Probably a better off season thread, but since it is a part of the critique of the Conner game, I will throw this in based upon an SI article from a a few years back. This might have been on BGP before, but I love the out of the box thinking. The article is from a 2009 sports illustrated article about the Pulaski Academy Bruins.

 

Pulaski hasn't punted since 2007 (when it did so as a gesture of sportsmanship in a lopsided game), and here's why: "The average punt in high school nets you 30 yards, but we convert around half our fourth downs, so it doesn't make sense to give up the ball," Kelley says. "Besides, if your offense knows it has four downs instead of three, it totally changes the game. I don't believe in punting and really can't ever see doing it again."

 

He means ever. Consider the most extreme scenario, say, fourth-and-long near your own end zone. According to Kelley's data (much of which came from a documentary he saw), 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. "So [forsaking] a punt, you give your offense a chance to stay on the field. And if you miss, the odds of the other team scoring only increase 15 percent. It's like someone said, '[Punting] is what you do on fourth down,' and everyone did it without asking why."

 

The onside kicks? According to Kelley's figures, after a kickoff the receiving team, on average, takes over at its own 33-yard line. After a failed onside kick the team assumes possession at its 48. Through the years Pulaski has recovered about a quarter of its onside kicks. "So you're giving up 15 yards for a one-in-four chance to get the ball back," says Kelley. "I'll take that every time!" Why not attempt to return punts? "Especially in high school, where the punts don't go so far," he says, "it's not worth the risk of fumbling or a penalty."

 

The team has had success winning the 2008 Arkansas 5A title and the article says that even in that game the coach stuck to his guns.

 

“In the waning minutes of the 2008 title game, as the Bruins nursed a 35--32 lead, they still went for it four times -- each successfully -- on their final drive before running out the clock.”

 

 

A coach's case for kicking conventional wisdom to the curb - Jon Wertheim - SI.com

I can definitely see his point on why it's pointless. However, each game and team is different. You have to judge the defense you have each year and against each opponent before making the decision. I do think it's entirely possible that some games you say ok we aren't going to punt and some games we are.

Chip Kelly at Oregon uses similar statistics and has been extremely successful. If Oregon wins the BCS title this year, Kelly will putting his decision making, backed by statistical probability, to the test in the NFL.

 

Even in our games, the average starting field position for an opponent is between the 35 and 45 yard line. So if you onside kick and don't recover, what are you really risking? About 5 -10 yards of field position, that's all. Of coarse, if do recover, that is a pretty significant reward.

I can definitely see his point on why it's pointless. However, each game and team is different. You have to judge the defense you have each year and against each opponent before making the decision. I do think it's entirely possible that some games you say ok we aren't going to punt and some games we are.

I agree 100% that it depends more on your team than anything else. If you have a team that has no offense or struggles big time in putting any points on the board then you have to punt. If you have a team with a great defense but not so great offense, then you have to punt.

 

Let's use a couple NKY teams this year for instance. If Ryle refused to punt then they would of been blown out even more games because their offense couldn't move the ball at all. Holy Cross this year, if they never punted there would of been running clocks in even more of their games this year.

 

You have to have a decent defense and decent offense before you even think about never punting.

I feel you punt when your playing the field position game. Monroe punted to the Paducah Tilmons 2 yd line last Friday which changed the game and gave Monroe the go ahead winning TD after a fumble on the one. So I feel its important to do so when you can pin them deep!!!

Monte Merrick of Bell Co 15-0 4-a state champ team. Kicked a fifty-two yard punt against Bullitt East to eight yd line. Bell defense scored a safety two plays later. Margin if victory in title game. 2 pts !!!

Monte Merrick of Bell Co 15-0 4-a state champ team. Kicked a fifty-two yard punt against Bullitt East to eight yd line. Bell defense scored a safety two plays later. Margin if victory in title game. 2 pts !!!

 

He's not saying it never works when you punt and kickoff, he's just saying odds are just as good it will work out for you if you don't do it.

If Ryle refused to punt then they would of been blown out even more games because their offense couldn't move the ball at all. Holy Cross this year, if they never punted there would of been running clocks in even more of their games this year.

 

So the downside is that Ryle would have blown out more and Holy Cross would have been inolved in more running clocks??? We know how the season played out going by conventional wisdom. However, if you think outside of the box, maybe.... having 4 downs instead of 3 to make a first would have changed things.

To some there is a difference between losing by 20 and losing by 40 but either way its a lose. So for example with Ryle being blown out by more shouldn't be a factor. When you know you are going for it every time on 4th it changes how you call plays. It also changes how a defense plays at time.

So the downside is that Ryle would have blown out more and Holy Cross would have been inolved in more running clocks??? We know how the season played out going by conventional wisdom. However, if you think outside of the box, maybe.... having 4 downs instead of 3 to make a first would have changed things.

 

With all due respect, 5 or 6 downs would not have helped either team this year.