Do you agree with Johnson's decision to go for it on 4th and 1?

[Sean Miller Fan]

This reminded me of Edsall's decision to go for it on 4th down (I think it was 2 or 3 though) from his own 25 or so during the Wanny era.

I agreed with both calls. Put on your objective football analyst goggles on. What do you think?

For me, this was a classic playing of the percentages. I'm a bit of a stats nerd so I liked it from GT's standpoint. Football 101 says be conservative, punt it, and rely on your D to force OT. Stats say there is probably somewhere between an 80-90% chance of making the 1st down.

Now, admittedly I am making up some of these stats but if you are Johnson, here's the probabilities:

4th down conversation: 80-90%
Winning the game in regulation after that conversion: 30-40%

Losing the Game in regulation after punting: 30%

Losing the Game in regulation after failing on 4th and 1: 70-80%

Classic Game Theory. Johnson chose the path with the greatest chance of reward but biggest risk. His AD might not be proud but John Nash is.

 

[MajorMajors]

I would have gone for it if I were GT. Took a really exceptional play by Jarrett and Galambos to get the stop, and even at that it was by about an inch. And even if you stop the guy, you may "lose" because of the spot -- as I thought we did on a 4th down stop earlier in the game.

And if Peterman had given up like 3 more inches of ground when he knelt down to put the ball in the center of the field, Pitt misses the kick... Yeah, there was a penalty...

To me, college FB is a game that requires being aggressive on offense -- scoring points -- and keep scoring points.

Go Pitt.

 

[TD_istheman]

Yes against us, for sure. We had to prove we could stop one before teams have a second thought next time

 

[President Stache]

Everyone outside of Hampton Roads thought we stopped the first one as well. Which caused a TD the next pass.

 

[joeydavid]

Thought it was dumb at the time but understanding his faith in running the ball it didn't surprise me. You have to give the credit for playing to win verses what most coaches do.

This reminded me of Edsall's decision to go for it on 4th down (I think it was 2 or 3 though) from his own 25 or so during the Wanny era.

I agreed with both calls. Put on your objective football analyst goggles on. What do you think?

For me, this was a classic playing of the percentages. I'm a bit of a stats nerd so I liked it from GT's standpoint. Football 101 says be conservative, punt it, and rely on your D to force OT. Stats say there is probably somewhere between an 80-90% chance of making the 1st down.

Now, admittedly I am making up some of these stats but if you are Johnson, here's the probabilities:

4th down conversation: 80-90%
Winning the game in regulation after that conversion: 30-40%

Losing the Game in regulation after punting: 30%

Losing the Game in regulation after failing on 4th and 1: 70-80%

Classic Game Theory. Johnson chose the path with the greatest chance of reward but biggest risk. His AD might not be proud but John Nash is.

 

[pittmeister]

Yes, but I would have called a different play.

 

[PhPanther1]

I would have punted and went to OT. Why risk being stopped and instantly losing vs making Pitt have to work to kick a long FG with a shitty kicker.

 

[JohnnyGossamer]

Yes. Agree with playcall too. Pitt made a monumental play on D to stop GT by what appeared to be no more than an inch.

Johnson felt Pitt would get into FG range and/or score a TD if he'd punted. He wanted to 1st down then to kill the clock and win the game with no time left.

 

[pittzap]

I would have punted and went to OT. Why risk being stopped and instantly losing vs making Pitt have to work to kick a long FG with a shitty kicker.

I agree. Punt. Too far back on their side of the field.

 

[JohnnyGossamer]

I think he thought, as I did too, if GT punted, Pitt would've gotten into FG range and won. He wanted the ball last. Didn't work out.

 

[Swervin27]

yes. should have went outside with it though. done that toss sweep. we weren't stopping that play, zero chance..

 

[wbrpanther]

This reminded me of Edsall's decision to go for it on 4th down (I think it was 2 or 3 though) from his own 25 or so during the Wanny era.

I agreed with both calls. Put on your objective football analyst goggles on. What do you think?

For me, this was a classic playing of the percentages. I'm a bit of a stats nerd so I liked it from GT's standpoint. Football 101 says be conservative, punt it, and rely on your D to force OT. Stats say there is probably somewhere between an 80-90% chance of making the 1st down.

Now, admittedly I am making up some of these stats but if you are Johnson, here's the probabilities:

4th down conversation: 80-90%
Winning the game in regulation after that conversion: 30-40%

Losing the Game in regulation after punting: 30%

Losing the Game in regulation after failing on 4th and 1: 70-80%

Classic Game Theory. Johnson chose the path with the greatest chance of reward but biggest risk. His AD might not be proud but John Nash is.

The decision was great. Running up the middle was the only way they had a chance of not making it. If he would have optioned his QB down the line they would have gotten the first down.

 

[Swervin27]

he pulled a "pitt"

 

[Panther Parrothead]

Yes, but I would have called a different play.

^^^This.^^^ Pitt sold their soul to stopping that particular play. If GT would've faked the dive, and then pitched it wide, the RB might still be running.

 

[JohnnyGossamer]

They ran the option earlier and Bradley threw them for a -1 gain. Only needed half a yard. I think the playcall was sound.

 

[pbrad]

Dumb football strategy. Even at 90% you make it, that 10% chance almost guarantees a loss which is what happened. Punt the ball and force a team who has proven to be bad in the 4th quarter to move the ball. Having said that, I am glad he did what he did.

 

[HunkyPanther]

They ran the option earlier and Bradley threw them for a -1 gain. Only needed half a yard. I think the playcall was sound.

Agree Outside Pitch, although giving Pitt fits, always has the potential for a huge loss...up the middle was your safest bet.

 

[Drax1975]

Hell no, he's gon get the axe!

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

This reminded me of Edsall's decision to go for it on 4th down (I think it was 2 or 3 though) from his own 25 or so during the Wanny era.

I agreed with both calls. Put on your objective football analyst goggles on. What do you think?

For me, this was a classic playing of the percentages. I'm a bit of a stats nerd so I liked it from GT's standpoint. Football 101 says be conservative, punt it, and rely on your D to force OT. Stats say there is probably somewhere between an 80-90% chance of making the 1st down.

Now, admittedly I am making up some of these stats but if you are Johnson, here's the probabilities:

4th down conversation: 80-90%
Winning the game in regulation after that conversion: 30-40%

Losing the Game in regulation after punting: 30%

Losing the Game in regulation after failing on 4th and 1: 70-80%

Classic Game Theory. Johnson chose the path with the greatest chance of reward but biggest risk. His AD might not be proud but John Nash is.

Agree with the decision. Totally disagree with the play call. They were successful wide all game. They ran into our strength.

 

[upj87]

I would have punted and went to OT. Why risk being stopped and instantly losing vs making Pitt have to work to kick a long FG with a shitty kicker.

risk going to OT? they had not stopped Pitt all day...Much, much better chance of getting the first down than stopping Pitt from scoring after a punt.

 

[Drax1975]

Hell no, gon get the axe!

 

[JoseLind13]

Going for it was the right call, IMO... The odds were heavily in GT's favor to convert. Pitt simply stepped up and made the big play.

Even the most conservative run plays by GT seemed to be easily getting 3+ yards most of the day. They were averaging 5.5 yards per carry at that point.

 

[Swervin27]

if you flip it, and pitt punts and loses, we flip out. it's exactly what happened in iowa, in ok state.. We went for it in this situation against Ga Tech, Cuse on a fake punt and won. You punt, you lose.. The field position might have been a little further back but same exact story.

you got to play to win, not punt and hope your De can hold, not in college football. NFL maybe but not in college.. They punt we win, they go for it and get it, they probably win.. They convert that 4 out of 5 times.. It was a smart call, bad results..

 

[California Panther]

making Pitt have to work to kick a long FG with a shitty kicker.

BTW, interjecting some facts, that "shitty" kicker you reference has made 7 FGs in a row

 

[Drax1975]

if you flip it, and pitt punts and loses, we flip out. it's exactly what happened in iowa, in ok state.. We went for it in this situation against Ga Tech, Cuse on a fake punt and won. You punt, you lose.. The field position might have been a little further back but same exact story.

you got to play to win, not punt and hope your De can hold, not in college football. NFL maybe but not in college.. They punt we win, they go for it and get it, they probably win.. They convert that 4 out of 5 times.. It was a smart call, bad results..

Not enough time to make that decision, plus Pitt doesn't have the receivers to make something happen in that short amount of time.

 

[BuffetParrothead]

Who cares whether he made the right decision!
It was the right decision for PITT WE WON! And
that's all that matters.
FYI- none of us were on the field, in his head, we
have no idea what his thought process was so
different people will make different decisions in
clutch situations!

 

[JoseLind13]

BTW, interjecting some facts, that "shitty" kicker you reference has made 7 FGs in a row

yep... and the lasting image in Johnson's mind was that same kicker nailing a 56-yard FG to beat them last season.

 

[Jpripper88]

Dumb football strategy. Even at 90% you make it, that 10% chance almost guarantees a loss which is what happened. Punt the ball and force a team who has proven to be bad in the 4th quarter to move the ball. Having said that, I am glad he did what he did.

Huh? At 90% they make it, you are still advocating punting? There was 1:47 left in the game, we had all three TOs, and we would have only needed 40 yards or less to get a FG try.

 

[PhPanther1]

BTW, interjecting some facts, that "shitty" kicker you reference has made 7 FGs in a row

Hahahahahahaha you're right. He's awesome and I feel completely confident when he goes out there. Hahahahahahahahaha

Thanks for the facts.

 

[BuffetParrothead]

PS
We ( PITT) own Johnson! We're in his head! All he can think about is losing by a FG when GT plays PITT.
He'lll continue to make bad decisions when they play us!
Win the mental game making it easier to win on the field!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A military strategy!

 

[jtbuba]

I think he thought, as I did too, if GT punted, Pitt would've gotten into FG range and won. He wanted the ball last. Didn't work out.

Good post--- his decision to go for it was the correct one.

 

[PHATWOOD]

Johnson's decision was correct, his playcall was utter garbage. Aside from two plays all day the sweep toss was guaranteed a half yard. Why would anyone run in to the one verified strength of the defense? Just go toss left, away from #5, and get the first down.
He deserved to lose, even with the "doink" to make it hurt more.

All that said, I hate dealing with the triple option once per year like most people and hope he gets his ass fired.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

if you flip it, and pitt punts and loses, we flip out. it's exactly what happened in iowa, in ok state.. We went for it in this situation against Ga Tech, Cuse on a fake punt and won. .

Not me. I LOVE going for it on 4th. I am almost to the extreme where I like that Arkansas HS coach who never punts and calls plays knowing he has 4 plays to get 10 yards. On 3rd and 4 around midfield against OKST, I was telling my buddy "run it twice." Because I thought we should have used 2 plays to get 4 yards and we probably win.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

This reminded me of Edsall's decision to go for it on 4th down (I think it was 2 or 3 though) from his own 25 or so during the Wanny era.

I agreed with both calls. Put on your objective football analyst goggles on. What do you think?

For me, this was a classic playing of the percentages. I'm a bit of a stats nerd so I liked it from GT's standpoint. Football 101 says be conservative, punt it, and rely on your D to force OT. Stats say there is probably somewhere between an 80-90% chance of making the 1st down.

Now, admittedly I am making up some of these stats but if you are Johnson, here's the probabilities:

4th down conversation: 80-90%
Winning the game in regulation after that conversion: 30-40%

Losing the Game in regulation after punting: 30%

Losing the Game in regulation after failing on 4th and 1: 70-80%

Classic Game Theory. Johnson chose the path with the greatest chance of reward but biggest risk. His AD might not be proud but John Nash is.

That's some pretty rock-solid research there, SMF. Who could argue with those numbers? And I mean that literally. Who could possibly argue with made up numbers?

I don't think it was a wise decision by GT and I felt that way before we stopped them. It was just so deep in their own territory that the risk far outweighed the reward.

I'm sure he did expect to pick it up – otherwise he would not have gone for it. However, I will always believe it was a strange/poor choice by Paul Johnson.

I just don't think Pitt was going to challenge them with its average passing game in that spot had the Yellow Jackets decided to punt the football instead. I think the worst case scenario for Georgia Tech would've been overtime.

I would never be accused of being a mathematician but I don't think Johnson was playing the odds at all. I think he was playing a hunch and he guessed wrong.

For the record, I also disagreed with Edsall's decision a few years ago. However, that Pitt DL was terrible and this one is not.

 

[Franb]

Not me. I LOVE going for it on 4th. I am almost to the extreme where I like that Arkansas HS coach who never punts and calls plays knowing he has 4 plays to get 10 yards. On 3rd and 4 around midfield against OKST, I was telling my buddy "run it twice." Because I thought we should have used 2 plays to get 4 yards and we probably win.

Agree with you on OKST, that decision should be made on 3rd down. Gives more options for what play to call on 3rd down, if you know that you will go for it on 4th.

 

[President Stache]

Yeah the same pitch was stopped the previous 4th down but all these geniuses think obviously the pitch was the right call...

Right call was to punt

 

[cruzer]

This reminded me of Edsall's decision to go for it on 4th down (I think it was 2 or 3 though) from his own 25 or so during the Wanny era.

I agreed with both calls. Put on your objective football analyst goggles on. What do you think?

For me, this was a classic playing of the percentages. I'm a bit of a stats nerd so I liked it from GT's standpoint. Football 101 says be conservative, punt it, and rely on your D to force OT. Stats say there is probably somewhere between an 80-90% chance of making the 1st down.

Now, admittedly I am making up some of these stats but if you are Johnson, here's the probabilities:

4th down conversation: 80-90%
Winning the game in regulation after that conversion: 30-40%

Losing the Game in regulation after punting: 30%

Losing the Game in regulation after failing on 4th and 1: 70-80%

Classic Game Theory. Johnson chose the path with the greatest chance of reward but biggest risk. His AD might not be proud but John Nash is.

I slightly disagree with the decision. Here's my thinking; if you make the first, you are still at your own 35, so a long way to go before you're in FG range. If you don't make it, Pitt is instantly in FG range. Pretty big risk. All that aside, the play call was monumentally dumb. Pitt stopped the pitch play exactly once all game. Run your QB with the pitch option and I'm betting they make it. Pitt's interior defense was the only part of the defense that was reasonably stout all game. Dumb call (but we'll take the gift).

Cruzer

 

[PantherO]

Agree with going for it. However, I would have called a different play.

 

[pittman71]

horrible decision, it makes no sense. If the ball is at midfield or on Pitt's side of the field then of course you go for it.

He just gave Pitt the victory, although I am happy he did. We would be ripping Narduzzi if he did the exact same thing with the same result.

 

[drp1tt]

This reminded me of Edsall's decision to go for it on 4th down (I think it was 2 or 3 though) from his own 25 or so during the Wanny era.

I agreed with both calls. Put on your objective football analyst goggles on. What do you think?

For me, this was a classic playing of the percentages. I'm a bit of a stats nerd so I liked it from GT's standpoint. Football 101 says be conservative, punt it, and rely on your D to force OT. Stats say there is probably somewhere between an 80-90% chance of making the 1st down.

Now, admittedly I am making up some of these stats but if you are Johnson, here's the probabilities:

4th down conversation: 80-90%
Winning the game in regulation after that conversion: 30-40%

Losing the Game in regulation after punting: 30%

Losing the Game in regulation after failing on 4th and 1: 70-80%

Classic Game Theory. Johnson chose the path with the greatest chance of reward but biggest risk. His AD might not be proud but John Nash is.

I said it at the time that given the time left I would have punted and gone to OT. Pitt does not really have a vertical passing game so for Pitt to score quickly the odds were not very good. In OT they had a better kicker and an offense to continually get in scoring position with each possession.