4th & Short Analysis

[besserheimerphat]

I wanted to go back and objectively see what we've been doing on 4th downs where the QB sneak was a legitimate options this year. I went through the play-by-play for all 11 games so far this season and looked at every 4th down where the distance to convert was 3 yards or less. There were several 4th Downs with 4 to 6 yards to go that we attempted, but since those are too far for a QB sneak I didn't include them. I threw out everything where we punted or attempted a FG. That left 15 plays on the season. Two of those were penalties, which I threw out:

• Texas: Q1 on our own 30, 4th & 1, Delay of Game - probably did it for field position on a punt, but don't know for sure just from play-by-play
• Texas: Q2 on our own 37, 4th & 2, False Start - obviously intended to go for it

We also had two 4th & Shorts against non-con opponents, which I also threw out due to an assumed talent difference making a big impact. Both were passes out of the shotgun and converted FWIW.

So that left 11 4th & Short plays, in conference, that either converted or failed:

• Baylor, Q1 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• Kansas, Q4 on their 49, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Texas, Q4 on our 33, 4th & 2: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q1 on our 47, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Norton)
• OU, Q4 on their 20, 4th & 3: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q4 on their 3, 4th & 1: Shotgun Pass that Failed
• WVU, Q3 on their 23, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)
• OSU, Q4 on our 25, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Dekkers)
• TTech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Ttech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Failed (Dekkers sack)
• Ttech, Q4 on their 28, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)

I didn't figure there'd be enough samples to say anything about effectiveness, but I ran a Chi-Sq anyway. We never went Under Center and Passed the ball, but when we Passed out of Shotgun we converted 3 of 5 attempts (60%). However when we Rushed, we were 0 for 3 out of Shotgun (0%) and 2 for 3 from Under Center (67%). Even with only 3 samples of each that's enough to say there is a statistically significant difference at the 90% Significance Level.

One other thing that stuck out at me, though I didn't record it, was the number of times we called a timeout on 4th & Short. I'd guess about half the time we went for it and half the time we didn't. But to me that indicates we're not sure what we want to do as the game goes along. We should be thinking about how we'll approach 4th down as we line up on 3rd down, and then depending on the result it's a "simple" go/no-go. If we're calling timeouts a lot on our own 4th down plays, then we're not thinking far enough ahead IMO. Many times we'd call a timeout on 4th down and just end up punting or kicking a FG anyway. That feels like a wasted timeout.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Our last couple sneaks have easily gained the first down. Easily. That should be the play until someone stops it, and it shouldn't require any thought to call it.

 

[Malty Flannel]

Notice both under center QB sneaks converted. I forget where I saw it, but the chance that a QB sneak picks up the first down on 4th and 1 yard or less is like 93%

 

[isucy86]

I wanted to go back and objectively see what we've been doing on 4th downs where the QB sneak was a legitimate options this year. I went through the play-by-play for all 11 games so far this season and looked at every 4th down where the distance to convert was 3 yards or less. There were several 4th Downs with 4 to 6 yards to go that we attempted, but since those are too far for a QB sneak I didn't include them. I threw out everything where we punted or attempted a FG. That left 15 plays on the season. Two of those were penalties, which I threw out:

• Texas: Q1 on our own 30, 4th & 1, Delay of Game - probably did it for field position on a punt, but don't know for sure just from play-by-play
• Texas: Q2 on our own 37, 4th & 2, False Start - obviously intended to go for it

We also had two 4th & Shorts against non-con opponents, which I also threw out due to an assumed talent difference making a big impact. Both were passes out of the shotgun and converted FWIW.

So that left 11 4th & Short plays, in conference, that either converted or failed:

• Baylor, Q1 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• Kansas, Q4 on their 49, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Texas, Q4 on our 33, 4th & 2: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q1 on our 47, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Norton)
• OU, Q4 on their 20, 4th & 3: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q4 on their 3, 4th & 1: Shotgun Pass that Failed
• WVU, Q3 on their 23, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)
• OSU, Q4 on our 25, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Dekkers)
• TTech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Ttech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Failed (Dekkers sack)
• Ttech, Q4 on their 28, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)

I didn't figure there'd be enough samples to say anything about effectiveness, but I ran a Chi-Sq anyway. We never went Under Center and Passed the ball, but when we Passed out of Shotgun we converted 3 of 5 attempts (60%). However when we Rushed, we were 0 for 3 out of Shotgun (0%) and 2 for 3 from Under Center (67%). Even with only 3 samples of each that's enough to say there is a statistically significant difference at the 90% Significance Level.

One other thing that stuck out at me, though I didn't record it, was the number of times we called a timeout on 4th & Short. I'd guess about half the time we went for it and half the time we didn't. But to me that indicates we're not sure what we want to do as the game goes along. We should be thinking about how we'll approach 4th down as we line up on 3rd down, and then depending on the result it's a "simple" go/no-go. If we're calling timeouts a lot on our own 4th down plays, then we're not thinking far enough ahead IMO. Many times we'd call a timeout on 4th down and just end up punting or kicking a FG anyway. That feels like a wasted timeout.

Thanks for taking the time to go back. It is amazing how analytics has changed going for it on 4th down in "our" territory. Not sure if I am convinced it is ever the right choice, especially the our 30's. But TT made it work on Saturday. I just feel even if the 4th down play is successful, for the drive to end up in a score- it takes 6-7 more plays to create a scoring opportunity.

As far as 4th down Timeouts. I think Matt Campbell is firmly in the camp that he wants to talk to his QB and have other players regroup to get everyone on the same page. Not sure it is necessarily an indicator of lack-of-planning. But I would agree our offense takes too many unnecessary timeouts.

My biggest issue is defenses taking timeouts on critical 3rd or 4th down plays even before the teams line up. Unless players are tired, I think the TO gives an offense time to regroup and coaches to speak with QB.

 

[LtRaczack]

I wanted to go back and objectively see what we've been doing on 4th downs where the QB sneak was a legitimate options this year. I went through the play-by-play for all 11 games so far this season and looked at every 4th down where the distance to convert was 3 yards or less. There were several 4th Downs with 4 to 6 yards to go that we attempted, but since those are too far for a QB sneak I didn't include them. I threw out everything where we punted or attempted a FG. That left 15 plays on the season. Two of those were penalties, which I threw out:

• Texas: Q1 on our own 30, 4th & 1, Delay of Game - probably did it for field position on a punt, but don't know for sure just from play-by-play
• Texas: Q2 on our own 37, 4th & 2, False Start - obviously intended to go for it

We also had two 4th & Shorts against non-con opponents, which I also threw out due to an assumed talent difference making a big impact. Both were passes out of the shotgun and converted FWIW.

So that left 11 4th & Short plays, in conference, that either converted or failed:

• Baylor, Q1 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• Kansas, Q4 on their 49, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Texas, Q4 on our 33, 4th & 2: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q1 on our 47, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Norton)
• OU, Q4 on their 20, 4th & 3: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q4 on their 3, 4th & 1: Shotgun Pass that Failed
• WVU, Q3 on their 23, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)
• OSU, Q4 on our 25, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Dekkers)
• TTech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Ttech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Failed (Dekkers sack)
• Ttech, Q4 on their 28, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)

I didn't figure there'd be enough samples to say anything about effectiveness, but I ran a Chi-Sq anyway. We never went Under Center and Passed the ball, but when we Passed out of Shotgun we converted 3 of 5 attempts (60%). However when we Rushed, we were 0 for 3 out of Shotgun (0%) and 2 for 3 from Under Center (67%). Even with only 3 samples of each that's enough to say there is a statistically significant difference at the 90% Significance Level.

One other thing that stuck out at me, though I didn't record it, was the number of times we called a timeout on 4th & Short. I'd guess about half the time we went for it and half the time we didn't. But to me that indicates we're not sure what we want to do as the game goes along. We should be thinking about how we'll approach 4th down as we line up on 3rd down, and then depending on the result it's a "simple" go/no-go. If we're calling timeouts a lot on our own 4th down plays, then we're not thinking far enough ahead IMO. Many times we'd call a timeout on 4th down and just end up punting or kicking a FG anyway. That feels like a wasted timeout.

Almost as though the game moves much faster than the decision-making process. Observe, orient, decide, and act, whoever does that faster holds the initiative and has an advantage in any situation.

 

[NorthCyd]

I wanted to go back and objectively see what we've been doing on 4th downs where the QB sneak was a legitimate options this year. I went through the play-by-play for all 11 games so far this season and looked at every 4th down where the distance to convert was 3 yards or less. There were several 4th Downs with 4 to 6 yards to go that we attempted, but since those are too far for a QB sneak I didn't include them. I threw out everything where we punted or attempted a FG. That left 15 plays on the season. Two of those were penalties, which I threw out:

• Texas: Q1 on our own 30, 4th & 1, Delay of Game - probably did it for field position on a punt, but don't know for sure just from play-by-play
• Texas: Q2 on our own 37, 4th & 2, False Start - obviously intended to go for it

We also had two 4th & Shorts against non-con opponents, which I also threw out due to an assumed talent difference making a big impact. Both were passes out of the shotgun and converted FWIW.

So that left 11 4th & Short plays, in conference, that either converted or failed:

• Baylor, Q1 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• Kansas, Q4 on their 49, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Texas, Q4 on our 33, 4th & 2: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q1 on our 47, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Norton)
• OU, Q4 on their 20, 4th & 3: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q4 on their 3, 4th & 1: Shotgun Pass that Failed
• WVU, Q3 on their 23, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)
• OSU, Q4 on our 25, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Dekkers)
• TTech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Ttech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Failed (Dekkers sack)
• Ttech, Q4 on their 28, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)

I didn't figure there'd be enough samples to say anything about effectiveness, but I ran a Chi-Sq anyway. We never went Under Center and Passed the ball, but when we Passed out of Shotgun we converted 3 of 5 attempts (60%). However when we Rushed, we were 0 for 3 out of Shotgun (0%) and 2 for 3 from Under Center (67%). Even with only 3 samples of each that's enough to say there is a statistically significant difference at the 90% Significance Level.

One other thing that stuck out at me, though I didn't record it, was the number of times we called a timeout on 4th & Short. I'd guess about half the time we went for it and half the time we didn't. But to me that indicates we're not sure what we want to do as the game goes along. We should be thinking about how we'll approach 4th down as we line up on 3rd down, and then depending on the result it's a "simple" go/no-go. If we're calling timeouts a lot on our own 4th down plays, then we're not thinking far enough ahead IMO. Many times we'd call a timeout on 4th down and just end up punting or kicking a FG anyway. That feels like a wasted timeout.

Another to add to your analysis, even though it wasn't a 4th down, was the QB sneak we started out the 99 yard drive against Iowa with. That should count as a success as we blew the much vaunted Iowa defense off the line and got like 3 yards with it.

 

[CoachHines3]

We ran 2 qb sneaks at the 50-ish yard line against Tech but not at the goal line. makes sense to me

 

[cyclone1209]

I wanted to go back and objectively see what we've been doing on 4th downs where the QB sneak was a legitimate options this year. I went through the play-by-play for all 11 games so far this season and looked at every 4th down where the distance to convert was 3 yards or less. There were several 4th Downs with 4 to 6 yards to go that we attempted, but since those are too far for a QB sneak I didn't include them. I threw out everything where we punted or attempted a FG. That left 15 plays on the season. Two of those were penalties, which I threw out:

• Texas: Q1 on our own 30, 4th & 1, Delay of Game - probably did it for field position on a punt, but don't know for sure just from play-by-play
• Texas: Q2 on our own 37, 4th & 2, False Start - obviously intended to go for it

We also had two 4th & Shorts against non-con opponents, which I also threw out due to an assumed talent difference making a big impact. Both were passes out of the shotgun and converted FWIW.

So that left 11 4th & Short plays, in conference, that either converted or failed:

• Baylor, Q1 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• Kansas, Q4 on their 49, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Texas, Q4 on our 33, 4th & 2: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q1 on our 47, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Norton)
• OU, Q4 on their 20, 4th & 3: Shotgun Pass that Converted
• OU, Q4 on their 3, 4th & 1: Shotgun Pass that Failed
• WVU, Q3 on their 23, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)
• OSU, Q4 on our 25, 4th & 1: Shotgun Rush that Failed (Dekkers)
• TTech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Failed (Silas)
• Ttech, Q3 on their 2, 4th & Goal: Shotgun Pass that Failed (Dekkers sack)
• Ttech, Q4 on their 28, 4th & 1: Under Center Rush that Converted (Dekkers)

I didn't figure there'd be enough samples to say anything about effectiveness, but I ran a Chi-Sq anyway. We never went Under Center and Passed the ball, but when we Passed out of Shotgun we converted 3 of 5 attempts (60%). However when we Rushed, we were 0 for 3 out of Shotgun (0%) and 2 for 3 from Under Center (67%). Even with only 3 samples of each that's enough to say there is a statistically significant difference at the 90% Significance Level.

One other thing that stuck out at me, though I didn't record it, was the number of times we called a timeout on 4th & Short. I'd guess about half the time we went for it and half the time we didn't. But to me that indicates we're not sure what we want to do as the game goes along. We should be thinking about how we'll approach 4th down as we line up on 3rd down, and then depending on the result it's a "simple" go/no-go. If we're calling timeouts a lot on our own 4th down plays, then we're not thinking far enough ahead IMO. Many times we'd call a timeout on 4th down and just end up punting or kicking a FG anyway. That feels like a wasted timeout.

The tech game was screaming for a play action roll out pass to the TE.

 

[quasistellar]

The tech game was screaming for a play action roll out pass to the TE.

I thought for sure the 2nd or 3rd attempt would be that. Talk about outsmarting yourself.

 

[aeroclone]

It would be interesting to see the numbers on 3rd and 1 as well. That would yield a bigger sample size.

That said, your findings really back up what I and many others have been feeling for this season and beyond. The inside handoff out of the shotgun in short yardage situations has been abysmal for us. From our small sample size the sneak has been very effective. Which makes it even more frustrating that we are so hesitant to do it. I don't think this is too hard for a bunch of coaches earning millions to figure out. I also don't think it is too much to ask for B12 caliber athletes to take a snap under center. That is the only excuse I can come up with, fear of a fumbled exchange since we run everything else out of shotgun.

 

[besserheimerphat]

Another to add to your analysis, even though it wasn't a 4th down, was the QB sneak we started out the 99 yard drive against Iowa with. That should count as a success as we blew the much vaunted Iowa defense off the line and got like 3 yards with it.

The play-by-play is limited to "rush middle" and the rusher's name. It either says "shotgun" or doesn't mention formation at all so I assume that means under center. Someone would have to go back to the film to find other occurrences of QB sneaks.

 

[clone4life82]

Thanks for taking the time to go back. It is amazing how analytics has changed going for it on 4th down in "our" territory. Not sure if I am convinced it is ever the right choice, especially the our 30's. But TT made it work on Saturday. I just feel even if the 4th down play is successful, for the drive to end up in a score- it takes 6-7 more plays to create a scoring opportunity.

As far as 4th down Timeouts. I think Matt Campbell is firmly in the camp that he wants to talk to his QB and have other players regroup to get everyone on the same page. Not sure it is necessarily an indicator of lack-of-planning. But I would agree our offense takes too many unnecessary timeouts.

My biggest issue is defenses taking timeouts on critical 3rd or 4th down plays even before the teams line up. Unless players are tired, I think the TO gives an offense time to regroup and coaches to speak with QB.

I agree with you on the Timeout discussion. I’m not opposed to TOs in those situations. If we find that a defense is in a set that is a disadvantage to the play we’re calling or we’re not seeing what we want, call the TO and regroup.

 

[madguy30]

Our last couple sneaks have easily gained the first down. Easily. That should be the play until someone stops it, and it shouldn't require any thought to call it.

There should be a call or symbol to just get up to the line and do it and it doesn't matter if the whole stadium knows it. It's about conversion but it's also about playing with an attitude or purpose.

 

[ISU_Guy]

if you are calling time out on 4th and a yard, you probably should just throw at that point. you have given the other team a chance to bring in 5 - 400 pound linemen at that point.

 

[Malone]

If we insist on being in shotgun with a yard to go, why not bootleg and play to strength? Or even a trap play.

I don’t think even grandpa Ferentz is as stubborn as Campbell and that’s saying something. He’s playing a “f you, I’m going to run the same play until the players succeed” game but it comes off feeling like a “f you, pay me, I don’t care” game. It’s worn right now. It’ll turn into boos next year if it doesn’t change…don’t care how ma and pa, salt of the eart a fan base is.

 

[stewart092284]

Don't bring traps into this lol or any kind of power football.

 

[knowlesjam]

If we insist on being in shotgun with a yard to go, why not bootleg and play to strength? Or even a trap play.

I don’t think even grandpa Ferentz is as stubborn as Campbell and that’s saying something. He’s playing a “f you, I’m going to run the same play until the players succeed” game but it comes off feeling like a “f you, pay me, I don’t care” game. It’s worn right now. It’ll turn into boos next year if it doesn’t change…don’t care how ma and pa, salt of the eart a fan base is.

At least try something different...call your 3rd down play and then roll right into the the 4th down play under center with no chance for the other team to substitute...quick snap before the other team really sets up. But no, let's take 40 seconds of the clock, let the other team freely sub, and then call time out.

 

[CYdTracked]

The problem seems to be we have become too predictable when we run a 4th down play out of the shotgun. Defenses basically stack the box on us and know there is a good chance we are going up the gut with it 1 way or another and when you have the OL issues we do you can't start the play several yards behind the line and expect they will get a push or create a hole to convert it. Was watching the Michigan/Illinois game and Michigan went for a 4th and short late in the game out of the shotgun but they brought a receiver in motion that the defense did not bring someone up closer to the line to cover and they hit him for a quick hit while in motion for a nice 1st down play. Told the guys I was watching it with that maybe Manning should file that one away for his playbook as it almost looked too easy! We just don't seem to have much creativity with 4th down plays if we aren't just running it right up the gut out of the shotgun.

I've felt that we've under-utilized our Tight Ends a lot this season too as we used to line up and have 1 or 2 in motion to throw the defense off then either load up a side to run a play off tackle or the edge or even hit one of them with a pass route when they failed to cover one. The TE group may not be of the caliber of talent the guys before them were but Dean and Hanika have been capable pass catchers when we actually made efforts to target them.

 

[Cloned4Life]

I agree with you on the Timeout discussion. I’m not opposed to TOs in those situations. If we find that a defense is in a set that is a disadvantage to the play we’re calling or we’re not seeing what we want, call the TO and regroup.

If we are being honest with ourselves, it is quite obvious that the large majority of our timeouts called either on 4th down or when the play clock is running down late on a 3rd down or whatever - are due to our coaches literally not knowing what they want to do. Literally not having a plan, literally not having a predetermined decision or play ready, and most certainly not having the foresight of down and distance on 3rd down thinking ahead to 4th down. Sure, this might be generally "OK" sometimes (i.e. I'm sure even the best coaching staffs do this once in a while), but our staff does it because they sincerely just don't know what to do. You can see it in the players reactions, their eyes, shots from the sidelines, etc. Everyone often looks confused. Dekkers (and Purdy before him) looking to the sideline... waiting... confused... Sideline also looking confused. Sometimes the game really is moving too fast for our coaches.

These wasted timeouts, the false starts in the 4th quarter, these discipline-based mental lapses - these are consistent themes, and can be found consistently in our losses in the last 5 seasons.

 

[StLouisClone]

I wanted to go back and objectively see what we've been doing on 4th downs where the QB sneak was a legitimate options this year. I went through the play-by-play for all 11 games so far this season and looked at every 4th down where the distance to convert was 3 yards or less. There were several 4th Downs with 4 to 6 yards to go that we attempted, but since those are too far for a QB sneak I didn't include them. I threw out everything where we punted or attempted a FG. That left 15 plays on the season. Two of those were penalties, which I threw out:

• Texas: Q1 on our own 30, 4th & 1, Delay of Game - probably did it for field position on a punt, but don't know for sure just from play-by-play

I remember the above. We had 4th and a foot from our 30. I was screaming at Campbell to go for it. Instead Dekkers tried to draw Texas offsides with movement and cadence. It didn't work and we went back 5 yards. Really dumb call.

Coaches should have had Dekkers sneak it. We could have used another possession given we lost by only 3 points. That's what coaches like Texas Tech's coach understands. He's gone for 4th down more than anyone. Aggressive calls like that can help you overcome a talent deficit. If you sneak it in that situation, you are going to make it 95% of the time. It's really a no brainer.