Cory's Corner: The Fourth Down Revolution
Has analytics gone too far on fourth down?
There was a time when NFL coaches treated fourth down like a stop sign.
Fourth-and-2 at midfield? Send out the punt team.
Fourth-and-goal from the 3? Take the three points.
The logic was simple: Trust your defense, play the field-position game and avoid the mistake that lands you on Monday morning's highlight reel.
Today, it sometimes feels as though the stop sign has been replaced by a green light.
Analytics have fundamentally changed the way NFL coaches manage games. According to league data, teams attempted roughly 490 fourth-down conversions during the 2000 season. By 2025, that number had climbed to approximately 935 attempts—nearly double in a quarter century. Teams averaged more than 30 fourth-down attempts each during the 2025 season, compared to fewer than 17 a decade earlier. The evolution isn't subtle; it's a revolution.
No coach embodies the movement more than Detroit's Dan Campbell.
“Dan Gamble,” as critics affectionately call him, has become the face of fearless football, routinely bypassing field goals and punts in favor of keeping his offense on the field. Since taking over the Lions, Campbell has led one of the league's most aggressive fourth-down attacks, helping transform Detroit from perennial afterthought into a Super Bowl contender.
He's hardly alone.
Baltimore's John Harbaugh was among the first established coaches to fully embrace analytics. Kevin Stefanski consistently trusted the numbers in Cleveland. Sean Payton has never been shy about taking calculated risks, while Green Bay's Matt LaFleur dramatically increased his fourth-down aggressiveness during the 2025 season after years of being more conservative.
LaFleur's evolution is interesting because it mirrors the NFL's. In 2019, he went for it in only about 30% of his fourth down opportunities. From 2020 through 2023, that figure climbed to roughly 60%, the highest rate in the league. After a conservative detour in 2024, LaFleur became the NFL's most analytically aggressive coach in 2025, making the recommended fourth-down decision 72.7% of the time. The transformation illustrates just how dramatically coaching philosophy has shifted in only six seasons.
The math is compelling.
Converting a fourth-and-1 often increases a team's win probability more than punting ever could. Offenses are better than they've ever been. Quarterbacks are more accurate. Short-yardage packages are more creative. Analytics remind coaches that surrendering a possession voluntarily isn't always the safest option.
But here's where spreadsheets can fall short.
Football isn't played inside a computer model.
Analytics don't fully account for momentum after a failed conversion. They can't measure how a defense responds after being handed a short field or how confidence shifts when a team comes away empty after bypassing an easy field goal. Weather, injuries, fatigue and the emotional rhythm of a game often matter just as much as expected points added.
Sometimes common sense still deserves a seat at the table.
A fourth-and-2 from the opponent's 40 in perfect weather isn't the same as fourth-and-2 from your own 35 with a backup quarterback protecting a late lead. Yet too often it feels like some coaches have become prisoners of probability instead of masters of the moment.
The best coaches don't ignore analytics — they simply refuse to be governed by them.
Bill Belichick's greatest strength wasn't statistics. It was knowing when to trust them and when to trust his football instincts. The same can be said for Andy Reid, who embraces modern analysis without allowing it to dictate every critical decision.
Analytics have unquestionably made NFL coaching smarter.
But smarter doesn't always mean wiser.
The numbers should inform decisions, not make them. Fourth down should remain a judgment call, not an automatic response generated by a chart.
Because while spreadsheets can calculate percentages, they still can't measure the heartbeat of a football game.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn
__________________________
Comments (44)
HarryHodag
June 30, 2026 at 06:42 am
I've long complained about this. The nerds have changed a great game but also the gambling industry as well factors into this. The coaches think they're offense can gain six feet any time, as an example. The fans want more offense as it feeds their bets.
The reason teams back when punted was easy: field position. If you're playing the Chiefs and you hand Mahomes the ball at midfield after a failed attempt you've effectively given an assassin an easier time to score. I don't care if you happen to gain the six feet on fourth and 2. The chance of it failing is equal and after that you've given the other team a clear advantage. I can see going for it if your behind late in a game and failing won't end up any worse than your current position. Those instances are rare. Going for it in your own territory is insane.
The defenses are starting to catch up to the new offenses in the league and after a number of the 4th and 2's fail and coaches jobs are on the line(like Matt LaFleur's even with the extension) they will go back to punting again.
HawkPacker
June 30, 2026 at 08:53 am
Harry analytics?
I don't look for that to happen Harry.
dobber
June 30, 2026 at 08:55 am
I think there's a lot to agree with in what you've said, HH, but that last statement I think is off: unless there are rule changes that favor the defense in short yardage situations, this cat is out of the bag. I think what defines a 'go for it' situation has been forever changed. Sometimes teams make those decisions against their interest, though, because they know they're better off taking the chance than giving the ball back to a Mahomes or Burrow...or because their defense is gassed or beat up.
Agreed: missed fourth downs are very visible when they fail, but most of them are lost as part of the drive when they succeed.
BuckyBadger
June 30, 2026 at 09:09 am
I don't think the fans making bets factors into the decision on the coach.
In today's game where moving the ball is so much easier than ever before punting isn't as effective as it once was.
dobber
June 30, 2026 at 09:18 am
"I don't think the fans making bets factors into the decision on the coach."
Geez, I hope not!
HarryHodag
June 30, 2026 at 11:56 am
But if they team loses, social media pressures for a change. If not for Policy acting for MLF and Gute, the fans would have wanted a change after last season, largely fueled online.
HarryHodag
June 30, 2026 at 11:54 am
The fans losing money on decisions by the coach creates pressure on social media to fire the coach. Admit it or not, the team management look at those posts. Gambling on sports, legal or not, is a reality but it is ultimately a bad thing for both the bettor and the fans. It's like a casino...you hear from the 5 percent who win big and the 95% who lose their buttinskis are silent.
Leatherhead
June 30, 2026 at 01:02 pm
Anybody who loses money gambling on a sporting event deserves it, IMO.
I hope the team management isn't taking social media posts seriously. These are committed professionals who work tirelessly looking for microscopial advantages in the most competitive league on Earth. The franchises are billion dollar corporations. Social media is people looking for clicks.
I know that on the sidelines your feelings can override your judgement, but some general rules of thumb are "don't make it worse"(like a doctor) and "play the percentages" (like an investment advisor).
WestCoastPackerBacker
June 30, 2026 at 04:09 pm
It backfired on Campbell several times last season. They were successful 58.1 of their tries, good for 15th in the league.
x24
June 30, 2026 at 06:53 am
"prisoners of probability instead of masters of the moment"- very nicely said!
I've grown tired of AI and its disciples trying to feed in enough stats to churn out enough data to make football predictable. Listening to their play by play computations is like watching a game with C-3PO.
Oppy
June 30, 2026 at 07:25 am
Being a long time reader of CHTV and of Cory's work, I feel qualified to state that there is almost certainly a large level of irony in your comment you may not be aware of.
dobber
June 30, 2026 at 08:49 am
boom.
Cheezehead72
June 30, 2026 at 07:36 am
I like the analytics. Now I will admit some of the stats they state during the game are just plain silly. Analytics is a new way of looking at the game.
You need to remember there are many types of people watching the game.
People that enjoy the game for being the game. Those are the purist.
Then there are people that enjoy the analytics and analysis of the game. Thos are the analytical people.
Then there are the people that enjoy the back story the personal stories of the players and coaches. Those are the emotional or touchy feely people, or like I like to call them the hippies.
Then there are the people that like the halftime show. Yes that only happens in championship games or college games.
They need to make it entertaining for as many people as they can.
dobber
June 30, 2026 at 08:58 am
""prisoners of probability instead of masters of the moment"- very nicely said!"
Cory-bot is coldly indifferent to your praise.
Cheezehead72
June 30, 2026 at 06:56 am
Something that Cory did not mention is that the way the game is set up makes going for it on forth down more desirable is that the game is an offense oriented game. What Woody Hayesand Darrell Royal once said about only three things can happen on a passing play and two of them are bad and one good is not accurate in the modern game. Now four things can happen and two of them are bad and two of them are good. The pass could be intercepted or go incomplete bu the pass could be complete or you could get pass interference. And we know that the officials through the yellow hanky more than they use the white hanky.
Guam
June 30, 2026 at 07:43 am
Really good point CH72. The 1978 rule changes (defensive backs can't hit a WR beyond 5 yards from the LOS and OL can use their hands in pass blocking) revolutionized the passing game and made football a much more offensively oriented game. Much of the "common sense" about short yardage situations Cory referred to predated those 1978 rule changes.
Analytics has simply put math to a changed environment and allowed coaches to justify overturning some of the old "common sense". While I don't always agree with some of the go for it philosophy (I'm old and conservative) it has certainly made the game more exciting and more importantly, it often works.
dobber
June 30, 2026 at 08:45 am
Analytics work pretty well in baseball which is mostly a 1-on-1 game (batter v. pitcher) played in a team context. This is in part why Ivy League econ majors with no background in sports became GMs running MLB and MiLB player acquisition and development, and "3-true-outcomes"--the death of baseball for the spectator--took off. The equivalent football GMs (Ahem, Kwesi) have not fared so well.
I'd argue that analytics in the NFL--where you have two coordinators pushing around 22 guys on the field that have to mesh together and individuals need to read and respond in a microsecond--are really only retrospective and aren't very predictive.
I've been skeptical of over-reliance on analytics in the NFL and the proliferation of "advance stats." Some of these stats work well in terms of what to expect--ADOT is a good example. Some only mean something when particular players are on the field or alignments are in use and fall apart in the face of injury. There are some analytics that work, and I'd argue that 4th downs actually do work pretty well and I agree with you: they've added something to the game. Some coaches have a bad track record at accounting for field position in the face of those analytics, though (Campbell is one), and making their jobs harder...sometimes giving games away.
Coldworld
June 30, 2026 at 11:29 am
Not only is baseball one-on-one, but many of those one one one moments repeat and each individual displays their traits over a much greater sample. All probability predictions become closer to the mean with volume and are more accurate when there are less variables.
dobber
June 30, 2026 at 08:32 am
"Something that Cory did not mention..."
For about 700 words, there were a lot of things Cory didn't mention in this AI-generated, staccato-formatted, repetitive word soup. This article is the CHTV equivalent of a two-hour meeting that could've been an email.
stockholder
June 30, 2026 at 07:11 am
MLFs risk-averse style has lead to steady regular-season wins.
(Running vs passing)
And I only needed to blame Gute.
For needing more aggressive offensive players.
To match those teams gambling more, for the super-Bowl.
The complaints to open it up for Love.
Has you wanting MLF change from
His philosophy. His game-plans.
And if you compare the teams that Reid and Belichicks had.
They had great players that could make the plays.
That left it a no brain solution.
Coldworld
June 30, 2026 at 07:49 am
“ The complaints to open it up for Love.
Has you wanting MLF change from
His philosophy. His game-plans.”
Yes! That would be a great step forward from what we have been offensively since at least 2022. This offense has not been innovative, creative or intimidating for opponents. It needs to be.
stockholder
June 30, 2026 at 01:19 pm
MLF had to protect love.
We saw the nightmare plays.
I'm sure he'll pass more,
when the injuries stop.
And the team is a 100%.
jannesbjornson
June 30, 2026 at 01:43 pm
The guy tried to convert a 4th and One from inside his own territory, during a First Quarter. What Philosophy is demonstrated, Capitulation ?
stockholder
June 30, 2026 at 02:12 pm
I'm sure it was a positive move,
for his QB and offense.
No fear.
Coldworld
June 30, 2026 at 07:43 am
How much of the uptick is a combination of ST doubts (less justified last season in terms of punt coverage, but legitimate going into that season) and an O that couldn’t sustain drives on 3 downs? If you can’t move the chains in 3 often enough then 4th down aggression becomes a lot more tempting. There is also the question of faith in your kicker to consider.
How much of the uptick in 4th down conversion attempts by LaFleur is driven by internal pressures and how much by league wide statistical conclusions is unclear to me at this point.
Since'61
June 30, 2026 at 09:05 am
Analytics are a tool and one of several factors which teams should use when considering whether to try for the first down or not. Unless it's late in the game and the team is behind I don't like going on 4th down within your own territory. Failure is like a turnover which gives the opponent a short field and today's offense are usually too good to prevent a TD in that situation. If not a TD then a free FG with today's kickers consistently making 50+ yard FGs.
It also matters if you're playing at home or on the road. Why let the opponent's home crowd into the game if they haven't been prior to that point in the game.
I often feel that MLF is heavily influenced by analytics in all of his play calling, not just 4th downs, when I watch the Packers offense. I think other teams have figured this out and that is why MLFs offense has become predictable. He needs to put the game into Love's hands and open up the passing game. The Packers OL has even better at pass blocking than run blocking. 2025 was a clear sign of that. If the Packers receiving corps including Kraft is healthy for week one it will be time to let Love and the receivers lead the offense. Jacobs will get his touches especially if the Packers are playing with a lead. Thanks, Since '61
Coldworld
June 30, 2026 at 09:27 am
The going for it in your own territory on 4th down is an interesting example. It’s not merely how often does it convert and for what, but also what is the cost if it fails. On a simplistic level, it highlights that what may be the predicted outcome X times in 100 is only the first step in the necessary considerations.
To use a simple illustration, If it leads to a conversion 80% of the time what does it lead to over the remaining 20%? If the answer is that we score one in 5 times but it causes us to surrender more points on 2 of the remaining occasions then it’s a bad idea unless this is a one off chance before time expires. Analytics are just a lens, how narrowly or broadly one looks at them determine how reality appears, but not necessarily whether that perception is real or situationally accurate.
I think Dan Campbell is a good example of seeing only part of the equation too often (for which I am grateful). To be fair, mentally processing a broad context them in a real time and time limited situation is not easy, which is another reason why they can be a trap.
Sometimes a little knowledge is dangerous. "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.” William Bruce Cameron. I would add that, even if it can be counted, you’d better be counting all of the variables And only them. As Dobber points out, there are a lot of those inherent in a football play.
Bitternotsour
June 30, 2026 at 10:17 am
A failed field goal is a turnover. A punt is a turnover. Ultimately it's just a matter of where that turnover is on the field. Keeping the ball is the better strategy. < 2.5 yards to go, you keep the ball. Fire the punter.
Coldworld
June 30, 2026 at 10:27 am
And what is the predicted outcome of a turnover in that context, or a first down? You give a nice illustration of how narrowing the lens of analytics can be. The obvious is only the first step in the calculus and probably not the most important.
LambeauPlain
June 30, 2026 at 09:07 am
Could be more "who is that guy" this year when observing LaFleur's 4th down decisions...if he evaluates Love's analytics AND is focused like a laser on the OL development.
Cory must have missed an article from a few weeks ago that used analytics to show how Love is among the NFL's best under pressure...O coverage (blitz attacks) and cover 1 (mostly man). Jordan is also among the elites on late downs...especially 4th downs.
Imagine what can happen if the OL is a dominant, top NFL unit.
dobber
June 30, 2026 at 09:08 am
According to the raw numbers at ESPN.com, the Packers attempted 25 offensive plays on 4th down in 2025. That's tied for 20th and is only about 1.5 4th down attempts per game. Virtually all the teams in the top 10 in 4th down attempts were not playoff teams. The majority (8 of 12) of the teams in the bottom third of 4th down attempts (including the Packers) were playoff teams. The Seahawks had only 12 plays on 4th down in '25.
Cory-bot states that teams averaged over 30 offensive plays on 4th down in 2025. I can look at the numbers on the stats page at ESPN.com and without even pulling out a calculator say that Cory-bot's number is too high by about 3-4 plays, which isn't a lot. I can look at other sources and get very different numbers: ESPN says the Packers had a 56% conversion rate. Teamrankings.com says 60%.
espn.com/nfl/stats/team/_/stat/downs/table/miscellaneous/sort/fourthDownAttempts/dir/desc
One needs to be careful to separate out "tactical" 4th downs (e.g. 4th and 1 at midfield with 8:00 to go in the second quarter in a 3-0 game) from "4th downs of necessity" (playing from behind, late in games). I'm not really sure what the populations of each are out of the totals we're looking at or where you start making that discernment. At one point Cory-bot says "recommended 4th down situations" but we really don't have a good clue how the Packers or other teams calculate those or account for field position in what's a 'recommended 4th down'.
Coldworld
June 30, 2026 at 09:46 am
A good offense, particularly backed by a good kicker, shouldn’t need to be aggressive on 4th downs very often. That’s, when regular, the kind of aggression that results from a bad offense or one that is overly cautious on the first 3 and can’t sustain drives without heightened risk. Unless that is the D is completely impotent.
At times last year we had kicker doubts and a D that couldn’t get off the field, but we also were cautious on early downs and seemed to shift towards holding leads not extending them. Ultimately that is an approach that’s built for an offense with a stellar D. Like so many things under this regime we eat our own tail strategically, let alone tactically, far too often.
Bitternotsour
June 30, 2026 at 10:21 am
Conversely, you can't score if you don't have the ball. In LaFleur's case you can't score if you don't have balls. Time to have the eyebrows groomed.
Savage57
June 30, 2026 at 09:16 am
I'm OK with being situationally and prudently aggressive on 4th down.
What I'm not OK with is repeatedly running into the heart of the defense hoping somehow they're not going to expect that on 4th and short.
BuckyBadger
June 30, 2026 at 09:16 am
I don't think most coaches are aggressive enough. The rate of successful drives is way up than it was just 10 years ago. Every year the NFL makes it easier on the offense and harder on the defense. Punting at midfield is almost as bad as an INT. Even if you fail on 4th down at midfield you chances of stopping the other team only go down a few percentage points than if you punt them down to the 10. To many still think like it is the 80s where defenses can put a hurting on the offense and you Pass INTs and roughing calls weren't called when you looked at the offensive player wrong. How many drives a game get extended on a questionable roughing call or what used to be a good hit?
Many don't understand the math behind analytics and just brush it off as nonsense but coaches better understand the situation. I do agree that the situation of the game should come into play as well but most analytics do take into account weather and past performance of the QB. It isn't just the league averages this so you should do this, it is far more involved than that.
Leatherhead
June 30, 2026 at 09:41 am
Here's the thing: If you go for it on 4th down, and make it, it's a first down. If you don't make it, it's a turnover. It's like a gamble where if you win, you get a quarter, and if you lose, you lose a dollar.
There was a popular article about 20 years ago about how the Math favors "never punting". Essentially, the point of view was that the only thing more important than possession was a TD. Not a FG attempt. And when you punt it away, you've given away possession, and so that it is better to try to extend your possession.
They backed it up with data about how this would inevitably lead to fewer possessions by your opponent,thus, lower scores. All true, but I think turning the ball over to your opponent inside your own 30 is a bad choice. Once you're at midfield, that's a little different.
I do think it's stupid to give your opponent an opportunity for a long punt return. If you recall that thing that happened in Chicago last year, we gave up some long returns on punts when we could have simply punted the ball out of bounds.
Cheezehead72
June 30, 2026 at 09:59 am
Yes long punt returns are aggravating but punting out of bounds is an art that most punters today do not master. Analytics will tell you that you are better off punting the ball high and let your team run under the punt than kicking it out of bounds.
The problem is you have to be able to defend the punt. The punt coverage team must do their job.
Leatherhead
June 30, 2026 at 11:21 am
I would dispute those analytics. Aiming towards the sidelines is not difficult. You do sacrifice some distance, (a little geometry will tell you how much) but you avoid long returns, injuries, and penalties.
Back in the day, 20 years or so ago, teams returned a lot more punts than they do today. I mean, a lot. Almost twice as many. Why the decline?
As far as the coverage team doing their job, it should be patently obvious to any fan of football that strange stuff happens all the time. We don't recover onside kicks. Fake punts. Fumbles. Blocked kicks. Stupid penalties. You've got a bunch of 22 year olds, overamped on adrenaline, in front of 70000 screaming people. Shit happens.
I think that good coaching means avoiding high risk situations when you can. It doesn't mean deliberately and intentionally putting a 22 year old UDFA in a position where they can cost you the game.
Bitternotsour
June 30, 2026 at 10:23 am
A punt is a turnover. You're just volunteering the ball rather than having it taken from you. It's a totally polluted mindset.
Leatherhead
June 30, 2026 at 11:23 am
A punt is a turnover, but you're trading it for 40 yards of field position. And you're doing it voluntarily, unlike an interception or fumble or taking the chance on 4th down.
TarynsEyes
June 30, 2026 at 10:16 am
The analytics say you should go for it on 4th, fine, but the most important fact about that is something nobody seems to mention. The fact that all teams simply do not perform equally. Take the tush-push. Can the Packers do it as well with success as Philly does? No. That is part of the success rate the analytics figures in, but does it apply to all? No. The thinking that the success rates computed apply to each as a useful baseline is moronic, and each HC should know what their team's actual capabilities are in that decision. MLF's play-calling is suspect without the use of misleading analytics. Let's get the easier part down pat first, then move into the land of statistical misleading info.
BuckyBadger
June 30, 2026 at 10:57 am
"That is part of the success rate the analytics figures in, but does it apply to all? No. "
I disagree here. Teams are putting in their success rate vs the leagues. If you have Geno Smtih at QB you are not thinking you can do the same thing as Mahomes or Allen. Allen is great in short yardage and his coach will factor that it in vs if you have Aaron Rodgers. The analytic staff on each team is crunching their own numbers, they aren't hired to just crunch league averages.
Cheezehead72
June 30, 2026 at 10:31 am
If you get a first down in three downs or less you do not have to make the decision.
Leatherhead
June 30, 2026 at 12:46 pm
That's kind of my thinking, too. If your offense is getting guys blocked, and you aren't turning it over, then you should be able to get 10 yards in 3 plays. But if a penalty, or missed assignment, has stopped you for 3 plays in a row, why do you think that 4th play is going to be different?
Simple rules for me: Don't go for it on your side of the field unless there is no choice. Once you cross the 50, if you're playing against a poor offense, then just punt them down to the 10 and let your defense earn some money.
If you're playing a good offensive team, I'm not sure how much difference it makes where you give them the ball, the 10 or the 45, but if you can convert a 4th down and keep them off the field for another few minutes, that probably ends up reducing their number of possessions.