[BostonCard]

There are many ways to lose a game, not just punting the ball with plenty of time left and having the opposing team drive the ball 70+ yards for the go-ahead touchdown.  Another way to lose is to drop back for a pass, and throw an interception and watch the other team drive the ball 40 yards for the go-ahead touchdown (or worse throw a pick six).  Costello has thrown 11 interceptions in 367 pass attempts, roughly 3% of all drop-backs.  Let's give him 5 or so throws in a drive to ice the game; cumulatively that's a 1 in 6 chance that he throws an interception that leaves us in a worse situation than we started.

Then there is the fact that Costello's completion percentage is 67%, so there is a non-zero chance of throwing three incompletions in a series (or completing a pass short of the first down marker), plus about a 5% sack rate.  With the realization that each incompletion stops the clock, there is a chance that an aggressive approach relying on more passing at the end of a game leaves us in a worse position than running it three times into the pile and punting.

Lastly, this is cursed by the small number of games involved, but it is worth noting that we won both games in which we notably turtled (ASU and UCLA).

BC

---

One statistic I would be very interested in reading: success running on 3rd and 4th and under 2 yards, especially out of the ogre, over the last several years.  A formation/tactic that used to be automatic is now anything but, and yet we continued to try it (or the new variant, a one-back backfield and a 9-person offensive line.)  And have almost vanishingly rarely done anything other than a straight-ahead dive out of it.

And another interesting trendline would be comparing percentage of successful plays (using the definition of down and distance - 50% of yards to gain on first down, etc) by running and passing.  That's the sticking point for me about continuing to run unsuccessfully in an attempt to wind the clock - is a higher percentage of potential first downs in throwing worth the risk of an incompletion/interception?

VG

This year, running the ball on third and 1-3 yards, we have 22 attempts, 10 first downs and 1 TD.  On fourth down, regardless of distance, we have 6 attempts, 3 first downs, and 1 TD.  Overall, it is about a 50/50 proposition.  

Throwing, we have 10 first downs and 1 TD on third and 1-3 yards in 18 attempts and 3 first downs and 1 TD in 6 attempts on fourth down.  The numbers are slightly better throwing the ball than running on third and short or fourth down.

Last year, we had 20 first downs and 3 touchdowns on 31 attempts on third and 1-3 yards, and 4 first downs on 6 attempts in fourth down.  Our conversion percentage running the ball has definitely dropped.

BC

[BostonCard]

There are many ways to lose a game, not just punting the ball with plenty of time left and having the opposing team drive the ball 70+ yards for the go-ahead touchdown.  Another way to lose is to drop back for a pass, and throw an interception and watch the other team drive the ball 40 yards for the go-ahead touchdown (or worse throw a pick six).  Costello has thrown 11 interceptions in 367 pass attempts, roughly 3% of all drop-backs.  Let's give him 5 or so throws in a drive to ice the game; cumulatively that's a 1 in 6 chance that he throws an interception that leaves us in a worse situation than we started.

Then there is the fact that Costello's completion percentage is 67%, so there is a non-zero chance of throwing three incompletions in a series (or completing a pass short of the first down marker), plus about a 5% sack rate.  With the realization that each incompletion stops the clock, there is a chance that an aggressive approach relying on more passing at the end of a game leaves us in a worse position than running it three times into the pile and punting.

Lastly, this is cursed by the small number of games involved, but it is worth noting that we won both games in which we notably turtled (ASU and UCLA).

BC

---

One statistic I would be very interested in reading: success running on 3rd and 4th and under 2 yards, especially out of the ogre, over the last several years.  A formation/tactic that used to be automatic is now anything but, and yet we continued to try it (or the new variant, a one-back backfield and a 9-person offensive line.)  And have almost vanishingly rarely done anything other than a straight-ahead dive out of it.

And another interesting trendline would be comparing percentage of successful plays (using the definition of down and distance - 50% of yards to gain on first down, etc) by running and passing.  That's the sticking point for me about continuing to run unsuccessfully in an attempt to wind the clock - is a higher percentage of potential first downs in throwing worth the risk of an incompletion/interception?

VG

This year, running the ball on third and 1-3 yards, we have 22 attempts, 10 first downs and 1 TD.  On fourth down, regardless of distance, we have 6 attempts, 3 first downs, and 1 TD.  Overall, it is about a 50/50 proposition.  

Throwing, we have 10 first downs and 1 TD on third and 1-3 yards in 18 attempts and 3 first downs and 1 TD in 6 attempts on fourth down.  The numbers are slightly better throwing the ball than running on third and short or fourth down.

Last year, we had 20 first downs and 3 touchdowns on 31 attempts on third and 1-3 yards, and 4 first downs on 6 attempts in fourth down.  Our conversion percentage running the ball has definitely dropped.

BC