I can't believe we are passing on 4th & 1 when we have K Hill ... or even G Schrader
Printable View
I can't believe we are passing on 4th & 1 when we have K Hill ... or even G Schrader
And correct me if I'm wrong but on two of the passes we didn't convert didn't we have a drop on one and just a terrible throw on another where we had the guy wide open but bounced it to him?
I've seen a chart of this for the NFL, and it is WAY more aggressive than any coach has done. IIRC, you only punt at 4th and 6 or more, every other time No matter what, you go for it. https://www.mic.com/articles/75949/s...hart-tells-youQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
100%
Why? It is the exact same thing as a turnover (it is literally called a turnover on downs). The fact that it is not counted as an official turnover is retarded. The outcome is just as bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
The outcome is just as bad, but they are telling you two different things. An interception or fumble tells you you are being sloppy with the ball (most of the time; there are fluke plays that result in fumbles and to a lesser extent interceptions when people are more or less doing the right thing). A turnover on downs doesn't necessarily mean you are being sloppy. You just took a chance that didn't pay off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
Not saying they shouldn't be included in turnover stats. Don't really have a strong opinion on that either way, except that on the stats sheet, there will be somebody with a fumble and a fumble recovery or somebody with a thrown interception and an interception. No individual shows up for a turnover on downs, so in that sense, it makes sense that it's not recorded as a turnover.
If Leach made a chart like this (adjusted to college football, our team, and our opponent) and then followed 100% of time in games, I'd respect that and never criticize a failed 4th down conversion.Quote:
Originally Posted by SheltonChoked
It is called a turnover on downs. It absolutely should be viewed with fumbles and punts when discussing turnover margin.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
Are you saying we should no longer refer to a 4th down stop as a turnover on downs? Or still call it that but just don't view it as a turnover?
Because our line can't block three guys. You expect them to push 9 out of the way? If we run it every time, they know it's coming. If they have man on the outside, the way we played against LSU, why not throw it a few times.Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHDAWG
you are lost ... dawgQuote:
Originally Posted by TheLostDawg
I'd like to say I'd respect it as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
But I know I'd lose my shit the first time he went for it on 4th and 5, backed up to our 12 yard line. I know the numbers work. But it's too big a change. And I refuse to punt in Madden or NCAA.
I would understand going for it on 4th down if we had a bad defense. Right now, our defense is the unit playing best. Don?t put them in a position to stop them on a short field because our offense can?t move the ball. Until our offense proves it can actually score, we should not be going for it on 4th down unless we are between the opponent 30 and 40 yard line.
Do the numbers really say go for it on 4th and 5 deep in our territory? I would have thought the likely points from giving them the ball in the redzone would greatly outweigh the expected points from a 4th down conversion. Although I guess a punt from our 12 will generlaly give them pretty good field position also.Quote:
Originally Posted by SheltonChoked
Just gut feel, for the first half, I'm fine with 4th and short once we're past our 30, 4th and 6 once we're past our 40. Don't want to go for 4th and 10 unless we're between the 50 and whatever field goal range is for us. If the team we're facing has an explosive offense, I'd rather be more aggressive as field position won't matter as much for them. If they have a weak offense, I'd rather play more for field position to avoid giving them easy points. For the 2nd half it just depends on how the game is going.
In simple terms, you don't call a failed 4th down conversion a turnover because the stats don't count it as a turnover.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarius
Our turnovers are bad enough on their own without juking the stats.
Any time you give the ball up without scoring points it is, a turnover.
Did Dillon J play against Ky?
I understand why you can’t officially call them a turnover, but it is the same thing and I am not going to get upset with people for including them to prove a point.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
So punts are turnovers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Percho
Here's the larger point, several people are saying just stop turning the ball over and we will will. Well, yeah. But the turnovers are the symptoms not the cause.
The cause is our O-line's inability to block 3 with 5, the QB's inability to process the zone defense and make the right read, and our WR's inability to find the soft spot in the zone and make the play. So it's not as simple as just stop turning the ball over.
It's not, but the second and third thing you listed should be as easy as reps and practice, so that should take care of itself as time goes one.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
Of course if our O-line can't block 3 with 5, then it's going to be hard on our QB regardless of how well he and the receivers learn the offense.
If only there was a link with pictures and supplying the math for expected points...Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
Yes, the NFL based math in the link shows you go for it on 4th and 2 or less everytime. I have seen one before that showed only punt when it's 4th and long backed up inside the 10. The math changes based on expected outcomes (how good is your kicker, how good is your defense), But in football, you have to possess the ball to score. http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2618/...450826e5_o.png
As a corollary, If I was Lane Kifffin, and my defense is truly as bad as it has shown this season, I'd onside every kick. You cannot reliably stop another team, take the chances on the onside.