OT: San Diego State coach doesn’t want to punt in 2012

[DSquiz]

Per Yahoo:

At New Mexico, he developed the innovative 3-3-5 defensive scheme and now he's debating on whether to do away with punting on fourth down — if the Aztecs are beyond the 50-yard line — for the 2012 season.
"It makes sense," Long told the San Diego Union-Tribune.
"Additional plays would allow you to score a lot more points," he said. "It also puts a whole lot of pressure on the defense."

I have been doing this in Madden for a while now but we'll see if this works in the real world. Also with the upgrade to Big East play will he still move forward with this strategy.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Hey, I hope that Cole Wagner never has to see the field this year.......but.......if he does this he's gonna find out that real life is much, much, much different than video games. This is just dumb, and for a head coach at a D1 school to even suggest this strategy is embarassing.

 

[uconndennis]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/scorecasting/09/15/kelley.pulaski/index.html

i saw this guy on HBO Real Sports, I think ...

granted, its high school....but its working for them

 

[freescooter]

There was a study of the NFL a few years ago by some mathematicians who concluded that punting was generally a bad call, especially on 4th and less than 4. I got into much more complex analysis, but the basic argument went something to the extent that the average NFL play gains 3.7 yards, so if you have 4th and less than 4, you'll keep the ball most times and the more you keep the ball, the more points you score. It was a fairly complicated analysis but the end result was that teams would be signifcantly better off going for it on 4th down, especially less than 4 and in the opponents territory. Now whether reality meets the theory is an interesting question. Maybe we'll find out.

 

[pj]

I agree with this in many leagues. Any time the offenses have an advantage over the defenses, the 30 yards you give up by not punting is less costly than the change of possession. So if you can make the first down over 50% of the time, it's a good strategy.

On the other hand, if the defenses dominate like in many SEC games, punting is the way to go.

 

[whaler11]

He only said beyond the 50. Teams are way too conservative in that spot.

 

[CTGoonie]

There was a study of the NFL a few years ago by some mathematicians who concluded that punting was generally a bad call, especially on 4th and less than 4. I got into much more complex analysis, but the basic argument went something to the extent that the average NFL play gains 3.7 yards, so if you have 4th and less than 4, you'll keep the ball most times and the more you keep the ball, the more points you score. It was a fairly complicated analysis but the end result was that teams would be signifcantly better off going for it on 4th down, especially less than 4 and in the opponents territory. Now whether reality meets the theory is an interesting question. Maybe we'll find out.

The average NFL play may be 3.7 yards but you can't say the average on 4th down is 3.7 yards. Defenses stack the box knowing what the offense needs. I don't think a coach should make any general calls like what this coach is saying. Each 4th down decision needs to take so many more factors in to play like wind direction, score of the game, time left, recent history, flow of the game etc.

 

[Carl Spackler]

He only said beyond the 50. Teams are way too conservative in that spot.

I agree. I remember reading about this a while back, the statistics say that you should basically never punt when you're b/w the 50-35 on the opponent's side of the field.

There are plenty of ways to skew statistics though. A punter that can place a kick into the corner of the field inside the 20 yard line from either hash mark, when your in that no mans land....and a kicking unit that can cover that kick and pin dowin into that corner? Very valueable.

Momentum, in football, is very important. Very hard to quantify but very, very important. The whole concept of not punting, is based on not giving up offensive momentum at any cost.

I, on the other hand, think that special teams, is 1/3 of the game, and that momentum swings, are easiest and powerful to generate, in the kicking game, and at the level we want to be at, having as many methods of swinging momentum in your favor, as possible is a good thing.

 

[freescooter]

there are a number of different analyses of this question and they all come to the same general conclusion. Namely that coaches play it way too conservatively on 4th down. One guy analyzed every play from 2 seasons and concluded that basically from the 50 yard line in, teams have a better than even (56%) chance of gaining the necessary yardage. the percentages increase significantly the shorter the gain needed. On 4th and 1 it is something like 86%. One study concludes that the primary reason coaches punt on 4th down is because they have basically been trained to punt on 4th down. No rational analysis leads to that conclusion. It is more of a "company policy" as opposed to a move that can be defended by any rational analysis. If you violate the "standard policy" and you're wrong, as you sometimes will be, somewhere between 14 and 46% of the time,and therefore lose the backlash will be much more severe than if you played by the accepted rules and lost.

 

[BlueMAB]

It may not have been intentional but the title of the thread is misleading.

It should say "SDSU coach doesn't want to punt once their offense crosses the 50."

A calculated risk, but one that makes a lot of sense.

 

[ZooCougar]

There were a few years under Edsall where we might have been better off not punting.

 

[Sean]

Essentially, he's saying that he'll stop making stupid decisions.

If its 4th and 30 on the 50 because of 3 holding penalties, he won't go for it - he'll veto this decree. If its 4th and 8 on the 48...he SHOULD go for it and will.

Kind of like the NFL coach who went for it on 4th and 1 on his own 30, and got lectured about it - even though it was mathematically, clearly the right thing to do. Everything in life has odds, even taking the safe route has odds. The overall deficiency of math aptitude in America, though, is definitely felt on the football coaching field.

 

[freescooter]

the other point that gets ignored is the runback. Particularly when you're over the 50, if there is any kind of pretty good runback, the net gain to the kicking team is pretty small, particularly when combined with the probablility that you would have made a first down had you gone for it.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Does the new rule regarding touchbacks coming out to the 25 yard line apply to punts as well?

 

[Waquoit]

There was a study of the NFL a few years ago by some mathematicians who concluded that punting was generally a bad call.

Here's the LINK to that study.

But that's why there's a "book". If you go by the book, blame will never stick. Just say, hey, I went by the book. Do that for long enough and you end up with your dream job.

 

[Carl Spackler]

It's all interesting stuff, but if you really believe that the game is 1/3 offense, 1/3 defense, 1/3 kicking teams - the argument doesn't make any sense.

Because you're essentially removing a significant portion of the game, and therefore removing a choice of course of action regarding ball possession, field position during the game on the field of play - which all equates to reducing your ability to influence momentum.

What it all does show, clearly, is that the decision making process on what to do on fourth downs, based on down and distance and field position, and how your own team is doing and matched up with an opponent - isn't a black and white call, so coaches should probably do a decent job of coming up with some kind of decision making flow chart based on it all.

 

[ZooCougar]

Economists can't even make sound economic predictions. The make weathermen look reliable. I wouldn't trust them to help me make football decisions either.

 

[Waquoit]

It's all interesting stuff, but if you really believe that the game is 1/3 offense, 1/3 defense, 1/3 kicking teams - the argument doesn't make any sense.

Kicking teams aren't 1/3 of the game. Not even close.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Kicking teams aren't 1/3 of the game. Not even close.

Right on, if anything kicking teams are a lot more than 1/3. Most games are either won or lost on the kicks. But this talk is all statistics and theory, so for that purpose - in my view - the kicking game is 1/3 π r squared.

 

[sdhusky]

Right on, if anything kicking teams are a lot more than 1/3. Most games are either won or lost on the kicks. But this talk is all statistics and theory, so for that purpose - in my view - the kicking game is 1/3 π r squared.

That's why kickers get the big money in the nfl and punters are household names.

Only hard-core fans know people like Manning, Brady, Namath, Montana etc.

 

[whaler11]

That's why kickers get the big money in the nfl and punters are household names.

Only hard-core fans know people like Manning, Brady, Namath, Montana etc.

Kicking games are more than kickers and punters, but you know that and are just being douchy.