A Team That Never Punts

[Taosman]

As a contradiction to Tressel Ball, I present an interesting theory on going for it(at the high school level) on 4th down.

On the first possession Pulaski marched steadily downfield until it faced fourth-and-four at the Mustangs' 14-yard line. The Bruins went for it and converted. A few plays later, thanks to a penalty, they faced fourth-and-goal from the 23. Again they went for it, this time unsuccessfully. By the end of the first quarter, Pulaski hadn't punted or attempted a field goal on any of its four fourth downs—unsurprising when you consider that its roster lists neither a punter nor a kicker.
A coach's case for kicking conventional wisdom to the curb - 09.21.09 - SI Vault

[Jake]

Ive' heard about this and read the statistics. Let's see a major college or pro coach employ that philosophy - get stopped once in their own end and give up a TD - lose the game, and watch happens.

Logic and stats won't matter. Emotional reactions to a key failed attempt would cost someone their job.

[jwinslow]

These statistic systems have recommended going for it on 4th and 1 or 2 inside your own 25 to ice the game. And not in high school, in the nfl.

[Kenshin]

It makes a lot of good points, especially at HS level about fumbles and fouls on returns.
I could see it being used more moderately at college level by BE, ACC, or a school that isn't a powerhouse in their conference and willing to shake things up a little.
For example -- if you're on your own 20, just punt it. I could also see situations where the Kicker used almost exclusively on 4th and long from 40+ yards out.

It'd be interesting and entertaining if nothing else.

[BigWoof31]

Does anyone read "Tuesday Morning Quarterback" on ESPN page 2?

He seems to advocate going for it on 4th down anywhere between the 40's and anytime a coach does it - and that teams wins - he makes sure you know about it on Tuesday.

The same people who advocate this type of play don't really see the punter as a weapon. I'm proud of UGA's good punting history and I know the Buckeyes have had some good ones too!

A great punter is a valuable thing to have.

[lvbuckeye]

interesting article.

[BUCKYLE]

Save the stats for baseball.

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Originally Posted by BUCKYLE

Save the stats for baseball.

They still play baseball?

[MililaniBuckeye]

The guy who owns and runs the triathlon training clinic with which I do all my training is from Brazil (born and raised) and knows just enough about "American football" to be dangerous. We were shooting the [censored] before a swim class a few weeks back (he knows I'm a huge Buckeye fan...in fact, everyone in the clinic, especially the three Michigan grads in it, all know) and we started talking about the games coming up on that weekend. He made a comment that he'd never punt on fourth down, ever, regardless of field position or score. I tried to explain to him the reasons why you don't risk giving the ball back to your opponent in far worse field position than you'd have if you'd punted, but his thought process was that he'd just score on the next possession to even it out. He was dead serious. Of course, his approach to swimming against a current is to simply swim harder (no [censored]).

[BayBuck]

When the coach presents his reasoning based on stats like "when a team punts from that deep, the opponents will take possession inside the 40-yard line and will then score a touchdown 77% of the time. If they recover on downs inside the 10, they'll score a touchdown 92% of the time", I wonder how those stats would change if both teams were playing his no-punt strategy. The stats he uses to justify his gimmicky system are based on traditional football protocols, and frankly I don't believe they'd hold up if you're simply willing to give up X% of turnovers-on-downs regardless of field position, at least not past the HS level.

[jwinslow]

Originally Posted by BigWoof31

The same people who advocate this type of play don't really see the punter as a weapon. I'm proud of UGA's good punting history and I know the Buckeyes have had some good ones too!

A great punter is a valuable thing to have.

Our coach considers it the most important play in football, and we've had some excellent punters.

Thoma was a huge asset in the USC game, and I'm not sure if OSU beats Miami without Andy Groom.

Originally Posted by Buckeyeskickbuttocks

They still play baseball?

[Gooey Mess]

Originally Posted by BUCKYLE

Save the stats for baseball.

Baseball is the sport where stats matter the most.

[BUCKYLE]

Originally Posted by WappaGoo

Baseball is the sport where stats matter the most.

That was my point.

I also wonder what effect not punting would have on the other team. Eventually, you're going to [censored] them the [censored] off. In football...that could be huge.

[methomps]

Originally Posted by BayBuck

When the coach presents his reasoning based on stats like "when a team punts from that deep, the opponents will take possession inside the 40-yard line and will then score a touchdown 77% of the time. If they recover on downs inside the 10, they'll score a touchdown 92% of the time", I wonder how those stats would change if both teams were playing his no-punt strategy. The stats he uses to justify his gimmicky system are based on traditional football protocols, and frankly I don't believe they'd hold up if you're simply willing to give up X% of turnovers-on-downs regardless of field position, at least not past the HS level.

You also have to ask what value you get for converting a 4th-down deep inside your territory. Does it exceed 92-vs-77 risk? How often does a team score from that deep?

[Steve19]

Originally Posted by Taosman

As a contradiction to Tressel Ball, I present an interesting theory on going for it(at the high school level) on 4th down.

A picture is worth a thousand words.