4th Down Conversions

[Tyr]

Yesterday, the Jets were 2/5 on 4th down conversions, including two failed 4th down attempts in the red zone in the final 2 minutes. I know that conventional wisdom has shifted over the past 10-years for teams to go for it on a lot more 4th downs, but the Jets lost by 5-points yesterday and kicking two FGs could have been the difference for them. I get the rationale for why teams are going for it even if they fail, then the opposing team is pinned deep in their territory with little room to operate, and if they got 1 TD out of two 4th down tries, then that is 6-8 points. However, if the Jets had played it safe and took the points, then they very well could have won yesterday.

[Guest]

One flaw to that thought.  They got the second try for the TD at the end because they left the ball at the 1 yard line and we had to kick from the endzone.  If we have that at the 25 or better, it might be a different story.

But yes, those going for it calls can add up.

[Guest]

Yes, there is definitely the advantage of pinning the opposing team deep if you fail to convert. We were the beneficiaries of that in the Buffalo game. As for the other scenario, it would be the Jets making a FG and bringing the lead down to 2 with 3 timeouts and then the Vikings starting at their 25 needing at least 1-2 first downs to win it. The Vikings offense was faltering, so there were reasonable odds they would go 3 and out, but even still the Jets would have started maybe around their 20 and would have needed to get in range for a long FG, which their kicker was capable of.

Both situations have a chance of working, but I would agree that the Jets going for a TD on 4th down has a lot fewer moving parts.

Also, being down 5 could be been a factor too, since a TD plus a 2-point conversion would have put them up by a FG and gave the ball to the Vikings with no timeouts.

[Guest]

@Tyr said:
Yes, there is definitely the advantage of pinning the opposing team deep if you fail to convert. We were the beneficiaries of that in the Buffalo game. As for the other scenario, it would be the Jets making a FG and bringing the lead down to 2 with 3 timeouts and then the Vikings starting at their 25 needing at least 1-2 first downs to win it. The Vikings offense was faltering, so there were reasonable odds they would go 3 and out, but even still the Jets would have started maybe around their 20 and would have needed to get in range for a long FG, which their kicker was capable of.

Both situations have a chance of working, but I would agree that the Jets going for a TD on 4th down has a lot fewer moving parts.

Also, being down 5 could be been a factor too, since a TD plus a 2-point conversion would have put them up by a FG and gave the ball to the Vikings with no timeouts.

You make sense there.  Needing only a FG with Zeurlein and their defense playing like they were should have swung the decision.