Why Do Teams Ever Punt?

[CATonFIRE76]

You have to think outside the the box. Just like Red Beaulieu made the decision to take a knee on 1st, 2nd and 3rd down in order to keep Bobby Boucher from making an impact on the game. Strategery.......

[Jim Schue]

Gregg Easterbrook, writer of the TMQ column on ESPN.com, used to talk this guy up every week in his entertaining and lengthy 5,342,645-word weekly piece that I finally had to quit reading regularly.

[Clyde]

I would argue that if he has won a couple of state titles,, it is due to what is happening after the kickoff. You do not win titles without talent. I would hazard to say that if he was utilizing the same philosophy and did not win,, not only would we not be talking about him,, but he would be unemployed. I think the true test to his strategy would be to see what his won/loss record was before he adopted this approach to the game. All that being said,, it is working for him,, so there is really no compelling reason for him to change.

 

I love people that ask "why?" Why should I punt when stats say....?

 

Bad teams are bad teams so they're going to lose no matter what strategy you employ. He is using this against top teams and having a lot of success. He's not undefeated but he wins a lot.

 

You are not going to see this strategy start out at the highest levels. Why? Fear. Coaches are getting paid A LOT of money and if they go out on a limb and do not have immediate success that pay check goes away. It's why you often see innovation at lower levels.

 

Coach Stitt is a perfect example at Colorado School of Mines. I think that school is DII. He is an innovative coach that has had a lot of success. That success has caught the attention of D1 schools. Dana Holgerson brought him in to teach his staff some of the philosophies. You now see some of the strategy used in D2 being used regularly at WVU and now other schools. UK's offense will have some of his philosophy.

 

 

Colorado School of Mines head coach Bob Stitt an offensive guru to D-I teams | FOX Sports

[Jumper_Dad]

Three good reasons to punt

Field position

Field position

Field position

 

I remember reading about this guy a year or so ago. A stat the writer quoted was that the average high school punt resulted in around a 20 yard or less net change in field position. Granted there are a few punters and teams that net more than that, but look at how many punts in high school are shanked, kicked straight up or result in a big return.

 

I agree in the NFL with great punters it's not quite as valid of a proposition, but in high school it seems to be the smart thing to do...If you have an offense capable of moving the ball at all.

[Bisons66]

I am sure that strategies are being shared daily at all levels of the game. That is why the game of football continues to evolve and I think that is healthy for the game. The point I was trying to make was that if he did not have an offense that could move the ball or a defense that could stop the other teams progress,, he would lose.

 

Green Bay ran the Sweep to perfection,, you knew it was coming but they had the talent to make sure it was executed to perfection. Same way with the West Coast Offense in its "hay day",, a lot of people were trying to employ several aspects of that style of offense,, and then there is the "wildcat". Yet,, it was the teams talent in all aspects of the game that decided whether it came away with a win or loss.

 

All this coach is doing is giving themselves another opportunity to move the ball,, but if they did not have talent,, weather they got ten chances or twenty,,, it would not matter. My example would be if Grant County played Trinity,, and used the same philosophy,, I think it would be a huge defeat,,,not because of the type kick off was used or if they punted the ball. It would be because there is a difference in the talent being used.

[stinkyboy II]

That's the question Pulaski Academy head coach Kevin Kelley asks. He says you are going against the odds by punting vs going for it on 4th.

 

He uses an example. 4th and 8 from his own 5. If he goes for it and doesn't make it the other team will have about a 95% chance of scoring. However , if they punt the ball and the team takes over at about the 35 or 40 that team STILL has a 70%+ chance of scoring.

 

He says he has a 50% of making it on 4th so why not.

 

Here's a video Grantland did.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGDaOJAYHfo

 

In the video you'll see a game where they went up 29-0 before the other team ever TOUCHED the ball. That team was a top 10 team in the state. Game over in 1/2 a quarter.

 

I have trouble getting passed the numbers he uses in his example. His team has been so successful on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd down that he is left with 4th and 8. Now he has a 50% chance of making a first down with his 4th down play???

[tcjkbt]

No rule for KY specifically, but a fg attempt is treated just like a punt. A missed fg is spotted at the 20 if it goes into the end zone. If it doesn't make it to the end zone it can be returned just like a punt.

A few teams are using the "rugby" punt........line drive, hard to handle, often no return beause it goes out of bounds.

[doubledeuce]

A few teams are using the "rugby" punt........line drive, hard to handle, often no return beause it goes out of bounds.

 

Yes, it can put a lot of stress on a defense.

[GCHS]

Because they are easier to block than a punt, and no hang time to cover it.

 

1) It is not easier to block a placekick. Snap to kick time is a lot quicker.

2) Placekicks go farther.

3) Placekicks are easier to control, therefore you could just angle them out of bounds.

[Clyde]

1) It is not easier to block a placekick. Snap to kick time is a lot quicker.

.

 

That would be important if the player blocking the kick had to make it to the kicker. He does not. He just has to get a little penetration and his hand up and hope for a low kick.

[doubledeuce]

1) It is not easier to block a placekick. Snap to kick time is a lot quicker.

2) Placekicks go farther.

3) Placekicks are easier to control, therefore you could just angle them out of bounds.

 

 

Sounds like some quotes from a John Reed book.

 

 

From my experience in high school football, more place kicks get blocked than punts. Yes, snap to kick time is quicker but the distance is shorter also. How many times have you seen the kick hit the lineman in front of him? It is no where near as automatic for many high school teams as some think.

 

 

 

I am not totally opposed to the idea. I think a lot would depend on the ability of my center, holder, and kicker to execute a place kick almost 100% of the time. I think that some thing that people also do not consider, is that you could move the holder back more, if you have a capable snapper.

[RaiderPride5]

I completely understand the no punting at the high school level. In the NFL and college you have guys who can just flat out change position of the field punting from wherever they're at. In high school you won't find that. It's definitely a unique strategy that works for him.

 

 

Onside kicks I'm not so sure about, it would take me a while to do that

[PurplePride92]

Does the quality of the punter have anything to do with it? Josiah Robbins saved Boyle County with his punting last Saturday night. I'd argue that his punting played a large part of the victory. If punting was banned or if Boyle goes for it every time I'm not sure they win that game.

[rjs4470]

Quote Originally Posted by GCHS View Post

1) It is not easier to block a placekick. Snap to kick time is a lot quicker.

2) Placekicks go farther.

3) Placekicks are easier to control, therefore you could just angle them out of bounds.

 

From my experience in high school football, more place kicks get blocked than punts. Yes, snap to kick time is quicker but the distance is shorter also. How many times have you seen the kick hit the lineman in front of him? It is no where near as automatic for many high school teams as some think.

 

 

 

I am not totally opposed to the idea. I think a lot would depend on the ability of my center, holder, and kicker to execute a place kick almost 100% of the time. I think that some thing that people also do not consider, is that you could move the holder back more, if you have a capable snapper.

 

There are more than a few teams that couldn't get a place kick off if they tried. And even for some that can, I don't think placekicking is any more advantageous than punting. First there's an extra moving part, the hold. And if the snap or hold is bad, you're not getting the kick off. A bad snap doesn't doom a punt. Coverage wise, it's also harder to cover a placekick. You have to have a tight formation, and the kicking team has to hold it's blocks longer. That means it's going to be tough to contain if the kick gets returned. On punts, you can spread your formation, and split guys wide making it easier to get into coverage lanes. Also, on punts, long blocks really aren't required, and players can almost immediately get into coverage (in high school, players can leave before the ball is kicked, and are mostly taught to run through the player in front of them which is enough to keep them from blocking the kick). Hang time on a punt is typically going to be better as well, which also helps your coverage.

 

Unless you've got just a stud place kicker that can hammer the ball at least into the end zone from say the 50 in, in most situations, I think punting is going to be your better option.

[GCHS]

Let me rephrase... Assuming you can execute BOTH properly, a placekick provides some significant advantages over a punt.