Ferentz game management staples

Please link these robust statistical studies, I am interested in reading. I would love to see the statistics on going for 4th and 12 from the 40 or 50. I would almost be willing to bet that the opposing team has a higher % to score on their next possession if the team failed to convert, than the team has of scoring itself on that drive.

Here is the one from a Berkeley economics professor that kicked off (no pun intended) statistical studies of this nature.

http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~dromer/papers/JPE_April06.pdf

Since then, various other analyses have been done that support the position that punting on the inside the 50 and kicking FGs near the goal line generally are the wrong strategy.

Note that at some point down, distance, and field position may making punting a proper strategy. (In an extreme example, punting is almost certainly the proper strategy on 4th and goal from the 49.) I'm not sure where that line officially falls. Punting on 4th and 12 from the 44 or whatever the NIU situation was last year may have been optimal. But change that to 4th and 5 from the 35, and it would likely be better to still go for it.
 


That's not how it works. You would have to compare their chance to score if you don't get the 1st with their chance if you punt. Then compare your chance to score if you punt (0%) with your chance to score if you go for it. Then you compare those numbers.

Your chance to score if you punt is always 0%, no matter where you on the field you are. That means little to nothing. Games are won and lost on field position many times. Especially when you have a strong D, and a weak O (like Iowa has had). In that case you have to look at where on avg. you will get the ball back at if you punt VS where you will get the ball back at if you go for it.

For example Iowa punted from the 44 and got the ball back at the 24. They GAINED 20 yards by punting. Now of course this isn't the norm, but I would guess if you took an average of where Iowa gets the ball back at, you would be looking around the 50 yard line.

That said, I get what you are saying, but not all teams are built the same, and Iowa is certainly no Oregon, and would be foolish to play like them.
 


Nothing wrong with punting from the 36-39 if it is fourth and long depending on time and score. giving the ball to the opponent near your 40 if you dont make it is tough.

A punt from there downed around the 10-13 yards line is very good change in field position.

If you have the ball on the 30 yard line go for it, or if it is at the 38 and 4th and short go for it as higher chance of reward.

And also punting has less value the closer you get to the 20 and goal line.

If you punt from the 48 and get a touchback, you still net 28 yards. If you punt from the 31 and get a touchback, you only net 11.

And in addition, you are more likely to kick it into the endzone from the 31. From the 48, Kornbraith could actually take a regular swing at it and probably drop the ball near the 5 or 10 yard line.
 


Also note that Iowa was 104th in net punting last year. The only team we played that was worse was Minnesota at 105.

So say the off./def. were equal, it was generally a poor strategy to exchange punts. We weren't a strong punting team last year, and, although Micah was good when he actually returned a kick, he fair caught or let too many balls bounce and roll.
 




Your chance to score if you punt is always 0%, no matter where you on the field you are. That means little to nothing. Games are won and lost on field position many times. Especially when you have a strong D, and a weak O (like Iowa has had). In that case you have to look at where on avg. you will get the ball back at if you punt VS where you will get the ball back at if you go for it.

For example Iowa punted from the 44 and got the ball back at the 24. They GAINED 20 yards by punting. Now of course this isn't the norm, but I would guess if you took an average of where Iowa gets the ball back at, you would be looking around the 50 yard line.

That said, I get what you are saying, but not all teams are built the same, and Iowa is certainly no Oregon, and would be foolish to play like them.

I shouldn't have put the 0% I guess. I put it in because it was the only obvious one. The other 3 numbers are educated guesses. As far as Oregon goes, the fact that we aren't them doesn't change how you calculate the odds, it just changes the numbers you put into the equation.

For instance Oregon might want to go for a 4th and 10 from the 50 where as we might want to go for a 4th and 5 from the 40.
 


Some people don't understand football. This exactly strategy is what directly led to the win last year in Solider Field. So ok, it was the 44 yard line, but either way, we punted, and pinned NIU at the 1 yard line. We got the 3 and out (after nearly getting the safety). NIU punted, and guess what, we started with the ball at the 24 yard line, and scored the winning TD.

I know people HATE it when we punt inside the 40 or 50 yard line, but there is a very specific reason for it, and that is field position. Does it work all the time? No of course not, but neither does going for it, and giving the other team the ball at the 40 or 50 yard line.

Stop making sense to the unintelligent football people.
 


I shouldn't have put the 0% I guess. I put it in because it was the only obvious one. The other 3 numbers are educated guesses. As far as Oregon goes, the fact that we aren't them doesn't change how you calculate the odds, it just changes the numbers you put into the equation.

For instance Oregon might want to go for a 4th and 10 from the 50 where as we might want to go for a 4th and 5 from the 40.

You do have to look at how good an offensive team you are, and what your YPP are. I mean we ranked like 110th or something on offense. The probability of Iowa making a 4th and 4, VS Oregon making a 4th and 4 are much, much different odds.

Plus you can't deny that NOT making it from the 50 hurts you much more than making it from the 50 helps you. There is no guarantee that you score anything after making it. For example Iowa had the ball 10 times in NIU territory last year. You think we win that game if we go for all of those 4th downs, and give up field position?

It really isn't as cut and dried and some think on the "statistic" of going for it. It just depends on what you want to prove, cause as you said if you punt, you have a 0% chance of scoring.
 


You do have to look at how good an offensive team you are, and what your YPP are. I mean we ranked like 110th or something on offense. The probability of Iowa making a 4th and 4, VS Oregon making a 4th and 4 are much, much different odds.

Plus you can't deny that NOT making it from the 50 hurts you much more than making it from the 50 helps you. There is no guarantee that you score anything after making it. For example Iowa had the ball 10 times in NIU territory last year. You think we win that game if we go for all of those 4th downs, and give up field position?

It really isn't as cut and dried and some think on the "statistic" of going for it. It just depends on what you want to prove, cause as you said if you punt, you have a 0% chance of scoring.

Your 1st paragraph is exactly what I was saying. Since Oregon has a better offense they have different percentages of making it. Therefore it makes sense for them to go for it from further out than it would make sense for us to. Like I said, the equation doesn't change but the numbers you put into it does.
 


by punting, and holding the opposition deep in their own territory, you can move the line of scrimmage quite a bit in your favor over an exchange of punts.........they call this small ball. We have seen it a lot in the Big Ten over the last 40 years.
 


You do have to look at how good an offensive team you are, and what your YPP are. I mean we ranked like 110th or something on offense. The probability of Iowa making a 4th and 4, VS Oregon making a 4th and 4 are much, much different odds.

Plus you can't deny that NOT making it from the 50 hurts you much more than making it from the 50 helps you. There is no guarantee that you score anything after making it. For example Iowa had the ball 10 times in NIU territory last year. You think we win that game if we go for all of those 4th downs, and give up field position?

It really isn't as cut and dried and some think on the "statistic" of going for it. It just depends on what you want to prove, cause as you said if you punt, you have a 0% chance of scoring.


As for your 2nd paragraph goes, let's do an example.

Let's say you go for it from the 50 on 4th and 4 and don't get it. What are their odds to score? Let's say 40% (obviously its different depending on what team you're playing). Now let's say you punt. What are the odds they score after you punt. They are probably at the 20 or inside it. I would say their odds are around 20% that means their odds improve 20% by going for it.

Now let's say you go for it. What are the odds off scoring after you make it. You have 1st and 10 from at least the 46. I would say your odds of scoring are around 50%. If a coach agreed with those numbers in that situation he should go for it.
 


by punting, and holding the opposition deep in their own territory, you can move the line of scrimmage quite a bit in your favor over an exchange of punts.........they call this small ball. We have seen it a lot in the Big Ten over the last 40 years.

Or you may lose field position in the exchange depending on the relative strengths of the special teams or if you punt into the endzone. Seemed like we exchanged roughly 1 million punts with Nebraska last year. Unfortunately Mahler >>> Kornbraith+Weinke.
 


As for your 2nd paragraph goes, let's do an example.

Let's say you go for it from the 50 on 4th and 4 and don't get it. What are their odds to score? Let's say 40% (obviously its different depending on what team you're playing). Now let's say you punt. What are the odds they score after you punt. They are probably at the 20 or inside it. I would say their odds are around 20% that means their odds improve 20% by going for it.

Now let's say you go for it. What are the odds off scoring after you make it. You have 1st and 10 from at least the 46. I would say your odds of scoring are around 50%. If a coach agreed with those numbers in that situation he should go for it.

What you aren't taking into account is what happens when the most likely outcomes occur...IE you punt and they DON'T score. What are you chances of having good field position then and score on the next possession? Same for if you go for it at the 50, and they don't score, but you get the ball back at the 20 yd line. Now what are your chances of scoring.

Since failure to score is actually more common in both example (giving the ball to the opponenet at the 20, or 50), isn't it more important to then look at how that affects your next possession?

There are a ton of ways to look at these things. I will say that I am for going for it when you are at the 40 and have less than 4 yards for a 1st. I'm not a fan of going for 4th and 8, 9, 10 in that case. The odds of making it aren't good, and you give up field position and a chance for the D to make a play that can then create offense.
 


You do have to look at how good an offensive team you are, and what your YPP are. I mean we ranked like 110th or something on offense. The probability of Iowa making a 4th and 4, VS Oregon making a 4th and 4 are much, much different odds.

Plus you can't deny that NOT making it from the 50 hurts you much more than making it from the 50 helps you. There is no guarantee that you score anything after making it. For example Iowa had the ball 10 times in NIU territory last year. You think we win that game if we go for all of those 4th downs, and give up field position?

It really isn't as cut and dried and some think on the "statistic" of going for it. It just depends on what you want to prove, cause as you said if you punt, you have a 0% chance of scoring.

I agree, the better your offense, the better it is to go for it. Also, the worse your defense the better it is to go for it. For example, if you have a defense that's so bad it's likely to give up a TD regardless of field position, it doesn't make sense to punt very often.

Last year we were absolutely terrible on offense and mediocre on defense so it makes sense to punt in more situations.

The problem is if the QB is coached to make the safest throw and avoid all risk he is always going to choose the 3 yard passes because those are safe. We are always going to have a terrible offense if that's the case. JVB was a much better player than he showed last year (not that that's the only reason he played poorly).
 




Here is the one from a Berkeley economics professor that kicked off (no pun intended) statistical studies of this nature.

http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~dromer/papers/JPE_April06.pdf

Since then, various other analyses have been done that support the position that punting on the inside the 50 and kicking FGs near the goal line generally are the wrong strategy.

Note that at some point down, distance, and field position may making punting a proper strategy. (In an extreme example, punting is almost certainly the proper strategy on 4th and goal from the 49.) I'm not sure where that line officially falls. Punting on 4th and 12 from the 44 or whatever the NIU situation was last year may have been optimal. But change that to 4th and 5 from the 35, and it would likely be better to still go for it.

I would agree with this.
 


I was glad it worked, but a running play has a low probability of picking up ten yards unless you have a 25 year old Jim Brown playing against college players. So.............it was a very dumb call. Again, glad it worked.

FreedComanche

There is a reason they called the play. The coaches probably saw something that would make it work. Also, I am sure you have complained often about how PREDICTABLE the Iowa offense is. That call was unpredictable and, of course, you want to complain about it.
 


There is a reason they called the play. The coaches probably saw something that would make it work. Also, I am sure you have complained often about how PREDICTABLE the Iowa offense is. That call was unpredictable and, of course, you want to complain about it.

I remember 2 distinct things on that play. 1) I thought it was a BALLSY call. If you don't make it and lose that game, you are gonna get PERSECUTED. 2) I think it showed that GD was obviously thinking they had 2 plays to get 10 yards. This play caught everyone (players, fans, opposing coaches) off guard, and obviously worked to perfection. Is that a good play call, or did the players just execute? IDK, I'm just glad it worked out the way it did.
 


The whole coin toss thing annoys me, those who criticie teams who receive to start the game are thinking its a video game. When you play NCAA online there is a good chance both teams score every possession so you want the ball in the 3rd in case you gave up a score to end the 2nd. In real life, it doesnt really matter.
 


What you aren't taking into account is what happens when the most likely outcomes occur...IE you punt and they DON'T score. What are you chances of having good field position then and score on the next possession? Same for if you go for it at the 50, and they don't score, but you get the ball back at the 20 yd line. Now what are your chances of scoring.

Since failure to score is actually more common in both example (giving the ball to the opponenet at the 20, or 50), isn't it more important to then look at how that affects your next possession?

There are a ton of ways to look at these things. I will say that I am for going for it when you are at the 40 and have less than 4 yards for a 1st. I'm not a fan of going for 4th and 8, 9, 10 in that case. The odds of making it aren't good, and you give up field position and a chance for the D to make a play that can then create offense.


This is very true. Although the percentages would change a smaller amount on future possessions.

Also my post was wrong on the part of my example where you go for it at mid field. I said to figure the percentage of scoring after you get the 1st down but you would have to figure for before you got the 1st instead.
 




Latest posts






Top