What did we learn? Wisconsin edition

ColoradoHusk said:
I think you know how the expected points work, so I'm not really doing this to "argue with you".  Agree that our FG kicking is abysmal, but I would still put the expected points at that kick very close to 3.  If NU scores, kickoffs to Wisconsin, then NU is able to stop Wisconsin, based on average field position created, I would think that NU would probably start the next possession between their own 20-30.  Having to drive that length of the field against Wisconsin's strong D would probably have an expected point value of 1-2.  So the expected value of this situation is 3.5-5 points.

But, if NU is able to convert that first 4th down ~50% of the time, the expected points from that drive would be 3.5.  Also, given that Wisconsin is starting deep in it's own territory, I would argue that NU had a very good chance at starting the next possession inside it's own territory with probably another ~50% chance of scoring a TD following a short field.  So, the expected points from the 2nd possession would be 3.5 points again.  So, going for it on 4th down creates an overall expected value of ~7 points.

So, looking at the expected value of the 1st situation, it's probably 3.5-5 points.  The expected value of the 2nd situation is ~7 points.  I would rather have 7 points vs. the at most 5 points.  Finally, when facing a strong defense, and getting within 5 yards of the goal line, it's smarter to try to get the 7 points!  Settling for 3 points is what Wisconsin wants you to do!
Click to expand...
I was being somewhat tongue in cheek. But missing the FG and missing the 4th down conversion is going to give about the same expected points for the next drive even after a 3 and out. (The missed FG will give the opponent slightly better field position because the spot will be from where the ball to placed for the kick.) So the only real difference is the chances of making the FG, which I suspect for our bad kicking is going to be closer to 1.5 than 3 point differential. Going for it is the better chance for points for the reasons you've already given.

 
RedDenver said:
I was being somewhat tongue in cheek. But missing the FG and missing the 4th down conversion is going to give about the same expected points for the next drive even after a 3 and out. (The missed FG will give the opponent slightly better field position because the spot will be from where the ball to placed for the kick.) So the only real difference is the chances of making the FG, which I suspect for our bad kicking is going to be closer to 1.5 than 3 point differential. Going for it is the better chance for points for the reasons you've already given.
Click to expand...
I knew you were being tongue in cheek, but I also can't help diving into the analytics side of things. I know we are agreeing on things for the most part, and I am nitpicking here, but after a missed FG inside the 20, Wisconsin would have started their next possession at their 20.  IMO, that's a HUGE difference from starting their next possession at their own 5 yard line.  I think one of the biggest arguments for going for 4th downs inside the 5 or 10 yard line is that the offense typically has to be very conservative that following possession.  So, there is a good chance at a 3 and out, and getting the ball back in good field position.  Now, Wisconsin helped NU out significantly with the 15 yard unsportsmanlike penalty, so NU started the drive in great field position at Wisky's 33-yard line, which really created a high expected value of points on that drive.

My argument for going for it on 4th downs is more around the expected value created in the long run.  Yes, sometimes it will not work and that will draw critcism, but if you have a somewhat consistent outlook on 4th down attempts, it will pay off in the long-run.  I will say that Frost has frustrated with me on his inconsistency of attempting to convert 4th downs.  Examples of this are against Minnesota and Ohio State when Frost attempted FG's to cut those games to 2 or 3 point scores, when TD's would have put NU ahead.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ColoradoHusk said:
I knew you were being tongue in cheek, but I also can't help diving into the analytics side of things. I know we are agreeing on things for the most part, and I am nitpicking here, but after a missed FG inside the 20, Wisconsin would have started their next possession at their 20.  IMO, that's a HUGE difference from starting their next possession at their own 5 yard line.  I think one of the biggest arguments for going for 4th downs inside the 5 or 10 yard line is that the offense typically has to be very conservative that following possession.  So, there is a good chance at a 3 and out, and getting the ball back in good field position.  Now, Wisconsin helped NU out significantly with the 15 yard unsportsmanlike penalty, so NU started the drive in great field position at Wisky's 33-yard line, which really created a high expected value of points on that drive.
Click to expand...
Good point. I forgot about the spot being out at the 20 vs the 5.

ColoradoHusk said:
My argument for going for it on 4th downs is more around the expected value created in the long run.  Yes, sometimes it will not work and that will draw critcism, but if you have a somewhat consistent outlook on 4th down attempts, it will pay off in the long-run.  I will say that Frost has frustrated with me on his inconsistency of attempting to convert 4th downs.  Examples of this are against Minnesota and Ohio State when Frost attempted FG's to cut those games to 2 or 3 point scores, when TD's would have put NU ahead.
Click to expand...
I agree. I was also suggesting that our FG issues make going for it an even better proposition than for most teams.

 
I'm late to all the post-game threads so maybe I missed it, but was there ever an explanation for why Yant never saw the field against Wisconsin? 

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
I'm late to all the post-game threads so maybe I missed it, but was there ever an explanation for why Yant never saw the field against Wisconsin? 
Click to expand...


86001537-5358-4bc5-b792-7b81277da603_1.d3ba93dce222eedbef0992127f156d1e.jpeg


 
Undone said:
He's in the dog house because Scott Frost hates rushing yards.
Click to expand...


I just remember watching Wisconsin's large, strong, and deceptively fast freshman running back and wishing we had one of him. 

Which we do.

In a week where the #1 rusher goes down and a back-up RB leaves the program, that is one serious doghouse. 

Did Scott Frost address this directly?

 
Guy Chamberlin said:
I just remember watching Wisconsin's large, strong, and deceptively fast freshman running back and wishing we had one of him. 

Which we do.

In a week where the #1 rusher goes down and a back-up RB leaves the program, that is one serious doghouse. 

Did Scott Frost address this directly?
Click to expand...


Exactly. Yant is #1 on my list of expected transfer, but I really want to be wrong.

And I don't think he addressed it directly, but I could have missed it.

 
Position coach's decision according to today's presser. I've wondered if Yant is struggling in the classroom, or to attend classes or something like that.

 
Huskinator said:
None of what your said is wrong.  You are 100% correct.  We had fans on here calling for his head year one.  They are still calling for his head!!!  Look at the schedule, anyone would say that this was an impossible year to grade a coach and hold him to his record.   He is far more competitive than anyone other coach we’ve had in the last 20 years.   We don’t have blowout loses and we are in games till the very end of every game.   Ohio state was up 49-0 in the second quarter!!!!  That’s something we’d have seen from Bo.  We are close, so very close.  This team is fast, strong and competitive against multiple top 10 teams.  
 

My hope is that the fire we saw in frost on that no call pi will ignore this team. Scott and his team will play with a little anger and something to prove.   They have a year or two to prove they have a killer instinct and I think they show it!
Click to expand...
I think Frost’s major fault is that he failed to make changes/corrections in the last four years on recurring problems.  We need a coaching team that develops over years- not an unstable coaching rollover.  Frost is the head coach responsible for coaching team.  I think Frost should have been fired except that he fired the most blatant problem coaching areas.  I believe his most important task is find  a great O line coach and a road grader line that effectively pass block when needed.  A close second is the special teams and kickers.    A lot of current problems’ impacts will lessen if the O line gets first downs for long drives, no penalties and capitalizes field position from good kickers, special teams and defense.  Didn’t Devaney preach field postition and ball control? 
Also, find a defensive back coach equal to Warren Sanders.

 
Lorewarn said:
He could have managed the clock a bit better (we left the game with an unused timeout, and used the other two on dead balls after all) to give us more time for creativity in play-calling, but that wasn't too much of an issue.

Way, way more of an issue is the playcalling from 1st & 20 onwards. Four straight plays where it looked like every single route took forever and went all the way into the endzone. Adrian had to throw each one falling away off his back foot because they took so long, and the middle/underneath was wide open for the taking.

Mind-boggling how Frost didn't put Adrian in a position to succeed from the point of the holding penalty on. I don't put the last four plays on AM at all.
Click to expand...
I see it as on the last minute- the O line could have done better and Martinez threw some bad passes.  Maybe, if the line gave him a few more seconds, his passes would not have been off his rear leg.

 
URSS said:
I believe his most important task is find  a great O line coach and a road grader line that effectively pass block when needed.  A close second is the special teams and kickers.    A lot of current problems’ impacts will lessen if the O line gets first downs for long drives, no penalties and capitalizes field position from good kickers, special teams and defense.
Click to expand...


I'd rewrite your analysis more like this:

The offensive line is currently the hardest of the two problems to fix by next season, because it depends on what the guys do in the weight room in the offseason & training table, and then also their bad technique needs to be coached out of them.

Special teams is the easier of the two problems to fix, and if we fix it we probably snag two extra wins next year.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top