3 ms·
If the fear of 3rd and 10 was the main factor, then you wouldn't see such an uneven distribution based on whether the 2nd and 10 came via incomplete pass, or ru
by WillPostForFood 10y ago
If the fear of 3rd and 10 was the main factor, then you wouldn't see such an uneven distribution based on whether the 2nd and 10 came via incomplete pass, or run for no gain.
- mwfunk 10y agoThe difference is if a pass fails, you gain nothing, whereas even a mediocre run will probably give you at least a couple yards. So, if your goal is to avoid 3rd and 10, a run is more likely to accomplish this than a pass, even though a successful pass has a much higher ceiling in terms of yards gained.
- WillPostForFood 10y agoYes, I agree, but later in the article they show that if the second and 10 is due to a run on first down, they are more likely to run on second down than if they passed on first down. I.e., the coaches are looking backwards not forwards when they make the decision.
- tossaway1 10y ago> they show that if the second and 10 is due to a run on first down, they are more likely to run on second down than if they passed on first down I think you got this backwards. If the first down was a run, they were far less likely to run on second down compared to when the first down was a pass.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]