DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2018 NFL Season Looking Back: Browns 42 Raiders 45 Hue Jackson didn't think about going for it on fourth-and-1, but data suggests he should have

Hue Jackson didn't think about going for it on fourth-and-1, but data suggests he should have

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- When officials decided -- after further review -- that Carlos Hyde had not gained a first down with 1:38 left in the fourth quarter on Sunday, Browns coach Hue Jackson sent the punt team onto the field.

Jackson said afterward that he didn't consider going for it. "Because we were backed up," he said. "We need to punt the ball."

The Browns had an eight-point lead, but they were also at their own 18-yard line. A first down ends the game (the Raiders had just one timeout left), but no first down puts the Raiders in the red zone.

Of course, we now know the punt didn't matter. After a 14-yard return, the Raiders drove 53 yards in 54 seconds and tied the game. It took them four plays to get to the Browns' 20.

On Monday, Jackson said again that the thought of keeping his offense on the field for fourth-and-1 didn't enter his mind.

But should it have?

The data says yes.

What's the most effective play from scrimmage in football when you have two or fewer yards to go? The analysts at Football Outsiders say it's the quarterback sneak.

NFL teams tried a fourth-and-1 quarterback sneak 212 times from 2009-2015. They succeeded on 171 of those plays (80.7 percent). Even non-QB runs on fourth-and-1 over that same period were successful 63 percent of the time. Other successful fourth-and-1 plays included bootlegs (13-of-14) and quarterback dives (7-of-8).

This is not to say the Browns would have converted if they had called a quarterback sneak on Sunday. It's to point out that data suggests the odds were in their favor.

The quarterback sneak is the key. Even running the quarterback on fourth-and-2 worked 80 percent of the time (16-of-20) from 2009-15.

Passing on fourth-and-1 worked just 54 percent of the time. And passing on fourth-and-2? Just ask Bill Belichick about that. He tried it in 2009 when, leading 34-28, his Patriots faced a fourth-and-2 at their own 28 with 2:08 left to play. The Patriots used a spread formation to give Tom Brady options, but his pass to Kevin Faulk only gained a yard. The Colts took over and won the game on a Peyton Manning touchdown pass with 16 seconds left.

That play was one of 42 times teams passed on fourth-and-2 in 2009. They converted just 15 times (35.7 percent). From 2009-15, passes worked just 46 percent of the time.

Football Outsiders isn't the only source to advocate going for it on fourth-and-short. In 2013, the New York Times created the NYT 4th Down Bot, which used a decade of data analysis to determine that teams need to go for it much more often than they do.

The bot's rule of thumb: go for it on fourth-and-1 any place on the field where it is possible, starting at your own 9-yard line. (The bot admits that the final minutes of the game can complicate the rule of thumb.)

The bot's data showed that NFL coaches don't go for it the majority of the time on fourth-and-1 until they reach their opponent's 45-yard line.

As the boy points out, more than half of all plays in the NFL gain four or more yards, which means the numbers are on the offense's side and a conversion is more likely than not. That's why it frequently makes sense to go for it.

"Near your own goal line, going for it on fourth-and-1 is better than punting," the bot explains. "You'll probably make the first down. If you don't, your opponent will have good field position, but a punt would have given your opponent pretty good field position anyway."

There's more to consider here.

Take out Nick Chubb's two long touchdown runs and the Browns averaged 3.6 yards on 29 carries Sunday. None of the Browns' running plays resulted in a loss of yardage, and Hyde was stopped for no gain four times in 22 carries by the time the Browns faced that fourth-and-1. In other words, Hyde gained at least one yard 82 percent of the time against the Raiders.

The Browns have had more success than failure on fourth downs under Jackson. He was 13-of-18 in 2016 and 12-of-23 last season. The Browns are 2-of-4 this season, including a fourth-and-6 conversion against the Raiders. (The NYT 4th Down Bot's rule of thumb says to go for it on fourth-and-6 between your own 47 and the opponent's 35. The Browns were at the Raiders' 39.)

Maybe Jackson just remembers what Todd Haley said last year when Ben Roethlisberger wanted to do more quarterback sneaks.

"Some staffs choose not to let people earhole their quarterback in the side of the head," Haley said. "Other staffs take that risk at times. There is risk-reward with everything you do."

Haley spent six years as offensive coordinator for Mike Tomlin, one of the NFL's least aggressive coaches when it comes to fourth-and-short, according to Football Outsiders.

The Steelers were 2-of-10 on fourth-and-1 last season. The last time they tried a quarterback sneak on fourth-and-1 was 2014. The last time Roethlisberger tried a sneak on any down was 2015. Until this season, when he converted a third-and-1.

Against the Browns.

https://www.cleveland.com/expo/sports/erry-2018/10/22846a02ef6700/hue-jackson-didnt-think-about.html

And we're not even talking about 4th-and 1 at 80% for a QB sneak. We're talking 4th and INCHES.

So, yeah, he should have gone for it. We would have won the game.

It was obvious that our D wouldn't be able to stop Oakland from the TD and the 2 points conversion...

So even if we didn't get the yard we needed we would have more time to kick the winning field goal.

That's what I thought then.

If we had gone for it on 4th and 1 in that situation and run a bootleg, I would have crapped myself.. I would have loved it but I would have crapped myself.

I might have crapped yourself as well.

I sure wouldn't have wanted to do you laundry after the game.

it was a tough call. In the end, no one goes for it there. I would have loved it if we went for it, but punting wasn’t a horrible decision.

If we can't get a first down on 4th and inches w/ qb sneak (regardless of field position), we gotz problems.

I believed then we should have rolled the dice right there. Play for it.

Coaching to win is way different than coaching not to lose. This was a case in point IMHO.

They were going for it on 4th down and 2pt. conversions all game.....They were making aggressive calls all day on both sides of the ball....

I really can't fault the coaches on this one....it just came down to costly TO's in the 4th quarter, and a gassed defense that couldn't get a stop when their back was against the wall....

I'm hoping that the loss of Mitchell, probably for the season, won't derail a promising start to the season defensively. Though, once Mitchell went out, our D did not look the same...Hopefully Gaines or Carey can step up with more reps in practice....

I wonder if Hue's job is on the line or if he's been told he's safe?

I was yelling for them to go for it on 4th and inches, regardless of the field position. I think that tough decision would have resonated well with the players. Easy to say from me on my couch, but the odds of getting half a football length in yardage, were definitely in our favor.

Than again, Haley might have called the 7th play action double fake reverse, Triple Lindy thing again. :-)

Why not line up to draw them off ?

Ahhh, the valid point that everyone keeps ignoring.

If I'm coach, the second that review overturns the first down my offense races to the line and Mayfield starts barking... motion... more barking, until it's evident they're not jumping.




Then I PUNT.

No, it wasn't a horrible decision, but it was the book, safe decision. And it cost us the game. Going for it may have cost us the game as well, but at least we would have been trying to win the game.

Had we gone for it and not made it, I can honestly say I would be in Hue's corner today.

You just have to look at the facts of the game. Oakland could move the ball. Had we been able to shut them down all game, that's one thing, but we couldn't.

Go for it. Win the game there.

Ummmm ... hate to bring this up ... EVERYONE wants to IGNORE THESE FACTS about the D’s performance ...

The Faiders scored 42 in regulation ...

With 1:30 left in the game ... they had 34 points ... thats when Hue had to make his decision .... HERE’S A RE-CAP ... i know the details can be pesky .. but in this case .. its rather important as opposed to just looking at 45 and blaming the D ...

0 yard TD .... pick 6
7 yard TD drive .... fumble
20 yard TD drive ... fumble

3 yard FG drive ... punt was returned to our 30 .. 3 and out ... they gained like 3 yards ...

The other TD was a long drive ... 100% on the D ...
the other FG was basically a long ass run by Lynch ... that was the entire drive .. that is 100% on the D ,...

SO ... when Hue was faced with the decision ... QUIT MAKING CRAP UP ...

The D had given up 10 points ... the O was way more responsible for the other 24 than the D ..

Crap Peen ... u could make the argument getting our O off the field was the BEST OPTION as they gave the Faiders way more points than the D had to that point in the game ...

Its COMPLETE and UTTER BS to say they moved at will on D all game ... they may have gotten yards but the D WASN’T GIVING UP POINTS!!!!

I understand your point as well.


The fact is they moved the ball pretty easily in that last drive.

Look, I am not bsshing Hue for the call. It was a book call.


I, myself would have gone for making the foot we needed and wouldn't have held it against Hue had we gone for it and didn't make it.


I do know that kicking the ball as we did didn't help us win the game. Right?


Again, I am not bashing Hue for the call. Just saying that I would have told our guys I believe in them and told them to go win the game. Move the ball forward a foot or so.

I dont agree he should have went for it ... but now i wish he did ... *LOL* ...

I have no problem with u thinking he should have gone for it right up until u mention it was because they moved up and down the field on us at will as one of the reasons ..

At that point ... THEY HADN’T DONE THAT ...

They had no problem tying the game cause Williams went into prevent on the last drive ... and we couldn’t tackle Richard on the play before the TD ... he was in the middle of the field ... at the 20 .. don’t know witch DB missed the tackle there ... had him dead to rights ...

If he makes that tackle ... there at the 20 and the clocks running ... there was about 30 seconds left at the time .. by the time they spike it there’s 14 -18 seconds left ...

Then at about the 15 we miss another tackle by the hashmarks that would have kept him in bounds ...

Then he gets down to about the 10 with like 25 seconds left and runs out of bounds ...

Next play TD pass ... TWO NISSED TACKLES ... dang it dawg ...

Anyhow .. i disagree that we should have went for it ... but i understand and would have kept my mouth shut if u didnt say how the D was playing up to that point as a reason we should have went for it ...

Thats my beef brother ...

J/C:

Wondering if any of the geniuses who are questioning Hue not going for it have considered that Baker is our qb and he has already fumbled one snap and has very little experience under center?

And let's cut the crap. People are slamming Hue for going for two, but are saying he should have been more aggressive and gone for it inside his own 20 w/an 8 point lead.

LOL............y'all are a joke.

i thought it was a play call that is reflective of a coach
is coaching by book and not so.instinct.
all.day youve been gashing the Raiders on the ground.
why stop.now.???
I would did a hard count than out of a 3 TE set faked a simple 33 lead to Chubb and bootlegged Baker to the right.
I would have had Fells block down then release.
the defense would have by that time would have sold out on the dive leaving Fells wide open or Baker could have keep it and slid.

j/c sorta

Look, we can fine any number of things that cost us the game.

The 'bad' call that cost us a first down. The way too soon whistle that cost us a turnover at a minimum, a t.d. at a max.

Calloway slipping, having the ball go right through his hands, THROUGH his hands, costing us a pick 6.

A 'go for it on 4th and inches' vs. 'punt on 4th and inches late in the game, deep in our territory."

Dropped passes.

Etc.


It is what it is, it was what it was: We lost.

It reminds me of basketball. Down 1, a second on the clock. Guy goes to the free throw line for a 1 and 1. Misses.

People blame him for the loss. But, no one looks back at the missed free throws in the first, second, third quarters.

What about if a guy misses one free throw and then the other team gets the rebound, but the guy who gets the rebound forgets the score?

What about it? I'm not following you here.

Let's take volleyball - just tonight. Ref's missed a few calls. It happens, trust me.

24 them (other team) 23 us. Daughter gets a decent set. Ball is long by a bit. Game to them.

Daughter is all bothered "dad, I hit it out of bounds, I cost the team the game." (by the way, our team won the match)

Hey, Sooga, what about Hadley hitting 3 out of bounds, and 2 into the net earlier? What about Kayla hitting 4 out of bounds earlier in the game? What about the illegal set (double hit) that Gabby had? Why do you think YOUR hit cost the game? What about the 6 kills you had earlier in that game?

But what about if a guy misses one free throw and then the other team gets the rebound, but the guy who gets the rebound forgets the score and he has the time to pass the ball the best player of all time but let's the clock run out instead?

Ah. I see now.

Regardless, the team should've made more free throws earlier in the game, so as to not be in that position to begin with.

Or, better yet, the guy that went 3-9 from the field, if he'd have just gone 4-9 from the field.

Coming from the guy who constantly complains about people making personal insults. Well done.

Should Hue have thought about going for it on 4th and inches? Absolutely
Should he have actually gone for it? Absolutely not.

He most definitely should have considered all options, but the punt was the right decision. Just because it didn't work out doesn't mean the alternative was a better decision.

I have no issue with Hue punting from the Browns 18. That was the smart play.
My issue with Hue was not calling a timeout on the ensuing drive.
The D was clearly winded and needed that timeout to catch a 2nd wind.

Not a Hue fan, but cant believe all the crap he is getting here.

Offense and special teams gave the raiders 24 points,

Yeah I wished the D would have had one more stop in them, but they didn't.

Hue, at least here, made the right call.

I myself cannot fault Hue for punting it in that situation.

The goal is to not get put in these situations. Throttle them and learn how to finish. Stop making each game come down to the last minute.

Normally, I'd say punt it in that situation, but after getting screwed on the call, we should've went for it. Momentum was building on the Raiders' side and our offense should be able to get a first in that situation. We were 1-1-1, we should've played to win right there.

Also, ball don't lie.

Vers,I don't think anyone is really blaming Hue on the call.

Some of us are just questioning the logic of blaming on the refs when this was the 3rd time the D wasn't able to win the game.

We had 3 very good chances to win games and we blew them, on the other hand the Jets had the game on their pocket and they blew it.

I think bad teams are like that.... and that's one of the main reasons why we are so bad.

The truth is that every NFL coach is too conservative on 4th downs. Even the most controversial 4th down decisions (often from coaches like Belichick, Sean Payton, and Mike Smith when he was with the Falcons) were actually just interestingly close decisions, most (if not all) were actually the correct decision.

Eventually teams will figure it out, just like NBA teams have figured out that 3 points are worth more than 2, it makes sense to acquire and train players for that skill, and to make that a significant part of the offense. Or take how MLB teams have figured out that home runs should be emphasized. I'm not saying these are necessarily the most entertaining options.

For the NFL, no coach is really punished for lack of 4th down aggressiveness because they are all so bad at it. Coaches can just go with the status quo and their cushy 7 figure jobs won't be on the line for the inevitable time where they go for a 4th down when no other coach would, they fail, and lose a game as a result. Figure this would happen about once a year. But they'd win about two games per year by being more aggressive than other coaches (so net of about +1 win per year.)

A coach with the record Hue has SHOULD be questioned AND he is....with all the loses, and the way our D was playing I've have gone for it.....we've sucked for so long, the fans would have something new to cheer or groaned about new way to LOSE. JMHO, Eagles coach would have gone for it...AND made it for a victory. Our coach doesn't have OC job anymore, he should be well in touch with all kinds of situations AND have the coconuts to go for it.....he's fired if this season doesn't improve, especially after his....we've going to shock the world....right, same old same old.....GO Browns!!!

What's the questioning of blaming the refs?

THEY BONED US.

There's NO QUESTION about it.

Regardless of what went down for 58 minutes. We got a 1st down to take a knee and WIN. THEY BONED US.

j/c

No matter which call Hue made, if we didn't win the game, half the board would be questioning the call. At least one fourth of the board would be calling for his job. It's how things go on this board.

Giving them the long field with 1:32 to go in the game was the right call. Saying he wasn't aggressive? Yeah, he didn't go for two twice earlier. What a wimp this guy is! lmao

Some of this BS never gets old. And some of it? Yeah, it does.

I'm not mad that we punted it.

I think trying to lure a team off sides with a hard count would have been a better move, and then punt if no success.

O well.

j/c:

WWDPD

"What Would Doug Pederson Do?"

I prefer WWSMD

Or...WWMVD

"What would Mike Vrabel do?"

Vrabel went for it on 4th and 2 to win it in OT instead of kicking the FG to tie it.

Good point.

WWDPAND/ORSMD