Should We Stop Going For It On 4th Down?

[Boltgang74]

Herbert takes the blame for 4th and 1 fail. Parham was coming open with a huge mismatch in size. I understand the pass rush hurried Herbert, but he didnt even look at Allen / Parham / Guyton.

I keep hearing about Herbert having an off game and yes he did but the o line looked kinda shitty yesterday also.Lamar had alotta time whereas our guy was rushed all game.

[Coachmarkos]

I agree with the 4th downs, although I was expecting not to make them. We all now know what it looks like when Herbert has an off game and what it does to the rest of the team. The whole team looked off, but Herbert is the focal point and magnifier.

I think this team, this young team, with a brand new young HC that suddenly has been winning and reading about how great they are and what the darlings of the NFL they are maybe just maybe let it go to their heads a bit. This game against an outstanding coaching staff and a mature roster showed them they cannot do that. It was a good, early lesson that I hope and expect they will learn from.

TG

Yeah, that's what I was afraid of before the game, and it's what played out.

The team isn't that bad, but they certainly looked that bad yesterday.

We were so far behind at that point, we had to score. Coach Staley's reasoning is still solid. Yeah it put us behind by more, quicker. It wasn't like we were mounting a comeback without taking a shot.

[BlazingBolt]

I had no issue with the calls to go for it in Bmore game. We get them we have a chance to do something, punting wasn't going to help us win the game at that point.

[BlazingBolt]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/brandon-staley-sees-downside-of-4th-down-gambles-in-chargers-loss-to-ravens-195932128.html

Don't blame Brandon Staley's 4th-down gambles in Chargers blowout loss to Ravens


Jason Owens
Sun, October 17, 2021, 12:59 PM
For years, fans and analysts have screamed at their TVs and into microphones for NFL coaches to go for it on fourth down.

In 2021, we're seeing coaches do it like it's never been done before. The downside, obviously, is that it doesn't always work out. That was the case for the Los Angeles Chargers on Sunday as they came crashing down from the highs of a 4-1 start in a 34-6 blowout loss to the Baltimore Ravens.

The Chargers made plenty of mistakes in Sunday's loss. Were their failed fourth-down attempts among them?
Chargers fail on 2 critical fourth-down attempts


Head coach Brandon Staley kept his offense on the field on four fourth-down plays in the loss. Three of them failed. Two of the attempts arrived in obvious situations on a desperation fourth-quarter drive. The other two took place in Chargers territory with the game's outcome in the balance. Both of them failed and played a factor in Baltimore opening the game up.

But that doesn't necessarily mean they were the wrong calls.
Los Angeles Chargers head coach Brandon Staley looks on as his team works out prior to an NFL football game against the Baltimore Ravens, Sunday, Oct. 17, 2021, in Baltimore. (AP Photo/Gail Burton)Staley gambles early, sets up Tucker FG


The first Chargers gamble arrived early in the second quarter. The Ravens scored touchdowns on their first two possessions to open up a 14-0 lead. The Chargers, meanwhile, had watched their high-octane offense sputter to the tune of six yards and a pair of three-and-outs on previous back-to-back possessions. When they faced fourth-and-3 at their own 39-yard line early in the second quarter, Staley kept his punting unit on the sideline.

Herbert took a shotgun snap and looked to Mike Williams to his left beyond the first-down marker. One of the NFL's most potent connections failed to convert. Herbert's pass fell incomplete, and the Ravens took over on downs.

Baltimore managed just five yards on its ensuing possession. But it was enough to score, thanks to their starting field position and the best kicker in the game. Justin Tucker hit a 52-yard field goal to extend Baltimore's lead to three possessions at 17-0.
What the numbers say


Was it a bad decision by Staley? To play the result is flawed analysis. What do the analytics say?

Ben Baldwin's fourth-down decision bot shows the decision to go for it increased the Chargers win probability by 0.9%.

It was close to a tossup, but one that fell in favor of going for it. Because it didn't work out doesn't make it the wrong decision.
Go for it from inside your own 20?


Fast forward to the third quarter. Baltimore had opened its lead to 24-6 when the Chargers found themselves at fourth-and-1 at their own 19. For years in the NFL, this was a no-brainer for most coaches. Who in their right mind doesn't punt from inside their own 20, no matter the distance to line of gain?

But this isn't previous years or a coach who depends on old-school thinking. Staley again kept his offense on the field with 5:58 remaining in the third quarter. Herbert looked left, this time to wide receiver Josh Palmer. Again, Herbert's pass fell to the ground, giving Baltimore possession deep in Chargers territory with a 24-6 lead late in the third quarter. The game was essentially over.

Was this a bad call by Staley? Let's check the analytics again.

This time, Staley's decision increased the Chargers' win probability by 1.1% — from about 2% to roughly 3% with a play that had a 70% chance of success. It just so happened the 30% expected failure rate came into play this time.

While Staley's decision may appear unorthodox and overly risky, the math was on his side on the borderline decision. He also has one of the NFL's most accurate quarterbacks running the play. It's just jarring to watch it fail after decades of less-informed decision-making led to punts in similar situations.
Don't just look at the results


There's a tendency in these situations to play the results rather than the process. It's a thought process that had fans and analysts singing Staley's praises through five weeks. Staley has gambled throughout the season, including going for it on fourth down four times in the second half of Week 5's wild 47-42 win over the Cleveland Browns. NFL's Next Gen Stats determined that Staley called a perfect game against the Browns based on the numbers.

Next Gen Stats agreed that both of Staley's decisions to go for it on Sunday were tossups slightly in favor of going for it.

This is the nature of gambling. When done wisely, it increases a team's chances of success. But it doesn't always work out. The Chargers clearly made plenty of mistakes in Sunday's 28-point loss, including how they executed on those fourth-down plays. But the decision to gamble wasn't among them.

[northerner]

these calls are aggressive as they get, but i will take this over Martyball, Norv and Lynn.

[Xenos]

He put Palmer on the field and gave him that short pattern. IMO, we needed Guyton, Williams and Allen if we were using a 3 WR set. Palmer does not yet have good in game chemistry with Herbert.

And it was Herbert’s decision to throw it to Palmer.

[Xenos]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/brandon...195932128.html

Don't blame Brandon Staley's 4th-down gambles in Chargers blowout loss to Ravens


Jason Owens
Sun, October 17, 2021, 12:59 PM
For years, fans and analysts have screamed at their TVs and into microphones for NFL coaches to go for it on fourth down.

In 2021, we're seeing coaches do it like it's never been done before. The downside, obviously, is that it doesn't always work out. That was the case for the Los Angeles Chargers on Sunday as they came crashing down from the highs of a 4-1 start in a 34-6 blowout loss to the Baltimore Ravens.

The Chargers made plenty of mistakes in Sunday's loss. Were their failed fourth-down attempts among them?
Chargers fail on 2 critical fourth-down attempts


Head coach Brandon Staley kept his offense on the field on four fourth-down plays in the loss. Three of them failed. Two of the attempts arrived in obvious situations on a desperation fourth-quarter drive. The other two took place in Chargers territory with the game's outcome in the balance. Both of them failed and played a factor in Baltimore opening the game up.

But that doesn't necessarily mean they were the wrong calls.
Los Angeles Chargers head coach Brandon Staley looks on as his team works out prior to an NFL football game against the Baltimore Ravens, Sunday, Oct. 17, 2021, in Baltimore. (AP Photo/Gail Burton)Staley gambles early, sets up Tucker FG


The first Chargers gamble arrived early in the second quarter. The Ravens scored touchdowns on their first two possessions to open up a 14-0 lead. The Chargers, meanwhile, had watched their high-octane offense sputter to the tune of six yards and a pair of three-and-outs on previous back-to-back possessions. When they faced fourth-and-3 at their own 39-yard line early in the second quarter, Staley kept his punting unit on the sideline.

Herbert took a shotgun snap and looked to Mike Williams to his left beyond the first-down marker. One of the NFL's most potent connections failed to convert. Herbert's pass fell incomplete, and the Ravens took over on downs.

Baltimore managed just five yards on its ensuing possession. But it was enough to score, thanks to their starting field position and the best kicker in the game. Justin Tucker hit a 52-yard field goal to extend Baltimore's lead to three possessions at 17-0.
What the numbers say


Was it a bad decision by Staley? To play the result is flawed analysis. What do the analytics say?

Ben Baldwin's fourth-down decision bot shows the decision to go for it increased the Chargers win probability by 0.9%.

It was close to a tossup, but one that fell in favor of going for it. Because it didn't work out doesn't make it the wrong decision.
Go for it from inside your own 20?


Fast forward to the third quarter. Baltimore had opened its lead to 24-6 when the Chargers found themselves at fourth-and-1 at their own 19. For years in the NFL, this was a no-brainer for most coaches. Who in their right mind doesn't punt from inside their own 20, no matter the distance to line of gain?

But this isn't previous years or a coach who depends on old-school thinking. Staley again kept his offense on the field with 5:58 remaining in the third quarter. Herbert looked left, this time to wide receiver Josh Palmer. Again, Herbert's pass fell to the ground, giving Baltimore possession deep in Chargers territory with a 24-6 lead late in the third quarter. The game was essentially over.

Was this a bad call by Staley? Let's check the analytics again.

This time, Staley's decision increased the Chargers' win probability by 1.1% — from about 2% to roughly 3% with a play that had a 70% chance of success. It just so happened the 30% expected failure rate came into play this time.

While Staley's decision may appear unorthodox and overly risky, the math was on his side on the borderline decision. He also has one of the NFL's most accurate quarterbacks running the play. It's just jarring to watch it fail after decades of less-informed decision-making led to punts in similar situations.
Don't just look at the results


There's a tendency in these situations to play the results rather than the process. It's a thought process that had fans and analysts singing Staley's praises through five weeks. Staley has gambled throughout the season, including going for it on fourth down four times in the second half of Week 5's wild 47-42 win over the Cleveland Browns. NFL's Next Gen Stats determined that Staley called a perfect game against the Browns based on the numbers.

Next Gen Stats agreed that both of Staley's decisions to go for it on Sunday were tossups slightly in favor of going for it.

This is the nature of gambling. When done wisely, it increases a team's chances of success. But it doesn't always work out. The Chargers clearly made plenty of mistakes in Sunday's 28-point loss, including how they executed on those fourth-down plays. But the decision to gamble wasn't among them.

Good breakdown.

[Guest]

And it was Herbert’s decision to throw it to Palmer.

Which would not have happened had Palmer not been put on the field on that play.

[like54ninjas]

Which would not have happened had Palmer not been put on the field on that play.

Herbert made a poor throw on that play.
Herbert was not as accurate, as he is normally, versus the Ravens.
It was a poorly coached and executed single game.
New coaches, systems, terminology are still works in progress.
The entire team seemed to still be recovering from the brownies games.
I’m looking for a strong 4-6 games after the bye and then complete TEAM games to finish off the regular season heading into the playoffs.

[bartman83642]

No, don't need to stop going for it on 4th downs. Been a huge boost for is in most cases.

That being said I think going for it on 4th down at our own 20 was not the right choice. I am sure I will get lambasted by some people on here for saying it but at least read what I have to say and think about it. First, despite all the comment on here about our defense sucking yesterday at that point in the game our D was outperforming the O. The defense at that point had faced 7 drives. They did give up 4 scores but also got 3 stops including a turnover. The O on the other hand had 6 drives (not counting the 1 play drive at the end of the half) for a total of 24 plays and 112 yards. This included the INT by Herbert and a previous turnover on downs by going for it on 4th. The only score they managed was on a short field after the INT.

Now I know people will say the analytics support his decision but the base chart for going on it on 4th and short doesn't take into consideration the whole game situation but just that one play. It also doesn't and can't take into consideration the intangibles of any game\player situations. Things like QB's being off target on throws, dropped passes, in game matchups making it more difficult to complete passes, gain yardage on runs etc. Plus, other numbers would tell you if you fail to make it in that situation the chance of losing the game go up a lot. The chance for an opponent getting a touchdown increases dramatically. And even though the team held the Ravens to a field goal that still makes the chance of winning much harder. Three TDs and 3 XP's (with our crappy kicker) is definitely a lower possibility to overcome than an 18 point deficit. (No XP's needed.)

I got to believe the better option have been better off putting our D (which once again had made several stops) back on the field to try to get a stop and hopefully shorter field for the O which hadn't been able to sustain any lengthy drives (if we would have made the first we still would have had nearly 80 yards to go for the TD) and wasn't performing well. I know a lot won't agree with me but an analytic chart to go for it on 4th down and whatever yardage just isn't then end all answer for every situation.

[Xenos]

No, don't need to stop going for it on 4th downs. Been a huge boost for is in most cases.

That being said I think going for it on 4th down at our own 20 was not the right choice. I am sure I will get lambasted by some people on here for saying it but at least read what I have to say and think about it. First, despite all the comment on here about our defense sucking yesterday at that point in the game our D was outperforming the O. The defense at that point had faced 7 drives. They did give up 4 scores but also got 3 stops including a turnover. The O on the other hand had 6 drives (not counting the 1 play drive at the end of the half) for a total of 24 plays and 112 yards. This included the INT by Herbert and a previous turnover on downs by going for it on 4th. The only score they managed was on a short field after the INT.

Now I know people will say the analytics support his decision but the base chart for going on it on 4th and short doesn't take into consideration the whole game situation but just that one play. It also doesn't and can't take into consideration the intangibles of any game\player situations. Things like QB's being off target on throws, dropped passes, in game matchups making it more difficult to complete passes, gain yardage on runs etc. Plus, other numbers would tell you if you fail to make it in that situation the chance of losing the game go up a lot. The chance for an opponent getting a touchdown increases dramatically. And even though the team held the Ravens to a field goal that still makes the chance of winning much harder. Three TDs and 3 XP's (with our crappy kicker) is definitely a lower possibility to overcome than an 18 point deficit. (No XP's needed.)

I got to believe the better option have been better off putting our D (which once again had made several stops) back on the field to try to get a stop and hopefully shorter field for the O which hadn't been able to sustain any lengthy drives (if we would have made the first we still would have had nearly 80 yards to go for the TD) and wasn't performing well. I know a lot won't agree with me but an analytic chart to go for it on 4th down and whatever yardage just isn't then end all answer for every situation.

We were down 24-6 at that point. What’s the point of punting it back to them at that point? If you make it, you buy your defense more rest time and build momentum for your offense. Just like last week. You don’t make it then it was over regardless. A loss is a loss.

[equivocation]

We were down 24-6 at that point. What’s the point of punting it back to them at that point? If you make it, you buy your defense more rest time and build momentum for your offense. Just like last week. You don’t make it then it was over regardless. A loss is a loss.

If you miss it, the other offense can't milk the clock so your defense gets off the field faster and you save clock.