IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Not Quite ...In the Bullseye > The Bullhorn

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-20-2015, 02:53 PM
Keith Keith is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,250
Default Team That Never Punts and Always Onsides Kicks

This is moneyball for football. From a recent HBO Real Sports:

https://vid.me/nj4d

The innovative, math-based thinking here is enthralling. MLB doesn't have a monopoly on old school strategy. Changes are due to how NFL strategy will evolve.
__________________
Support ...IntheBullseye.com and follow us on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-20-2015, 05:53 PM
barrett barrett is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,593
Default

The main obstacle is what happens when you lose.

When you lose doing things the accepted way nobody blames you. When you lose doing things a new way you get far less rope. This coach wins a ton so that bridge has not been crossed yet.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-21-2015, 01:08 AM
Keith Keith is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,250
Default

Right, as proposed in the video, the biggest hurdle is the fear of failure. Also unsaid is that this school is private, able to attract top talent, creating a far less balanced level of completion than seen in the NFL, even college. The NFL also has far more reliable kickers and punters than say at the high school level where going for it may be less of a gamble.

Still, with the notion of punting, especially in short yardage situations and where field position is such that touchbacks are more common, is challenged by statistical analysis. In a passing league, how valuable is extra field position? I think it's a compelling discussion worth further investigation in spite of the fear (and consequences) of failure.

"Moneyball"-type ideas in MLB arose somewhat out of necessity given the revenue imbalances between teams. These exist on a far lesser scale in the NFL with all of their revenue sharing.
__________________
Support ...IntheBullseye.com and follow us on Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-21-2015, 01:54 PM
Warren Warren is offline
Regular Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 584
Default

I find the whole Moneyball idea of exploiting inefficiencies based on traditional thinking very interesting. More NFL teams are adding ďanalyticsĒ positions to their football operations staffs. The Jags are supposed to be getting heavily into it, and Kubiak is going to have his director of analytics on the headset during games to advise him of probabilities in key situations. The Patriots have a guy named Ernie Adams who has been with Belichick for years to find him this kind of information.

On the video the coach said something about the difference in field position between the average unrecovered onsides kick and the average kickoff and return only being like 14 yards (at his level, I assume). I donít think that holds up in the NFL.

They didnít mention how going for it almost every time changes play calling. If you know that you have four chances to make a third down instead of three, thatís probably going to change your approach, especially on third downs.

One area that I think NFL coaches need to follow the numbers more is going for a touchdown instead of a field goal on fourth downs at or near the goal line. Even if you donít score, I think the stats support the decision since it puts your opponentís offense in such bad field position.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.