5 ms·
Tough to take everything into account, but I find it troubling that all non-success/failure outcomes are not part of the calculation (ex: 8-yard gain on a 4th a
by kosei 13y ago
Tough to take everything into account, but I find it troubling that all non-success/failure outcomes are not part of the calculation (ex: 8-yard gain on a 4th and 10; a fumble on a 4th and 2 run, etc). It simplifies the formula to the layman, but I have to imagine that it adds enough additional variance to matter, especailly considering we're talking in variances of less than half a point in their stated example.
Also (and to their point), there is a ton of variation between offenses, defenses, punters, running backs, etc. Using this as a rubric is a nice idea for a rule of thumb for an armchair quarterback, but I'd strongly disagree with using it to accurately criticize any decision within a couple points of expected value.
- altoz 13y agoThis is especially true of 4th down plays. A surprise play-action pass on 4th and 1 can go for an especially long gain and thus should have higher expected value. There's also the fake-punt scenario, which I suspect tends to be more successful than a regular 4th down.
- kosei 13y agoAbsolutely. And I'm sure if coaches started trying to run more 4th down plays, that would dramatically change the algorithm as well.