What money ball is to baseball this could be it for football

[dungeonjoe]

The coach who doesn't punt.

take a look at this

http://youtu.be/f39cC92wZIU

[Darlinikki150]

Interesting, however I couldn't imagine a college or NFL team doing this.

[WeAreNorthDakota]

I can't see a college or NFL coach adopting this strategy in full but the numbers start to become overwhelming when you look at things like punting on 4th and 1 or 2 when you're already inside opposing territory. I could absolutely see a coach at a high level abandoning the punt once you cross the 50 or always going for 4th and 3 or less.

[McNeese75]

Hal Mummy????

[lionsrking2]

The punt has been a part of the game since it's inception ... it's used as a strategy for a reason ... it's not going anywhere anytime soon. We'll continue seeing more pooch punts by the QB near midfield, and perhaps more and more coaches rolling the dice on 4th and short, but the punt will always be with us.

[HailSzczur]

There's a reason no one does this in college or the pros. There's a reason no one deviates from the "norm" too much.

In high school players are less experienced. The situational awareness isn't there. They haven't practiced recovering onside kicks nearly as many times as an NFL player. They're forced into situations they're not used to and Pulaski exploits that. Kudos to them to figuring out some of the major weaknesses of the average High School team. A well disciplined team should not have too much trouble with that though. Can you imagine trying to capitalize off onsides kicks every single time? Sure it worked in a pinch for Sean Payton in the Super bowl, but that was a surprise. Are you telling me a SEC team or an NFL team is not going to have a good enough hands team to make this ineffective? Or that their defense won't post better than a 50% 4th down stoppage rate?

Interesting? Yes. Feasible on the big stage? No

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Dick Biddle has been doing this for at least a couple of years. Sorta.

[UNH Fanboi]

The math changes depending on the players and teams involved. College and pro teams have much better punters and kickers than HS teams. Going for it on 4th and 10 from your own 5 would not be some revolutionary strategy at higher levels--it would be idiotic.

That being said, I think coaches at higher levels are incentivized to play overly conservative in order to protect their jobs. Most pro coaches will choose a "safe" strategy that gives them a 45% chance of winning over a "risky" strategy that gives them a 50% chance of winning because you're more likely to get criticized if the risky strategy doesn't work.

Belichick's infamous 4th and 2 call against the Colts in 2009 is the perfect example. He got skewered for making the statistically risky call and losing. No one would have said anything if they had punted and the Colts won anyway.

[HailSzczur]

The math changes depending on the players and teams involved. College and pro teams have much better punters and kickers than HS teams. Going for it on 4th and 10 from your own 5 would not be some revolutionary strategy at higher levels--it would be idiotic.

That being said, I think coaches at higher levels are incentivized to play overly conservative in order to protect their jobs. Most pro coaches will choose a "safe" strategy that gives them a 45% chance of winning over a "risky" strategy that gives them a 50% chance of winning because you're more likely to get criticized if the risky strategy doesn't work.

Belichick's infamous 4th and 2 call against the Colts in 2009 is the perfect example. He got skewered for making the statistically risky call and losing. No one would have said anything if they had punted and the Colts won anyway.

How many times did the Falcons get criticized for failing on 4th and short last year? Cost them a game or two.

I'm all for ballsy calls once you hit your own 40 or so. We love running fake punts at about that spot of the field. Then once you hit your own 40 you get to that no mans land of coffin corner punt/touch back punt/really long FG/go for it. I can see his strategy being useful there. But its also about it evening out over the entire game. How many 4th and 3+ are you going to get at your opponents 40 a game? Maybe 3 or 4?

[PaladinFan]

I think a lot of that depends. When I played high school football our kicker could drill it through the end zone every kickoff without question. So, you'd be pretty foolish, IMO, to give up 30 or so yards of ground every kickoff by going for an onsides when you were, with probably 95% certainty, going to give the opponent the ball on the 20 (without anyone getting injured either).

[TigerFen]

Towson has a higher than average of going for it on fourth down. Towson was 4 for 4 this week while only going 6 for 15 on third down. I think all of the fourth downs were on the opponent's 50. They also faked a field goal because they don't trust they're kicking game that much. This is happening on at least one FCS team of not punting much.

[walliver]

The strategy can be very effective if your opponent doesn't have a good kicker and you have a very good or very bad defense. A good D will get you the ball back and a bad D will let the other team score regardless of field position. This could work similar to Grinnell College's basketball strategy.

[WeAreNorthDakota]

The biggest impact I see in this type of strategy is going for it on 4th and short as opposed to punting. 3rd down conversion percentage is a big predictor of success in a football game and going for it on 4th down is essentially just bettering your 3rd down odds. I'll use an average NFL team as an example and compare it to the best team in the NFL.

The Bears are 16th in the NFL this year in 3rd down % at 37.8%. They have converted 48 out of 127.

If you assume the 4th down conversion rate would be similar to the 3rd down rate (I'll use 33.3% for this example) and apply it to those drives where they didn't convert on 4th down you're looking at another 26 conversions (33% of 79). Add those 26 extra conversions to the original number and you've now converted 74 drives that got to 3rd down out of 127. That's 58% for those scoring at home. The NFL leader, Carolina, is currently converting 3rd downs at a 48% clip.

The Panthers have converted 62 out of 128 3rd down tries so far this season for a rate of 48.4%. If you assume a 43% 4th down conversion rate then you're looking at another 28 conversions and a final 3rd down conversion rate of 70%. 70% is an absolutely unheard of number when it comes to converting 3rd downs.

If you tell any coach that their team is going to convert 70% of their 3rd downs before a game they're gonna be pretty confident that they're going to come out on top.

[Twentysix]

The biggest impact I see in this type of strategy is going for it on 4th and short as opposed to punting. 3rd down conversion percentage is a big predictor of success in a football game and going for it on 4th down is essentially just bettering your 3rd down odds. I'll use an average NFL team as an example and compare it to the best team in the NFL.

The Bears are 16th in the NFL this year in 3rd down % at 37.8%. They have converted 48 out of 127.

If you assume the 4th down conversion rate would be similar to the 3rd down rate (I'll use 33.3% for this example) and apply it to those drives where they didn't convert on 4th down you're looking at another 26 conversions (33% of 79). Add those 26 extra conversions to the original number and you've now converted 74 drives that got to 3rd down out of 127. That's 58% for those scoring at home. The NFL leader, Carolina, is currently converting 3rd downs at a 48% clip.

The Panthers have converted 62 out of 128 3rd down tries so far this season for a rate of 48.4%. If you assume a 43% 4th down conversion rate then you're looking at another 28 conversions and a final 3rd down conversion rate of 70%. 70% is an absolutely unheard of number when it comes to converting 3rd downs.

If you tell any coach that their team is going to convert 70% of their 3rd downs before a game they're gonna be pretty confident that they're going to come out on top.

If you only tell the coach they are converting 70% of 3rd downs they are going to assume they are still punting lol.

[WeAreNorthDakota]

If you only tell the coach they are converting 70% of 3rd downs they are going to assume they are still punting lol.

All you have to do is word it differently. Tell a coach he has two options. 1st option: Every time your offense is faced with 3rd down you can extend the drive 37% of the time. 2nd option: Every time your offense is faced with 3rd down you can extend the drive 60% of the time.

Every single coach is choosing option 2 and all you have to do is stop giving the ball to your opponent on purpose. Punting is the worst possible option for an offense so why do it if you're not forced to?

[WeAreNorthDakota]

Look at it another way. You're an offense who loves to run the ball and only passes when necessary. You start your drive with runs of 3, 2, and 3 yards. Crap, it's 4th and 2. Time to punt. WHY??? You just converted that theoretical 4th and 2 on 3 straight plays but now instead of going for a 4th you're going to give the other team the ball without making them work for it?

[Go Green]

Pete Carroll at USC almost always went for it on 4th and two (or less) no matter where he was on the field.

Most of the time, it worked. Unfortunatley, the Rose Bowl against Texas was one of the few times it didn't.

Of course, he had a considerable talent advantage over opponents in those days.

[walliver]

All you have to do is word it differently. Tell a coach he has two options. 1st option: Every time your offense is faced with 3rd down you can extend the drive 37% of the time. 2nd option: Every time your offense is faced with 3rd down you can extend the drive 60% of the time.

Every single coach is choosing option 2 and all you have to do is stop giving the ball to your opponent on purpose. Punting is the worst possible option for an offense so why do it if you're not forced to?

There was a time when punting on third down was not unheard of. Prior to the spread offenses and the rules changes that promoted this type of play, a quick kick on third down could be a potent offensive weapon. I don't think I've seen this done in 20-30 years, however.

[HailSzczur]

There was a time when punting on third down was not unheard of. Prior to the spread offenses and the rules changes that promoted this type of play, a quick kick on third down could be a potent offensive weapon. I don't think I've seen this done in 20-30 years, however.

Only time I can remember seeing it done was by Tom Brady in the Divisional playoffs in '11. With 3:00 left in the game they punted back to the Broncos and pinned them at their 5 as there was no one back to receive. It was 3rd and 12 from the NE 42.

In 3rd in long situations, especially late in games around midfield it might seem like a decent plan actually. Especially against teams with a returnman like a Hester or a Cribbs. In a 4+ margin game you might be better off pinning them tight than letting them return it or start at the 20.