Analytics and football

[hqsi99 103]

First off: I’m a math guy. I love numbers and statistics and think they can be a valuable tool when used correctly. So I’m not one of those guys who think analytics are ruining sports. 
 

That said, I think they don’t really work well in football. There’s just too many moving parts and momentum on both offense and defense is too much of a factor. You can use statistics as a tool to inform decisions, but ultimately there’s a lot of “feel” that has to go into play calling in my opinion. 
 

In particular, Ole Miss’ decision to go for it on 4th down after the muffed punt was terrible. You HAVE to make Auburn pay for that mistake with points and it was a huge emotional boost to the defense to get that stop. And then going for it when down 11 made zero sense when you needed two scores anyway. 
 

I don’t think it cost Ole Miss the game, but the last 4 minutes sure look a lot different if Auburn is only up 2 (or 5 or 8 )instead of up 11. 

Edited November 1, 2021 by hqsi99

[CameronCrazy 1,085]

We were extremely lucky to be playing Lane Kiffin. Any other coach takes the points in the red zone, and that games becomes much closer.

[Hank2020 3,217]

15 minutes ago, CameronCrazy said:

We were extremely lucky to be playing Lane Kiffin. Any other coach takes the points in the red zone, and that games becomes much closer.

If they didn’t play the same way we wouldn’t have either. Can’t change one side and leave the other the same.

[boisnumber1 2,825]

18 minutes ago, Hank2020 said:

If they didn’t play the same way we wouldn’t have either. Can’t change one side and leave the other the same.

What do you mean? We played the way we played because they have a potent offense, not because they go for fourth downs at very unadvised, and outright stupid times.

[woodford 3,667]

3 hours ago, hqsi99 said:

That said, I think they don’t really work well in football. There’s just too many moving parts and momentum on both offense and defense is too much of a factor. You can use statistics as a tool to inform decisions, but ultimately there’s a lot of “feel” that has to go into play calling in my opinion. 

Totally disagree. They work in football. It does make sense to go for it on 4th down in certain situations. If you know a team has a stuff rate outside the top 100, you’re going to run the ball a lot, right?
 

The “momentum” is something that you can’t measure though. I don’t think that’s a valid argument. The many moving parts makes it easier to apply analytics to certain areas. There’s an argument (I’m on my phone and don’t know the link off hand) that too many NFL teams DON’T throw on 1st down enough. I think Lane made good decisions. They just didn’t work out. Sure he left points out there but they were depleted on offense in some positions. They had to score touchdowns to win. 

[cbo 7,932]

 

[bigbird 60,580]

3 hours ago, CameronCrazy said:

We were extremely lucky to be playing Lane Kiffin. Any other coach takes the points in the red zone, and that games becomes much closer.

True, but against another team we'd make different calls on 3rd down since we aren't defending 4.  

[aucanucktiger 1,798]

12 hours ago, hqsi99 said:

First off: I’m a math guy. I love numbers and statistics and think they can be a valuable tool when used correctly. So I’m not one of those guys who think analytics are ruining sports. 
 

That said, I think they don’t really work well in football. There’s just too many moving parts and momentum on both offense and defense is too much of a factor. You can use statistics as a tool to inform decisions, but ultimately there’s a lot of “feel” that has to go into play calling in my opinion. 
 

In particular, Ole Miss’ decision to go for it on 4th down after the muffed punt was terrible. You HAVE to make Auburn pay for that mistake with points and it was a huge emotional boost to the defense to get that stop. And then going for it when down 11 made zero sense when you needed two scores anyway. 
 

I don’t think it cost Ole Miss the game, but the last 4 minutes sure look a lot different if Auburn is only up 2 (or 5 or 8 )instead of up 11. 

Maybe Kiffen's just a mediocre HC after all.

[McLoofus 35,182]

5 hours ago, bigbird said:

True, but against another team we'd make different calls on 3rd down since we aren't defending 4.  

Great point.

*****

With regards to the OP, I agree. Analytics should be an ingredient. They shouldn't be the whole meal. Factor them into the decisions. Don't let them make the decisions for you. 

[hqsi99 103]

5 hours ago, bigbird said:

True, but against another team we'd make different calls on 3rd down since we aren't defending 4.  

I think this also plays against Kiffen's strategy of going for it on 4th down a lot.  When done sparingly, it can be effective because the defense is used to thinking they only have to defend for three downs.  If they get a stop on third down they are usually hyped up and ready to run off the field...then suddenly they have to defend a fourth down and get re-focused. They can get caught off guard.

Now that everyone knows Kiffen goes for it a lot on 4th down they have prepared accordingly and the defense is expecting they will have to defend 4 downs.  It becomes less likely that you are going to catch them off guard or catch them in a situation where they have to suddenly get re-focused.

[hqsi99 103]

28 minutes ago, aucanucktiger said:

Maybe Kiffen's just a mediocre HC after all.

This is also a very strong possibility.

[auburnphan 6,050]

Analytics are there for coaches to help solidify a decision, not to make decisions for coaches.  Assuming that Lane's decisions were just based off of analytics are not true.  He, himself said they went for it on some of the fourth downs this game because they have been really good at it.  

 

[autiger88 3,777]

 

[AUDub 11,184]

LOL that's great.