FINALLY...I've been throwing this study around with my friends in football conversations for years and nobody ever seems to find it interesting. It just makes sense...a high percentage of possesions end in scores, so possesion of the football is far more important than 30+ yards, which the opposing team will more than likely make up anyhow. I just don't understand how professional football coaches, who are PAID to try to understand the game better, can refuse to see this. I can't tell you how much I love Mangini...I think we are looking at a Billy Beane of football here...He's going to implement all the things I've been screaming for for years...he's gonna realize that punting more or less a useless strategy...that running the football is basically only useful as a set up to getting your passing game going with a high rate of efficiency (as is supported by Miami's recent -3 yards rushing victory) and that high draft picks garner a higher salary than they can rightfully deserve, and that picking 2nd rounders and hiring free agents is a more sound economic strategy...I can't wait.
I liked the call because I feel 4&1 is very makeable every time - look at it this way, every time the Texans had 4&1 they punted, and I was happy. Any time a team goes for it on 4&1 against us (or anyone) I expect them to make it. I'm usually right. The percentages are heavily in favour of a conversion on any 4&1 if you make a good playcall (ie: don't hand it off to a back that's been going backwards all day, or throw a bomb downfield). Loved it, even if it failed.
It was a freakin great call..1st down then it takes like 5 minutes off the clock and we end up with 3 points off of the QB sneak..Eric Mangini is playing to win football games..Risk/Reward baby.. Maybe one day when the Jets have All Pro players all over the place they can play conservative..those days aren't quite here yet are they?. 11 games in and we are fighting for a play off spot..are you kidding..everyone thought we would be like 3-8 with maybe two wins left in us for this season. We are in this position because we are an extremely well coached team, anyone who doesn't see that is a complete moron. REPEAT AFTER ME... Jets are in the play off hunt
I loved the play call but the decision to go was not the wisest. We could have allowd Hou right back in the game if we missed. The risk was not worth the reward but at least we made it.
The chance of success is what separates this decision from the onside kick call. I don't think there was a need to go for it given the situation, but it was still a very high probability play as opposed to the onside kick which doesn't have that great of a chance for success.
The reason is that Coaches are scared of losing their jobs. The punt is the safe option. You go for a punt and the other team scores, well it was the D's fault for not stopping the other team. You go for it on 4 & 1 and fail and the other team gets a quick score then you look like an idiot and all the media gets on your case etc etc
Emeril... is that you? :lol: But yea, I totally agree with you man watching Jets football this year hasn't been this exciting since the Parcells era. BAM!!!
He plays to win and has cost us 2 games b/c of it. At some point he has to scale down the silly Madden like decisions. he's doing a very good job overall but that's my biggest concern w/ him.
I think you hit the nail on the head there. It takes a brave man to go against convention, because if things don't pan out the public's response is "Listen, we do it this way for a reason." But you know what, I hope the response from people who don't actually care to look at history, or statistics, IS negative. It means there will be pressure on other coaches to keep implementing strategies that aren't as efficient because they are scared of public reaction (read: Herm Edwards). We've got a coach on our hands who could care less what the public thinks, he's going to win, and that's the most positive thing that's happened to the Jets in a long, long time.
When you compare this play to the "3rd and 15 draw" philosophy that permeated our clubhouse for the last five years I can't see how you would want to go back. They are a well coached, exciting team that has to make up for not having all the pieces they really need to make a legitimate SB run. We will get there.
As I've said the on side kick is really the only play I've had a problem with this year but I can see where others are coming from. It doesn't have to be one extreme or the other. You can still be "aggressive" without being stupid.
The other advantage of being aggressive is that you are not predictable in the way we used to be. I don't care how good you are, in the NFL if the other team has a good idea of what you are going to do, they will probably be able to stop it. Keep them guessing and you can move the ball.
Even if the Jets did not make the 4th and 1 play, we were still up two Td's. We were agreesive, and that play alone burned 6:00 of clock time afterwards basically ending the Game for the Texans.
I agree with 2004. Play solid football when you've got the other team on the ropes. Had we not gotten it and turned the ball over on downs with that kind of field position for the Texans, they could have scored and turned the momentum. Just ask Tom Coughlin this morning what can happen when you turn the momentum around.
I also agree and most of us in my section didn't understand the decision at that point in the game. C'est la vie....
That's exactly the proposition: do you do the right thing even if you'll look bad if it fails? The other main proposition of the "go for it on 4th and 1" theory is that as soon as some coach decides to do this all the time the punts on 4th and 1 will stop due to the competitive advantage that going for it gives. Note that this is just about 4th and 1. 4th and 2 or 3 is a much riskier proposition because the success chance goes down from 90% to 80% or less and then the numbers begin to flatten out in terms of risk and reward.
Unc, you would remember that Pats game (two years ago i think) -- they went on almost every 4th and 1 and killed us. I loved this call.
Yeah I can count the coaches who were willing to take real risks on the fingers of one hand: Walt Michaels, Pete Carroll, Bill Parcells and now Eric Mangini.
It was the right call to go for it, it showed confidence in the Offense and the defense at the same time. He had faith the O could go out and gain 1 yard. He had faith that if they didn't, the defense would be able to maintain the lead, even with them having great field position. It was the right call and with Nick Mangold leading the way, the perfect play call as well.
