any NFL coach has analyzed to the point where he knows the "correct" answer. Put it another way: Let's assume Belichick is omniscient and therefore knows he increases his chances of winning by 0.325% by kicking the FG first when there are 40 seconds on the clock. What about if there are 50 seconds? 60? 120? Even if you accept that kicking the FG first is correct with 40 seconds, obviously that's not what would happen with 2:00 left, so there's a cross-over point. In a game situation, the coach will make a gut call; it won't be based on extensive analysis, and I would be surprised if it would be the same every time the coach got into the same situation.'Ignoramus said:You're joking, right?I guess you have done the analysis since you know the answer to within a half percent probability.'CalBear said:
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear
Footballguy
So anyone who questions any decision made by an NFL head coach must be incorrect, even if different NFL head coaches make different decisions in the same situation?
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Common sense does not tell us that Bill Belichick has had someone analyze the question, "Should I kick a FG or go for a TD on 2nd and 10 from the opponent's 23 yard line with 43 seconds left to play?" Why would he? He'd have no idea whether or not he'd ever end up in that exact situation.Despite your attempts to make up falsities, yes, I'm sure Belichick has had someone do the exact analysis that you're talking about. In fact, common sense tells me that. To not do so would be very foolish when you're the head coach of a top NFL franchise.Please stop. You're making yourself look bad.5% is not the answer; I'm saying that the chance of winning in either situation is extremely low, the difference between the two approaches is even smaller than that, and I'm sure the exact situation is not something that any NFL coach has analyzed to the point where he knows the "correct" answer. Put it another way: Let's assume Belichick is omniscient and therefore knows he increases his chances of winning by 0.325% by kicking the FG first when there are 40 seconds on the clock. What about if there are 50 seconds? 60? 120? Even if you accept that kicking the FG first is correct with 40 seconds, obviously that's not what would happen with 2:00 left, so there's a cross-over point. In a game situation, the coach will make a gut call; it won't be based on extensive analysis, and I would be surprised if it would be the same every time the coach got into the same situation.'Ignoramus said:You're joking, right?I guess you have done the analysis since you know the answer to within a half percent probability.'CalBear said:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
This question is tougher when the team is closer to the end zone.
At the 23 yard line with 40 seconds left to go, that means Brady passing from around the 30 yard line. No sure thing and there's a very good chance at an interception.
What if they were at the 5 and Brady is throwing from around the 12?
As it was SF got the ball off the on-sides kick at 38 seconds left. If NE had gone for the TD, then if they get the TD maybe another 10 seconds runs off the clock, and then if they had been successful on the onsides perhaps 25-28 seconds is left and they would get the ball around the 50. Two passes to get to the 35 using 15-20 seconds could do it, but they had no time outs. One pass with Brady standing around the 30 or deeper vs that excellent defensive backfield and pass rush was very poor odds so chances are you would never get to do that.
I'd say if they were inside the 10, go for the TD because the percentage would have been higher and it would have taken less time.
My guess is they actually have this mapped out in advance with some sort of situation sheet mapped out by yard line and time left so there isn't debate and confusion on what to do when time is of the essence.
I think most people would say that Belichick made the right choice. - So: Assuming you have Brady & Co., at what yard line of the opponent does one say 'go for the TD first'?
At the 23 yard line with 40 seconds left to go, that means Brady passing from around the 30 yard line. No sure thing and there's a very good chance at an interception.
What if they were at the 5 and Brady is throwing from around the 12?
As it was SF got the ball off the on-sides kick at 38 seconds left. If NE had gone for the TD, then if they get the TD maybe another 10 seconds runs off the clock, and then if they had been successful on the onsides perhaps 25-28 seconds is left and they would get the ball around the 50. Two passes to get to the 35 using 15-20 seconds could do it, but they had no time outs. One pass with Brady standing around the 30 or deeper vs that excellent defensive backfield and pass rush was very poor odds so chances are you would never get to do that.
I'd say if they were inside the 10, go for the TD because the percentage would have been higher and it would have taken less time.
My guess is they actually have this mapped out in advance with some sort of situation sheet mapped out by yard line and time left so there isn't debate and confusion on what to do when time is of the essence.
I think most people would say that Belichick made the right choice. - So: Assuming you have Brady & Co., at what yard line of the opponent does one say 'go for the TD first'?
Last edited by a moderator:
One of the arguments in favor of taking a shot at the end zone first is that you can do so via a fake field goal, which may have a better probability of scoring than a normal offensive play.(If you kick the field goal first, you're stuck with normal offensive plays after the onside kick, since faking a field goal then would be pointless.)
Last edited by a moderator:
RUSF18
Footballguy
I don't remember, was the Niners ST unit in safe mode on that FG kick last night? Just curious.
Please See Mine
Footballguy
The decisions that Belichick consistently makes tell me that he does have access to knowledge of success probabilities.Common sense does not tell us that Bill Belichick has had someone analyze the question, "Should I kick a FG or go for a TD on 2nd and 10 from the opponent's 23 yard line with 43 seconds left to play?" Why would he? He'd have no idea whether or not he'd ever end up in that exact situation.Despite your attempts to make up falsities, yes, I'm sure Belichick has had someone do the exact analysis that you're talking about. In fact, common sense tells me that. To not do so would be very foolish when you're the head coach of a top NFL franchise.Please stop. You're making yourself look bad.5% is not the answer; I'm saying that the chance of winning in either situation is extremely low, the difference between the two approaches is even smaller than that, and I'm sure the exact situation is not something that any NFL coach has analyzed to the point where he knows the "correct" answer. Put it another way: Let's assume Belichick is omniscient and therefore knows he increases his chances of winning by 0.325% by kicking the FG first when there are 40 seconds on the clock. What about if there are 50 seconds? 60? 120? Even if you accept that kicking the FG first is correct with 40 seconds, obviously that's not what would happen with 2:00 left, so there's a cross-over point. In a game situation, the coach will make a gut call; it won't be based on extensive analysis, and I would be surprised if it would be the same every time the coach got into the same situation.'Ignoramus said:You're joking, right?I guess you have done the analysis since you know the answer to within a half percent probability.'CalBear said:
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Of course, and I agree. The question is really, to what degree of precision has he done this specific kind of analysis, if at all? I'm pretty confident he doesn't have a chart showing "43 seconds, 23 yard line, second down, no timeouts, 10 point deficit = 0.1943468..." I trust that Belichick makes the right decision more often than not in strategic situations, but "whatever Bill Belichick did is the right answer" seems like a poor argument. Mostly I was just trying to engage Warrior, because he seemed pretty argumentative and IIRC he's usually wrong in these types of threads. It's not the first time he's said something like "you're making yourself look bad" while seemingly missing the point of the post he's responding to, so I figured it might be entertaining to go down the rabbit hole with him for a while.The decisions that Belichick consistently makes tell me that he does have access to knowledge of success probabilities.Common sense does not tell us that Bill Belichick has had someone analyze the question, "Should I kick a FG or go for a TD on 2nd and 10 from the opponent's 23 yard line with 43 seconds left to play?" Why would he? He'd have no idea whether or not he'd ever end up in that exact situation.Despite your attempts to make up falsities, yes, I'm sure Belichick has had someone do the exact analysis that you're talking about. In fact, common sense tells me that. To not do so would be very foolish when you're the head coach of a top NFL franchise.Please stop. You're making yourself look bad.5% is not the answer; I'm saying that the chance of winning in either situation is extremely low, the difference between the two approaches is even smaller than that, and I'm sure the exact situation is not something that any NFL coach has analyzed to the point where he knows the "correct" answer. Put it another way: Let's assume Belichick is omniscient and therefore knows he increases his chances of winning by 0.325% by kicking the FG first when there are 40 seconds on the clock. What about if there are 50 seconds? 60? 120? Even if you accept that kicking the FG first is correct with 40 seconds, obviously that's not what would happen with 2:00 left, so there's a cross-over point. In a game situation, the coach will make a gut call; it won't be based on extensive analysis, and I would be surprised if it would be the same every time the coach got into the same situation.'Ignoramus said:You're joking, right?I guess you have done the analysis since you know the answer to within a half percent probability.'CalBear said:
Not Sleeping
Footballguy
Can't refute that logic!
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I'm not sure, it's how much distance it takes in how much time to go that far.43 seconds left.1 FG + an onsides kick recovery = say 5 seconds (because the 49ers got the ball back after the onsides with 38 seconds left).So you know if you kick the FG and get the ball back you have 38 seconds and 50 yards to go for a TD (with no timeouts).But if you go for the TD from the 23, how much time will you have to go for the FG from the 50 (and no timeouts)?I think most coaches would rather have the greater time amount to work with.Can't refute that logic!
packseasontix
Footballguy
So lets take your 50 yard line anlysis. If you take 3 shots at the end zone and connect on the last one your probably running off 7-8 second each time. You now have instead of 40 seconds about 16 seconds. Do you really want to try and go 50 yards for a TD in 40 seconds or have 16 seconds to get as close as you can to kick a field goal?I would think with no timeouts the less yardage you have to go the better not to mention if you just need to get in field goal range you can work the whole field and dont have to worry about punching it in for a TD.Finally what do you think is more likely:26 yard TD pass + 15-30 yard pass anywhere on the field with Spikeor50-60 yard drive for a TD with no timeouts w/ 40 seconds leftI just dont see how you justify not taking the shots at a somewhat average throw for Brady 20-25 yards down field compared to making him complete 2-4 of those passes in a row while managing the clock...I'm not sure, it's how much distance it takes in how much time to go that far.43 seconds left.1 FG + an onsides kick recovery = say 5 seconds (because the 49ers got the ball back after the onsides with 38 seconds left).So you know if you kick the FG and get the ball back you have 38 seconds and 50 yards to go for a TD (with no timeouts).But if you go for the TD from the 23, how much time will you have to go for the FG from the 50 (and no timeouts)?I think most coaches would rather have the greater time amount to work with.Can't refute that logic!
Joe Summer
Footballguy
A long passing play will always take more time than a kicking play (no player can outrun a field goal attempt).Therefore, if you kick the field goal first you will save about 2-3 seconds on the clock.I'm not sure, it's how much distance it takes in how much time to go that far.43 seconds left.Can't refute that logic!
1 FG + an onsides kick recovery = say 5 seconds (because the 49ers got the ball back after the onsides with 38 seconds left).
So you know if you kick the FG and get the ball back you have 38 seconds and 50 yards to go for a TD (with no timeouts).
But if you go for the TD from the 23, how much time will you have to go for the FG from the 50 (and no timeouts)?
I think most coaches would rather have the greater time amount to work with.
On the other hand, if you go for the TD first then you may save yourself some yards, but only if your starting position is closer than the ~35 yard line.
Standing Hampton
Footballguy
Aside from all of the posts about how many yards this, what yard that. You are down by two scores, so kick field goal, onside kick, hope you get it, TD, play for OT.
So 1st and goal from the 1 just kick the FG and go for the onside kick, amirite?
I think Schwartz made a similar decision in week 14 against the Packers with the only difference being the Lions were on the 20 and had less time. Personally I disagreed with both head coaches. I'm of the opinion you keep trying for the TD you know you are going to need while you have downs to burn.
DangerMonkey
Footballguy
The reason you kick the FG first is that you're already in FG range. This is sonething that you may not be able to achieve even if you recover the onside kick. I've heard lots of commentators say "That sack takes them out of FG range". Never once have I heard of a team being out of TD range.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
- Poll
