why is there punting?

[JBUCK66]

seriously,...who came up with that idea?

some gench, I'll bet

 

[DanBengalfan]

it came from the early evolution of the game when the ball was actually round. the goalie, or safety, would punt the ball, similarly to the way after a goalie in soccer traps the ball and often punts it from his penalty box.

Ray Guy was the first dedicated punter in the 1970's, up until that point, backup qb's generally had the job.

Punter (football) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JBUCK66]

I want names

it's rediculous

 

[whyoh]

i think it's so the browns can feel like they're getting positive yards

 

[Wazmankg]

What's wrong with punting ? Punt returns are often exciting. How would you suggest teams change possession ?

 

[bengaldoug]

I think once you're outside your own 35 yard line, the only time you should punt is very long yardage.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I think once you're outside your own 35 yard line, the only time you should punt is very long yardage.

Agreed. It has been statiscially proven that you are more likely to win by going for every 4th down than punting. One of the main reasons is, you are now using 4 downs to gain 10 yards, or needing just 2.5 yards a play. Under traditional methods, you need 3.3 yards a play to acheive a first down.

Instead of planning on only using 3 downs, you now twist conventional methods, and blow up what a lot of defenses rely on, and that is predictability. Using 4 downs means that if you only get 2 yards on a rush on 1st down doesn't limit you to passing the ball on 2nd or even 3rd down. It keeps the playbook wide open. Defenses rely on focing offenses to become more 1 dimensional, and a part of that is forcing 2nd and longs after a poor 1st down rush, or 1st down incompletion. Going for it on 4th down would blow that up.

I also think a big key, also, to being successful on 4th down is to know ahead of time that you are going to be going for it, so there is little confusion with players running on/off the field or getting the play call to the QB on time.

 

[DanBengalfan]

well, in youth football they just let them take over the ball at the 40 yard line. There is no "punt" the coach just tells the ref he accepts possession change.

 

[mcro_rave_2001]

So the Bengals don't consistently get blown out.....sorry i couldn't resit.

For real though, i have no idea, but i like the punting because it adds some more strategy into the game.

 

[flamingrey]

Agreed. It has been statiscially proven that you are more likely to win by going for every 4th down than punting. One of the main reasons is, you are now using 4 downs to gain 10 yards, or needing just 2.5 yards a play. Under traditional methods, you need 3.3 yards a play to acheive a first down.

Instead of planning on only using 3 downs, you now twist conventional methods, and blow up what a lot of defenses rely on, and that is predictability. Using 4 downs means that if you only get 2 yards on a rush on 1st down doesn't limit you to passing the ball on 2nd or even 3rd down. It keeps the playbook wide open. Defenses rely on focing offenses to become more 1 dimensional, and a part of that is forcing 2nd and longs after a poor 1st down rush, or 1st down incompletion. Going for it on 4th down would blow that up.

I also think a big key, also, to being successful on 4th down is to know ahead of time that you are going to be going for it, so there is little confusion with players running on/off the field or getting the play call to the QB on time.

Statistically proven? Evidence?

 

[DanBengalfan]

well, obviously, you need good field position to go for it on 4th down. if you are backed up to your 1 inch line and go for it, then your an idiot. I had a friend who did that while playing video-game-football, not a challenge at all.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I would like to know what is the league average yards per drive... that will give a better analysis to this question...

 

[bengaldoug]

Good field position, though, needn't be somewhere across midfield. But could you imagine Marvin Lewis going for it on fourth and four at the 39 yard line? The only disclaimer I would put in would be longer yardage, as in over five yards. Sometimes, too, the punt can be used as an offensive weapon. Pinning the opponent back at the end of either half is a good idea.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Statistically proven? Evidence?

If you ever read Greg Easterbrook on TMQ (ESPN) he has outlined this multiple times. I'm not going to go back and look for it, but he's has backed it up a few times that, percentage-wise, you are more likely to win the game by going for it on 4th down over the long haul (win more games) than if you punt in the traditional method of 3 and punt.

Again, if I remember correctly, it has to do with the math involved suggesting that the average football play would easily cover 2.5 yards at a higher success rate over 4 attempts, over the traditional method of 3.3 yards on 3 attempts to create a first down.

I will also say that I agree, there are times when punting should be used to your advantage. However, I think if you always start your offensive series with the mind-set of going for it on 4th down, it changes everything from your offensive approach/playcalling to catching the defense off-guard in the fact that they don't plan on teams going for it on 4th down. So where many teams might normally run, or pass, that predictability is thrown out the window because the offense is no longer relying on getting a 1st down in 3 plays, but in 4.

 

[JDM]

If the math was valid teams would go for it far more. Coaches aren't stupid, and if the math were correct, someone would try it out.

You would go 0-16 if you went for the majority of fourth downs you encountered.

 

[Tubbs1518]

Should Football Teams Go for It on Fourth Down? | Super Bowl 46 New England Patriots vs. New York Giants | Sports Science | LiveScience

Advanced NFL Stats: The 4th Down Study - Part 1

Advanced NFL Stats: The 4th Down Study - Part 2

Advanced NFL Stats: The 4th Down Study - Part 3

Advanced NFL Stats: The 4th Down Study - Part 4

The numbers show that NFL coaches should go for it more - ESPN The Magazine

Advanced NFL Stats: Going for It on Fourth Down

http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~dromer/papers/PAPER_NFL_JULY05_FORWEB_CORRECTED.pdf

That last one is the paper from the Cal Berkley professor some of the links reference too. It's all really interesting statistical analysis. It's a long read and if you can't get interest out of statistical analysis you won't enjoy it.

 

[Tubbs1518]

If the math was valid teams would go for it far more. Coaches aren't stupid, and if the math were correct, someone would try it out.

You would go 0-16 if you went for the majority of fourth downs you encountered.

Honestly according to the numbers.....no you wouldn't.

 

[Cincyfan78]

If the math was valid teams would go for it far more. Coaches aren't stupid, and if the math were correct, someone would try it out.
You would go 0-16 if you went for the majority of fourth downs you encountered.

This is incorrect bceause coaches are copy-cats. Very few coaches want to try something new for fear of failure. Look how long it took for the spread to finally reach the NFL. Colleges were running the spread for a decade+ before the NFL finally started to implenent it.

Very few coaches go against "the book" when it comes to play-calling, and this isn't always limited to just the NFL. When something fails and you "go by the book" it's almost a fail-safe. A way for a coach to explain that he "made the right call", and it just didn't work out this time.

Take for example just going for it on 4th and 1 in the Car/Buf game. If Carolina goes for the 1st down (if I am remember correctly) they actually would have increased their chances of winning statistically over kicking the field goal. However, "the book" says, never take points off the board. However, if Cam Newton can't get you 1 yard to ice the game at that point...what's the point? Yes, you forced the Bills to drive the field for a TD and XPT to win the game, but had they gotten the 1st down, the Bills wouldn't have even had the chance to do that. Their win % decreased by kicking that field, despite getting the points.

 

[Tubbs1518]

I hate when my post is at the bottom of a page, so I'll past it again.

Should Football Teams Go for It on Fourth Down? | Super Bowl 46 New England Patriots vs. New York Giants | Sports Science | LiveScience

Advanced NFL Stats: The 4th Down Study - Part 1

Advanced NFL Stats: The 4th Down Study - Part 2

Advanced NFL Stats: The 4th Down Study - Part 3

Advanced NFL Stats: The 4th Down Study - Part 4

The numbers show that NFL coaches should go for it more - ESPN The Magazine

Advanced NFL Stats: Going for It on Fourth Down

http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~dromer/papers/PAPER_NFL_JULY05_FORWEB_CORRECTED.pdf

That last one is the paper from the Cal Berkley professor some of the links reference too. It's all really interesting statistical analysis. It's a long read and if you can't get interest out of statistical analysis you won't enjoy it.

 

[JDM]

I have seen the analysis before, and I do not believe it is accurate. It doesn't (and can't) consider the momentum swing that comes with a big fourth down stop, or how badly this type of thing would affect the rhythm of the game. Economic analysis is a wonderful tool, but when applied to a sport like football where momentum and emotion play such a large role (see Seattle at home, Ray Lewis carrying the ravens to a SB victory despite laughably bad on the field play, etc), the validity has to be questioned. You would turn a .500 team into a .000 team and a .750 team into a .250 team if you followed this advice.