Does any coach punt from the opponent's side more than Garrett?

[Nerm222]

I think I can settle this whole debate with a simple example…

Consider the following – if I am coaching the Cowboys against the Packers on November 18, 1996; and my field goal kicker has made six FGs in the game; and I am up by the score of 18-6; and I am deep in Packers territory with 20 seconds to go; and my kicker is Chris Boniol; I would totally let my kicker tie the NFL record for FGs in a game.


Wait… what were we talking about??

 

[Nightman]

so tell me genius... is Bilicheck wrong in your opinion for not going for it on 4th and 2 inside opponents territory? are you calling Billichek not a good coach?

Um, since Belichick became the Patriots' head coach in 2000, the Patriots have the HIGHEST percentage of times going for it on fourth-and-short between midfield and the opponent's 30 -- he has gone for it 64.2 percent of the time.

Good find..... I knew Bill was the most aggressive but those numbers prove the OPs point

The smartest coach with the most job stability plays to win and goes against the book and the group think because he knows it gives him the best chance to win the game

 

[lqmac1]

It sure feels like Garrett punts a ton from the opposition's side of the field, and Sunday night was certainly no exception. We punted four times from Giants territory out of nine total drives. Those fourth downs:

• 4th and 3 from the Giants 43
• 4th and 2 from the Giants 44
• 4th and 7 from the Giants 42
• 4th and 20 from the Giants 42

The last drive is definitely a punting situation. I'm not sure what the numbers say about the 4th and 7, but I'd go for that with our offense. The first two should be automatic go for it situations unless there is a compelling game situation, which there was not at those points.

He's clearly helping the D. I know they looked good last week, but we don't have an elite defense so I'm sure that's a big reason why he tries to pin teams down near their own goal line!

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Don't call me son and stop replying to my posts.......you refuse to listen to anyone so go away and enjoy your Belichick doll

We isnt that the pot calling the kettle black.

Have you listened to anyone?

You seem to be enjoying your adamjt doll as you seemingly idolize him. He is a nobody having accomplished nothing in the nfl.

And seems like you want anyone who disagrees with you to go away.

You posted on a public forum...requesting response. When proven utterly wrong not just by me but most and yet continue to dig in and argue about smething you have no idea about and now are mad because why?

Then stop posting. Go create a forum and only allow those who agree with you to join. You might be happier.

Sorry kid you got a lot to learn. That much is painfully obvious

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Good find..... I knew Bill was the most aggressive but those numbers prove the OPs point

The smartest coach with the most job stability plays to win and goes against the book and the group think because he knows it gives him the best chance to win the game

Show me source of the data.

How many 4th down opportuities?

What was the situation in the game? How much time on the clock? Quarter? Score? What was the distance to go? Inches?1 yrd? 2 yards?

All relevant information. What that number presents is a cream soup. Everything put in a blender and mixed. It normalizes all data. Where in this case as its been obvious overall numbers are irrelevant but situational conditions drive decsions.

The game of football is about managing each series in a specific situation in the game. Isn´t that the original source of criticism....

With that said, as i have said before the specific situation matters. Am i against taking a risk n th and one? Probably no. 4th and 3? Probably yes. If three lays failed to get average of yards whats your confidence in getting 3 on a 4th.... situational fotball

 

[Nightman]

Have you listened to anyone?

You seem to be enjoying your adamjt doll as you seemingly idolize him. He is a nobody having accomplished nothing in the nfl.

If you don't respect Adam's reputation around here and call him a nobody then you are a troll....his work with the salary cap, comp picks and statistics on general is unimpeachable.... 90% of what I know about those topics came from long discussions around here...... you have the nerve to demand an answer to a stupid Belichick question and then demand sources when you are made to look stupid.....stop giving DC a bad name

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

If you don't respect Adam's reputation around here and call him a nobody then you are a troll....his work with the salary cap, comp picks and statistics on general is unimpeachable.... 90% of what I know about those topics came from long discussions around here...... you have the nerve to demand an answer to a stupid Belichick question and then demand sources when you are made to look stupid.....stop giving DC a bad name

OMG, get you nose out of his butt.....and wipe the brown...you are so far up his arse, we can barely see his shoes. Who said I disrespected him? he has an opinion, and so do I? and he thinks I am wrong with you the only one who agrees and I think he is right and a lot of people agreed with my opinion. what work with salary cap? as if the Cowboys team uses it to do their business!!!! whoop deeee doo....I can do the same, the info is out there available to all....if you know how to use google....and the comp picks are published by the league...wooohooo..he reposted the info...by the way Adam, we do appreciate it. but don't feel obligated to do it.....

and his stats are well, impeachable....as they say, there are lies, there are damn lies and then there is statistics!!!! his stats and premise had plenty of holes in it. you are just in love with his stats, because it supports your notion and your anger towards garrett....you are justifying it....

and what nerve? why are you so upset kid? I don't get it.... and sorry, you like a little kid who is pouting and holding his breath and looking blue...breath...relax and grow up a bit.


@adam, I do like you, I appreciate your views, but I don't necessarily agree with everything you say and I enjoy the debates and at the end of the day, we are both keyboard coaches.....

and I recommend you tell this kid to get his face out of your arse...... unless you enjoy it LOL

 

[Nightman]

OMG, get you nose out of his butt.....and wipe the brown...you are so far up his arse, we can barely see his shoes. Who said I disrespected him? he has an opinion, and so do I? and he thinks I am wrong with you the only one who agrees and I think he is right and a lot of people agreed with my opinion. what work with salary cap? as if the Cowboys team uses it to do their business!!!! whoop deeee doo....I can do the same, the info is out there available to all....if you know how to use google....and the comp picks are published by the league...wooohooo..he reposted the info...by the way Adam, we do appreciate it. but don't feel obligated to do it.....

and his stats are well, impeachable....as they say, there are lies, there are damn lies and then there is statistics!!!! his stats and premise had plenty of holes in it. you are just in love with his stats, because it supports your notion and your anger towards garrett....you are justifying it....

and what nerve? why are you so upset kid? I don't get it.... and sorry, you like a little kid who is pouting and holding his breath and looking blue...breath...relax and grow up a bit.


@adam, I do like you, I appreciate your views, but I don't necessarily agree with everything you say and I enjoy the debates and at the end of the day, we are both keyboard coaches.....

and I recommend you tell this kid to get his face out of your arse...... unless you enjoy it LOL

Let it go broheem..... we just got beat in real life and you are obsessed with old threads

You are being disrespectful and childish over an internet debate......... not a good look

Posters here have added 100x the content you ever had......learn your place if you are just going to make up numbers and ignore the experts

 

[Jake]

did anybody actually answer the OPs question?

Yep, but I'll gladly post it again. This is why you punt.

 

[Nightman]

Yep, but I'll gladly post it again. This is why you punt.

and again you ignore the reward when you make it

you only have to make 20% of 4th downs in their territory to make it worth while.....1 in 5

 

[JD_KaPow]

Yep, but I'll gladly post it again. This is why you punt.

Um, this plot shows pretty clearly why you go for it. Looking at a 4th down around the opponent's 40 yard line...
If you punt, your chances of scoring are 0%. If you go for it and make it, your chances (FG+TD combined) are over 50%.
If you punt, your opponent's chances are around 20-25%. If you go for it and fail, your opponent's chances are around 40-45%. Better, but not nearly as much of a swing.
It doesn't take a very high probability of success for going for it to be a much better option.

 

[Doomsday]

Punting on 4th and 3 when you are down 17 is pretty weak

 

[Jake]

and again you ignore the reward when you make it

you only have to make 20% of 4th downs in their territory to make it worth while.....1 in 5

That's not at all what the chart is telling you, and here's why. There's nothing in that data that tells you how often you'll score, and how many points you'll score, on drives where you convert a 4th down in enemy territory. It only tells you the frequency with which teams score depending on where they begin drives.

Now if you have some actual data to support your claim I'd love to see it. But it appears you're only misinterpreting the chart I posted and making incorrect extrapolations based on that misinterpretation.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Punting on 4th and 3 when you are down 17 is pretty weak

I could not believe that call. It's 4th and 3, you're down 17 points with under 12 minutes to play, you've struggled stopping Denver all day, and you don't have an offense designed for quick strikes. Do you really think you're going to get 3 more chances to score in the game? Garrett had clearly given up on the game at that point.

I also hated the call to punt on 4th and 3 at Denver's 39. (First play of the 2nd quarter).

 

[JD_KaPow]

That's not at all what the chart is telling you, and here's why. There's nothing in that data that tells you how often you'll score, and how many points you'll score, on drives where you convert a 4th down in enemy territory. It only tells you the frequency with which teams score depending on where they begin drives.

Now if you have some actual data to support your claim I'd love to see it. But it appears you're only misinterpreting the chart I posted and making incorrect extrapolations based on that misinterpretation.

Huh? If I have the ball on 1st down at the opponent's 40 yard line, it doesn't matter if that's the first play of the drive or the 10th. All those other plays are behind me. You can treat it, from that point forward, as the first play of a drive. Besides which, I've checked the sources for those data, and they are not in fact "beginning of drive." They are "first down field position." (Not that it matters).

If I convert on a 4th down at the opponent's 40 yard line, I have a >50% chance of scoring from that point (all other things being equal, of course).

The plot comes from here: http://archive.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2009/01/drive-results.html

And here's the money quote:

"Each graph is based on first down field position. For example, for all 1st downs at a team’s own 35 yard line, offenses go on to score touchdowns 20% of the time. It doesn’t matter how the team got to the 35 yard line with a first down. They could have started the drive there or converted a first down from their own 20."

 

[Nightman]

That's not at all what the chart is telling you, and here's why. There's nothing in that data that tells you how often you'll score, and how many points you'll score, on drives where you convert a 4th down in enemy territory. It only tells you the frequency with which teams score depending on where they begin drives.

Now if you have some actual data to support your claim I'd love to see it. But it appears you're only misinterpreting the chart I posted and making incorrect extrapolations based on that misinterpretation.

I'm not using your chart except for another piece of data backing my argument

The data has been provided throughout this thread and in numerous studies that are too lengthy to re-post..... you have to do your own research....... but the numbers provided by the experts say it is clearly beneficial to go for it a lot more, especially in their territory

Like I said ...... you only have to succeed one in 5 times to make it worth while.............. a first down at their 35 is worth more than a FG to start with...... almost guaranteed points..... if you give the other team the ball at their 40 they still have to get 2-3 1st downs to get into FG range

 

[Nightman]

I could not believe that call. It's 4th and 3, you're down 17 points with under 12 minutes to play, you've struggled stopping Denver all day, and you don't have an offense designed for quick strikes. Do you really think you're going to get 3 more chances to score in the game? Garrett had clearly given up on the game at that point.

I also hated the call to punt on 4th and 3 at Denver's 39. (First play of the 2nd quarter).

How about not kicking the FG on 4th down at 10 down by 18 with 4 minutes left

You need 3 scores....... it is playing to save face and not playing to win

 

[JD_KaPow]

How about not kicking the FG on 4th down at 10 down by 18 with 4 minutes left

You need 3 scores....... it is playing to save face and not playing to win

Not kicking the FG was the right call there. Again, it's 4th and only 3, and you're inside Denver's 10 yard line. You need 3 scores, but two of those scores must be TDs. You are extremely unlikely to make it down that close 2 more times, but you might make it down there once and make it to around the 30-35 on another drive, where you can kick the FG. At that moment, so close to the end zone, your best chance (by far) to score the two TDs you need is to score one of them on the current drive. Kicking the FG moves you further away from winning the game, not closer.

 

[Nightman]

Not kicking the FG was the right call there. Again, it's 4th and only 3, and you're inside Denver's 10 yard line. You need 3 scores, but two of those scores must be TDs. You are extremely unlikely to make it down that close 2 more times, but you might make it down there once and make it to around the 30-35 on another drive, where you can kick the FG. At that moment, so close to the end zone, your best chance (by far) to score the two TDs you need is to score one of them on the current drive. Kicking the FG moves you further away from winning the game, not closer.

IDK about that

They needed 18 points and at 4thand 3 the expected points were 2.99
If they got a 1st it would go to 5.50 ....... they difference between 3 and 5.5 points wasn't worth getting 0

We were right back down there on the next drive at 4th and 6 with 1:15 left...if we convert the TD we are down 35-27 with an onside kick coming....instead they go 100 yards with a TAINT

Being close to a TD is mitigated by the clock

 

[khiladi]

Jason Garrett was the guy that was backed up in their own territory against the Commanders, with like 80 yards to go, on the last play of the game and he runs a passing play with a check-down option to Choice, of which Romo throws to, Choice then proceeds to fumble and the Commanders score, ultimately that play defining the victory for the Skins.

Jason Garrett probablt has no idea what he's doing a lot of the time...