They worked out, but coach Pat Fitzgerald's two fourth-down calls in the fourth quarter deserve to be second guessed.
Upon further review...
Upon further review...
Looking at Fitz's um, questionable, fourth-down calls
- Thread starter lou v
- Start date
I think Alviti got a bad spot. Nobody seemed upset about it but I think he got it
The reverse pass wtf. He said they practice it all the time. From the 2??
IDC. It's a win
The reverse pass wtf. He said they practice it all the time. From the 2??
IDC. It's a win
I actually love the new Fitz who is aggressive on the 4th downs. There was an article that talks about how statistically you're far better off going for it in a lot more cases depending on field position and distance.
I also don't mind the trickeration, but that call with 2 yards to go, when you have JJTBC and a shitty KY run defense, does boggle the mind. Not necessary. But, IDC either, and prefer the new Fitz far more than Turtle Fitz. I just wish he'd be more aggressive in holding certain assistants accountable for their performance.
I also don't mind the trickeration, but that call with 2 yards to go, when you have JJTBC and a shitty KY run defense, does boggle the mind. Not necessary. But, IDC either, and prefer the new Fitz far more than Turtle Fitz. I just wish he'd be more aggressive in holding certain assistants accountable for their performance.
I have no problem with the aggressive 4th downs. Calling a long, slow developing, very horizontal play with one yard to go at the 2 was just bad football. We did not have to make it to the goal line. Just the 1. We had run the QB sneak a couple of times already and been able to push the center of the UK line. If we HAD to run a trick play, start with the QB under center so the defense had to stack the center of the line. If there was no trick play that started under center, then you just don’t have a trick play suited for the situation. Don’t call it.
Good column. Exactly the right tone. Fitz shouldn't escape criticism just because we won.
Fitz was way too aggressive on 4th down this game. UK should thank him because they had no shot in this game had he made better decisions on those last 4th downs.
We’re at the 2, running the ball well and we can still get a first down inside the 1 yet we run a long slow trick play that almost gets Lees sacked at like the 15 yard line? Either take the 3 points (would have made it a 2 TD lead rather than TD and FG) or just run it ahead and possibly get a 1st and goal inside the 1 if you don’t get a TD. Really bad.
Bad decision going for it on a sneak with our smaller QB at our own 39. It was a full yard, not just inches. He looked like he got it but was given a poor spot and they couldn’t overturn it from there since you couldn’t definitively say when his knee went down.
I think there were 1 or 2 other missed 4th downs where it could have helped to punt and try to pin them back.
If Fitz was a little more judicious with the 4th downs we would’ve won more comfortably.
On the other hand it’s a rather meaningless bowl game so why not have some fun with it
Going for it on 4th down = fun.
Calling a play which is not designed for the situation at a crucial point in the game = not fun.
I am definitely in the “right decision, bad playcall” camp.
As E-Cat mentioned, there have been actual analyses of the punt/go-for-it question, based on actual data rather than conventional wisdom and assumptions.
In the words of the New York Times' “4th Down Bot,” a “large body of statistical evidence suggests coaches are far too timid on fourth down, kicking or punting the ball away when they should be going for it.”
You can read about it here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/upshot/a-better-4th-down-bot-giving-analysis-before-the-play.html?_r=0
and here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/upshot/a-better-4th-down-bot-giving-analysis-before-the-play.html?_r=0
The 4th Down Bot appears to be built for the NFL, but I doubt that the results would be all that different for college. And the studies, as a general matter, would have had NU go for it on 4th and 1 from the 39 – or even on 4th and 2 from the 39.
In the words of the New York Times' “4th Down Bot,” a “large body of statistical evidence suggests coaches are far too timid on fourth down, kicking or punting the ball away when they should be going for it.”
You can read about it here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/upshot/a-better-4th-down-bot-giving-analysis-before-the-play.html?_r=0
and here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/upshot/a-better-4th-down-bot-giving-analysis-before-the-play.html?_r=0
The 4th Down Bot appears to be built for the NFL, but I doubt that the results would be all that different for college. And the studies, as a general matter, would have had NU go for it on 4th and 1 from the 39 – or even on 4th and 2 from the 39.
Face it Fitz's in game play calling on offense especially, has never been his strongest quality. I think the aggressive 4th down strategy is a good one especially for him as the numbers bear witness to the idea that it is actually statistically conservative. The play choice on the one was odd and given the time on the clock the call not to punt at the end of the game was questionable. Unless he just didn't trust the punt team to cover.
It looked like the exact play we ran for a 2 point conversion against Auburn in the Outback Bowl with Andrew Brewer (also a converted QB) throwing. It worked perfectly when run with adequate blocking. We had to use that play to make up for a missed PAT kick and the Yankee play tied the game to send it into overtime. I have often wondered if we hadn't had to use it then if we could have used it in OT to win after Auburn kicked a field goal to start the OT.
I was under the impression that the offensive coordinator was the one actually calling the plays. That would be McCall...am I mistaken in that assumption?
I think it's reasonable to assume that the head coach is involved in making 4th down calls...as to whether he's more involved beyond "go for it" or "kick," who knows?
If so, and if the coordinators call the timeouts too, then it changes some of my opinions. In that case, I would believe PF is seeking to learn game coaching from others...but that he has selected the wrong others...
I don't know, bowl games are supposed to be fun for the players, aren't they?, and I think that may have been what was in the mind of whoever called those two fourth down plays. Perhaps the coaches felt we could win this one way or the other and were willing to take some risk. I have criticized McCall's play calling in the past, but with 8 wins in a row I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. On the fourth and six or whatever it was, no question the conservative response was to punt, but what if Alviti had made first down, that would have been great. And with the fourth and goal, under the circumstances, who's to say running it up the gut would have produced a different result. It would have looked better to us idiots, although one thing we're damn good at is second guessing. In the heart of the B1G season against a tough opponent unless we were desperately behind, I would seriously question both of these calls, but with our back-up QB and against a worn down and somewhat confused opponent, not so much. I do think we misjudged Kentucky's passing game and it showed in their last drive. Lucky, maybe to escape with the win and not be forced into overtime, but win we did.
Fitz makes the decision to go for it on fourth. Once the coach decides to go for it, the coordinator then determines personnel and play. The offensive coordinator may give the head coach an option. Basically saying, “we can do play A or we can try play B” and let the head coach decide between the two. Otherwise, the offensive coordinator calls all the plays.
I like the fact that we go it because the players enjoy it more and it makes the game more fun. In the end, I think the aggressive Fitz has won games that the timid Fitz would have loss. Even though the decisions have looked stupid, he has not loss a game because of them since he started this aggressive movement. I hated the way we use to sit on a 7 point lead in the middle of the 3rd quarter with very conservative play calling. If anyone hasn’t notice, it isn’t just fourth downs that has changed. The offense does not change what they normally do until very close to the end of the game. They keep pushing it no matter what the score is and that is good to see. We have ten wins. It was a really good year considering what it looked like after Duke or after Penn State. We are getting positive press. This will all help recruiting.
I like the fact that we go it because the players enjoy it more and it makes the game more fun. In the end, I think the aggressive Fitz has won games that the timid Fitz would have loss. Even though the decisions have looked stupid, he has not loss a game because of them since he started this aggressive movement. I hated the way we use to sit on a 7 point lead in the middle of the 3rd quarter with very conservative play calling. If anyone hasn’t notice, it isn’t just fourth downs that has changed. The offense does not change what they normally do until very close to the end of the game. They keep pushing it no matter what the score is and that is good to see. We have ten wins. It was a really good year considering what it looked like after Duke or after Penn State. We are getting positive press. This will all help recruiting.
The High School Football Coach Who Never Punts
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-high-school-football-coach-who-never-punts/
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-high-school-football-coach-who-never-punts/
Probably better to run a play like that on second or third down instead of on fourth down. It's a high risk call, and the WR needs to have the option to throw the ball away away if the play blows up.
It is better not to run a slow-developing, horizontal play next to the goal line. Just because another team did it does not change that. If Jimmy jumped off a cliff, would you do that, too?
I like the play and think it can work. Just don't call it on 4th down.It is better not to run a slow-developing, horizontal play next to the goal line. Just because another team did it does not change that. If Jimmy jumped off a cliff, would you do that, too?
When you are not particularly adept at pass blocking and sustaining those blocks, and when the field is very short so the safeties can play the LOS, a reverse is a terrible idea.
Note how the OU play depended on Mayfield being left alone in the back of the end zone. After the reverse, it nets out to a run/pass option with the passer well outside the pocket. Something like that with Alviti rolling, or maybe even a jump pass / run option might have worked given MA’s athleticism.
Note how the OU play depended on Mayfield being left alone in the back of the end zone. After the reverse, it nets out to a run/pass option with the passer well outside the pocket. Something like that with Alviti rolling, or maybe even a jump pass / run option might have worked given MA’s athleticism.
I have replied to myself to reiterate something I said earlier. If you are going to run such a play from that position on the field, the quarterback must be under center to keep the defense honest.
Completely agree. How many times do you see a fourth down play and the punter or kicker is throwing the ball. Again, if you are going to go for it. Put the ball in the hands of your best play makers. Keep you number 1 offensive out there and run a play - Here was simple give the ball to Justin. You don't have to overthink - just rely on your talent
Similar threads
