The optimistic view - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: The optimistic view (/thread-8269.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: The optimistic view (/thread-8269.html)
Re: The optimistic view - DC - 11-18-2014
(11-18-2014, 03:51 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=11130.msg105617#msg105617 date=1416350490]Utah was not moving the ball well, and even though they have a solid kicker who probably could have been counted on to make a 50 yard kick, the chances of them moving 40 yards against our defense in a minute and change weren't all that much greater than the chances of them moving 60 yards.
If we kick and miss they get the ball on the 41, so they only need to move ~25 yards to get into their kicker's range, or the same yardage they'd need to get into the end zone in overtime, but with the added advantage of us needing to defend the whole field. It's not clear at all to me that their EPA in that situation is less than the 1-1.5 you'd give to Williamson kicking it.
Anyway, I'm not saying that the decision to punt was obviously right, I'm saying that it wasn't obviously wrong. Like you I'd probably prefer he go for it rather than kick the FG, but I think the expected winning percentages are all pretty close (and obviously unknowable).
[/quote]
Actually, they would get the ball around the 34. 34+7+10=51
Re: The optimistic view - stupac2 - 11-18-2014
(11-18-2014, 09:13 PM)DC link Wrote:Actually, they would get the ball around the 34. 34+7+10=51
Right, I was mixed up on the college/NFL rules. In the NFL you get the ball at the spot of the kick, which would be the 41 here.
Re: The optimistic view - BostonCard - 11-18-2014
(11-18-2014, 06:54 PM)doug link Wrote:I have already made it clear that I think Shaw's decision not to try the FG was wrong, but part of my reasoning wasn't stated. In ~ 50 years of watching football, I don't recall ever seeing a team win a game in which that team punted from inside the opponent's 35-yard line at any point during the game. I am not saying it has never happened, just that I don't recall ever seeing it, to the point that it is axiomatic with me: if you punt from inside the opponent's 35, you will lose. And I said that as Shaw sent on the punt team, same as I said it when he punted twice inside the 35 vs. U$.
Well, had we been leading by one instead of tied, the decision would have been a no brainer to punt it away.
BC
Re: The optimistic view - OutsiderFan - 11-19-2014
For those who question the wisdom of fans, let's remind ourselves of two very important facts:
1. Fans want their team to win
2. It has been statistically proven that possession is more valuable than field position in football games
Fan wisdom shouldn't drive personnel decisions or play calling, but fans are generally much more often right than wrong when it comes to issues related to ball possession and scoring points. It may be that their wisdom comes from an emotional place, but that doesn't mean it is wrong. I don't think too many fans would want their team going for it on 4th down and 10, up 1 point from their own 20 yd line with 30 seconds to play and the other team having no timeouts. But if it was 4th and a chain link and the other team had 3 timeouts, going for it would make a lot more sense, because you win the game by gaining an inch or two and you are then giving the other team multiple chances to win by giving the ball up. Most coaches would punt in both situations, when the decision to punt is only sound in the first scenario.