• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Decision Analysis: 4th and 1 at FSU 6, Down 11, 4 minutes Remaining

FckVwls

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
2,988
Reaction score
194
Let's ballpark it. My numbers are only estimates - but I think you will see that with any reasonable figures the correct decision will be the same.

Scenario: 4th and 1 at Florida State 6 down 11 points with 4 minutes to go:

Option 1 - Kick FG

To win game need 5 consecutive events to all occur (estimated percentage):

1. Make FG (93%) - Weaver is a good kicker, I'll give him 14/15 on such a short kick
2. Stop Florida State within reasonable time to get ball back (60%) - FSU offense struggling, will likely call vanilla plays to run clock
3. Drive the Field to Score TD after getting ball back (20%) - 1/5 seems about right in a 2 minute drill situation
4. Make 2 point conversion (45%) - Probably a bit less likely than national average with our offense against FSU defense
5. Win in Overtime (40%) - Even with a momentum have to be an underdog in OT in a game where you are 20 point dogs

Total Win Percentage = 2 percent


Option 2 - Go for Touchdown

1. Go for 4th and 1 at 6 yard line (45% make first down, 15% score touchdown, 40% miss/game over) - I think 60% make rate is about right in that scenario.
1a. - If First down made, Odds TD is scored next four plays (70% TD, 30% turn ball over on next set of downs)
Total TD make on drive = 15% + (45% * 70%) = 46%
1b. Go for 2 point conversion (45%) - Same as above

Total after first drive = 54% Game Over, 25% down 5, 21% down 3

Down 5:
2. Stop FSU within reasonable time (55%) - I'll go slightly lower than FG scenario due to less time on clock some of the time post score
3. Drive and score TD to win (15%) - Slightly lower than 20% above given possibly less time (although many times game clock would be similar)

Down 3:
2. Stop FSU within reasonable time (55%)
3. Drive and score TD to win (8%), Drive and score FG to tie (20%), Drive Fails (72%)
4. If Overtime, win percentage (40%) - Same earlier

Total win % = (25% * 55% * 15%) PLUS (21% * 55% * 8%) PLUS (21% * 20% * 40%)

= Total Win Percentage = 4%


Using these rough numbers, going for the first down doubles your chances of winning the game over kicking a FG. I would challenge anyone to change my numerical estimates above in a way that favors kicking the FG in the situation Wake Forest faced.
 
Needed a field goal and a touchdown (with two point conversion). Either way you need both, I thought it was an OK decision to take the points and then have to get a touchdown the next series, rather than miss the 4th down conversion and the game is over. Honestly, I would have been fine either way. Don't disagree with your calculations, but I thought it was an OK call to take the FG.
 
Take the points. Less probability of missing the field goal than converting in that situation against that defense. Really don't think that there should be any debate.
 
Yep, bad call. Not Grobe-punt-from-40 bad, but incorrect.
 
Let's ballpark it. My numbers are only estimates - but I think you will see that with any reasonable figures the correct decision will be the same.

Scenario: 4th and 1 at Florida State 6 down 11 points with 4 minutes to go:

Option 1 - Kick FG

To win game need 5 consecutive events to all occur (estimated percentage):

1. Make FG (93%) - Weaver is a good kicker, I'll give him 14/15 on such a short kick
2. Stop Florida State within reasonable time to get ball back (60%) - FSU offense struggling, will likely call vanilla plays to run clock
3. Drive the Field to Score TD after getting ball back (20%) - 1/5 seems about right in a 2 minute drill situation
4. Make 2 point conversion (45%) - Probably a bit less likely than national average with our offense against FSU defense
5. Win in Overtime (40%) - Even with a momentum have to be an underdog in OT in a game where you are 20 point dogs

Total Win Percentage = 2 percent


Option 2 - Go for Touchdown

1. Go for 4th and 1 at 6 yard line (45% make first down, 15% score touchdown, 40% miss/game over) - I think 60% make rate is about right in that scenario.
1a. - If First down made, Odds TD is scored next four plays (70% TD, 30% turn ball over on next set of downs)
Total TD make on drive = 15% + (45% * 70%) = 46%
1b. Go for 2 point conversion (45%) - Same as above

Total after first drive = 54% Game Over, 25% down 5, 21% down 3

Down 5:
2. Stop FSU within reasonable time (55%) - I'll go slightly lower than FG scenario due to less time on clock some of the time post score
3. Drive and score TD to win (15%) - Slightly lower than 20% above given possibly less time (although many times game clock would be similar)

Down 3:
2. Stop FSU within reasonable time (55%)
3. Drive and score TD to win (8%), Drive and score FG to tie (20%), Drive Fails (72%)
4. If Overtime, win percentage (40%) - Same earlier

Total win % = (25% * 55% * 15%) PLUS (21% * 55% * 8%) PLUS (21% * 20% * 40%)

= Total Win Percentage = 4%


Using these rough numbers, going for the first down doubles your chances of winning the game over kicking a FG. I would challenge anyone to change my numerical estimates above in a way that favors kicking the FG in the situation Wake Forest faced.

While going for a TD there does have a higher probability of winning in regulation than the FG, the FG gives a greater opportunity to extend the game and not lose in regulation. The TD is the riskier play and a lot more things have to go right to give us a chance.
 
The decision was not "laying up" by any means. You kick it off and stop them and see what happens.
 
Posted on game thread

Would've gone for it every time it was fourth and short today. We were such a long shot. Go for it. I mean you can argue the field goal gave us a chance to tie. But our true freshman qb threw a pick in the endzone. So what difference did it really make. Getting into field goal range at the end is much more likely than freshman qb leading drive and throwing td with time running out. I mean we probly lose either way but how the game ended is exactly why kicking the field goal is debatable.
 
While going for a TD there does have a higher probability of winning in regulation than the FG, the FG gives a greater opportunity to extend the game and not lose in regulation. The TD is the riskier play and a lot more things have to go right to give us a chance.

The only thing that matters is maximizing your total chances of winning the game. That is what the model estimates.

Unless you think making the game competitive for longer is important for a moral victory and program building or something like that.
 
The only thing that matters is maximizing your total chances of winning the game. That is what the model estimates.

Unless you think making the game competitive for longer is important for a moral victory and program building or something like that.

Not saying you play to keep it close, I think the FG prolonged our chances to win by staving off the definite loss.

There is a real chance you make the first down only to stall and have to kick the FG anyway, giving you the same need for a TD+2 with less time to do it.

If you don't get the 1st down, game over.

Score a TD, miss conversion, game over.

I disagree with your assessment that the TD gives us a greater opportunity to win. I think the probability of winning in OT > probability of winning in regulation and the FG at that point gave us a greater chance of reaching OT.

I wouldn't have been upset if he had gone for it, but not upset at the FG either. In the stands, I couldn't believe that he didn't go for it, but it makes some sense.
 
Last edited:
Maybe Clawson had info that going for it is < 50% odds? That's the only way I can rationalize it
 
Take the points. Less probability of missing the field goal than converting in that situation against that defense. Really don't think that there should be any debate.

Well, the numbers I used estimated a 93% chance of making the FG. And a 46% chance of making a TD on the 4th and 1 drive.

And going for the touchdown still yielded a winning result twice as often.
 
A 70% chance of making a TD after converting the 4th down seems a little high to me, but I've had too many beers to want to calculate what that does to the overall picture. Kudos for going through the effort though.
 
Oh God, the non-math nerds are really showing themselves on this thread. Maybe some decision trees would help, FckVwls. Good post.
 
A 70% chance of making a TD after converting the 4th down seems a little high to me, but I've had too many beers to want to calculate what that does to the overall picture. Kudos for going through the effort though.

There are a lot of 1st and goals from the 1,2,3,4 yard line in there. With four downs to score. I think 70% is okay, altough even if it is 50 or 60% it wouldn't change the overall conclusion.

Thank you for commenting on the actual inputs though. That is the only way you can really dispute my post (if I used bad inputs).
 
and what is the percentage of having sufficient time after scoring to stop them and come down and score again? kicking meant you controlled how much time was left to stop them and use your timeouts. thereby giving the kids the chance to steal one.
 
There are a lot of 1st and goals from the 1,2,3,4 yard line in there. With four downs to score. I think 70% is okay, altough even if it is 50 or 60% it wouldn't change the overall conclusion.

Thank you for commenting on the actual inputs though. That is the only way you can really dispute my post (if I used bad inputs).

No worries. And I certainly wouldn't go any lower than 50% and probably not even 60%, and that's after being scarred from years of Grobo calling red zone plays.
 
and what is the percentage of having sufficient time after scoring to stop them and come down and score again? kicking meant you controlled how much time was left to stop them and use your timeouts. thereby giving the kids the chance to steal one.

Fair post. I did include that somewhat. I gave Wake Forest a 60% chance to stop Florida State and a 20% chance to drive for a TD following the FG. And only used a 55% chance to stop Florida State and a 15% chance to drive for a TD following a TD. I did this to account for the fact that some of the time there would be less time on the clock by scoring a touchdown.

Please also consider that many times WF would be able to score a touchdown with similar time on the clock to kicking the field goal.
 
A 70% chance of making a TD after converting the 4th down seems a little high to me, but I've had too many beers to want to calculate what that does to the overall picture. Kudos for going through the effort though.
P(score TD on the 4th down play from the 6) = 0.15 also seems a little high to me but also too lazy to recalculate if that was changed to like 0.10 (would also have to slightly switch the make/miss 4th down probabilities of course, too).
 
Last edited:
Wake struggled in the red zone earlier in the game, so I think your percentages are very generous, especially given that Hinton was not at 100% late in the game. Wake had a chance to tie at the end, so kicking the FG worked out. If Wake had gone for the TD and succeeded, they would have likely been playing for a FG and the tie once they got the ball back. I think that either decision was fine in this case, it was just the execution that was ultimately lacking.
 
Back
Top