CFZ What if: No kicker on game day

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
56,925
Reaction score
64,361
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
What if the Cowboys didn't carry a kicker?
- Either go for it on 4th or punt.
- 2 point conversions after TDs.
- Punter that can kick off.

Statistics indicate that teams would come out ahead in the long run with this approach.
- A high school coach made headlines a few years ago for always going for it on 4th down.
- Not sure if that was literally always, or if it was restricted to being on the favorable side of the 50 yard line.

A failed field goal is place at the spot of the kick.
- That's ~8 yards behind the line.

With the method I listed, they have the option to punt.
- If they are so close that punting into the endzone does not gain much, then failing by going for it does not lose much.

I think defenses and D-Coordinators would have that an offense always has 4 downs to convert.
- Envision all of the times the Cowboys made a big stop on 3rd down, then the opponent converted on 4th.
- I always want to opponent to punt in those situations.
 

Streifenkarl

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,352
Reaction score
3,357
Ehm, don't know what to say lol. But cudos to the open minded I guess. Are you the first coming up with that "idea"? :D

When you're behind by two points and have two minutes left you just make it to a safe field goal position and get the easy win. I'd never start the season without a kicker. But why can't we teach Anger some kicking? Won't be worse than the Leg or those two guys battling it out at the moment. Use Dak as the holder and you keep the opponent always guessing.
 

Parcells4Life

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,484
Reaction score
9,333
What if the Cowboys didn't carry a kicker?
- Either go for it on 4th or punt.
- 2 point conversions after TDs.
- Punter that can kick off.

Statistics indicate that teams would come out ahead in the long run with this approach.
- A high school coach made headlines a few years ago for always going for it on 4th down.
- Not sure if that was literally always, or if it was restricted to being on the favorable side of the 50 yard line.

A failed field goal is place at the spot of the kick.
- That's ~8 yards behind the line.

With the method I listed, they have the option to punt.
- If they are so close that punting into the endzone does not gain much, then failing by going for it does not lose much.

I think defenses and D-Coordinators would have that an offense always has 4 downs to convert.
- Envision all of the times the Cowboys made a big stop on 3rd down, then the opponent converted on 4th.
- I always want to opponent to punt in those situations.
2 seconds to go in the game. At the opponents 25. You don’t want a FG?

or any time a holding penalty makes it 4th and 19 from the 32.
 

CowboyFrog

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,851
Reaction score
9,917
I dont know if it would be a good plan but man would the games get more intense.
 

nalam

The realist
Messages
10,988
Reaction score
6,476
You wouldn’t need a holder either. Romo’s whole career trajectory might have been altered if you’d have come up with this idea sooner.
Interesting point… who was the holder last season , I thought it was punter .

with him holding , Hirijjjjalllau hit all EPs ( like 4 ) in a game , did we change the holder this season, may be holding has an effect on kickers ???
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
56,925
Reaction score
64,361
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
2 seconds to go in the game. At the opponents 25. You don’t want a FG?

or any time a holding penalty makes it 4th and 19 from the 32.

With the ball at the 32, it would be a 50 yard field goal.

The end of game or end of half time restricted scenario is probably the biggest limitation of this concept.
- Having said that, many of those situations that we've seen were due to the offense playing to get in that position.
- Much of this concept can't be evaluated on a direct situational comparison because a commitment to doing it changes other parameters.
- Offenses often play to settle for the 4th down with 2 seconds remaining scenario.
- Garrett played that type of 'safe' option many times and it often burned us.

Kellen Moore said that one issue that Analytics highlighted is that they need to score more often from outside the redzone.
- That based on NFL statistics, not specifically just the Cowboys.
- Just using this as an example of statistics going beyond just direct comparisons.
- i.e. Just comparing redzone success rate is not sufficient.

Obviously, NFL teams would never go without a kicker altogether.
- Even if they wanted to do it, there probably aren't 32 punters that can kick off...
- The stats probably don't favor always going the 2 point conversion.
- If the extra point probability is 90%, then the 2 point conversion probability would need to be over 45%.
 

Brax

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,355
Reaction score
6,991
What if the Cowboys didn't carry a kicker?
- Either go for it on 4th or punt.
- 2 point conversions after TDs.
- Punter that can kick off.

Statistics indicate that teams would come out ahead in the long run with this approach.
- A high school coach made headlines a few years ago for always going for it on 4th down.
- Not sure if that was literally always, or if it was restricted to being on the favorable side of the 50 yard line.

A failed field goal is place at the spot of the kick.
- That's ~8 yards behind the line.

With the method I listed, they have the option to punt.
- If they are so close that punting into the endzone does not gain much, then failing by going for it does not lose much.

I think defenses and D-Coordinators would have that an offense always has 4 downs to convert.
- Envision all of the times the Cowboys made a big stop on 3rd down, then the opponent converted on 4th.
- I always want to opponent to punt in those situations.
Imagine 4th down end of game down 2 points with 3 seconds left at the 25 now it’s a TD or loss, just don’t see it. There will be kicker to many games come down to the last second FG to even take this seriously.
 

conner01

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,889
Reaction score
25,808
2 seconds to go in the game. At the opponents 25. You don’t want a FG?

or any time a holding penalty makes it 4th and 19 from the 32.
Always going for it wouldn’t work because if scenarios like you pointed out
But I do think going on 4th around mid field much more often is a good strategy
Going for 2 more often too
But in all situations it’s just not feasible
Too many scenarios like you mentioned
 

conner01

Well-Known Member
Messages
27,889
Reaction score
25,808
With the ball at the 32, it would be a 50 yard field goal.

The end of game or end of half time restricted scenario is probably the biggest limitation of this concept.
- Having said that, many of those situations that we've seen were due to the offense playing to get in that position.
- Much of this concept can't be evaluated on a direct situational comparison because a commitment to doing it changes other parameters.
- Offenses often play to settle for the 4th down with 2 seconds remaining scenario.
- Garrett played that type of 'safe' option many times and it often burned us.

Kellen Moore said that one issue that Analytics highlighted is that they need to score more often from outside the redzone.
- That based on NFL statistics, not specifically just the Cowboys.
- Just using this as an example of statistics going beyond just direct comparisons.
- i.e. Just comparing redzone success rate is not sufficient.

Obviously, NFL teams would never go without a kicker altogether.
- Even if they wanted to do it, there probably aren't 32 punters that can kick off...
- The stats probably don't favor always going the 2 point conversion.
- If the extra point probability is 90%, then the 2 point conversion probability would need to be over 45%.
The extra point probability seems to continue to drop
I don’t think a 45% conversion rate on two point tries is something hard to do
It just requires brute will by the oline or trickery by the OC
 

buybuydandavis

Well-Known Member
Messages
23,699
Reaction score
20,779
What if the Cowboys didn't carry a kicker?
- Either go for it on 4th or punt.
- 2 point conversions after TDs.
- Punter that can kick off.

Statistics indicate that teams would come out ahead in the long run with this approach.
- A high school coach made headlines a few years ago for always going for it on 4th down.
- Not sure if that was literally always, or if it was restricted to being on the favorable side of the 50 yard line.

A failed field goal is place at the spot of the kick.
- That's ~8 yards behind the line.

With the method I listed, they have the option to punt.
- If they are so close that punting into the endzone does not gain much, then failing by going for it does not lose much.

I think defenses and D-Coordinators would have that an offense always has 4 downs to convert.
- Envision all of the times the Cowboys made a big stop on 3rd down, then the opponent converted on 4th.
- I always want to opponent to punt in those situations.


Multiple issues:
1) Reasonable chance that it's better to go for 2 than 1 generally. Even more likely that it's often good depending on scenario and the particular teams involved. I believe that effectiveness at goal line offense and defense probably has wide ranges across the teams in the NFL.
2) Also likely, IMO, that teams should try FGs less, mostly going for it, but maybe sometimes punting. Again, this varies across team matchups and scenarios.
3) But, there are certainly scenarios when the best option is to try a FG, and those scenarios are common. The benefit to the team of having a kicker available is more valuable than an extra gameday roster spot.

Later ...
Obviously, NFL teams would never go without a kicker altogether.

Oh. I thought that's the scenario you were suggesting.
 

RodeoJake

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,874
Reaction score
6,829
Having a kicker ain't a big deal. Just put one out there and be done with it. Games are never won or lost because of a kicker. Punters are much more important.
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
56,925
Reaction score
64,361
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Multiple issues:
1) Reasonable chance that it's better to go for 2 than 1 generally. Even more likely that it's often good depending on scenario and the particular teams involved. I believe that effectiveness at goal line offense and defense probably has wide ranges across the teams in the NFL.
2) Also likely, IMO, that teams should try FGs less, mostly going for it, but maybe sometimes punting. Again, this varies across team matchups and scenarios.
3) But, there are certainly scenarios when the best option is to try a FG, and those scenarios are common. The benefit to the team of having a kicker available is more valuable than an extra gameday roster spot.

Later ...
Obviously, NFL teams would never go without a kicker altogether.

Oh. I thought that's the scenario you were suggesting.
Yes, it is the scenario that I'm suggesting to consider what would happen.'
- I'm just adding the disclaimer that they would keep a kicker even if they had to plan to never kick field goals.
 

plymkr

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,346
Reaction score
13,869
Always going for it wouldn’t work because if scenarios like you pointed out
But I do think going on 4th around mid field much more often is a good strategy
Going for 2 more often too
But in all situations it’s just not feasible
Too many scenarios like you mentioned
Going for it on 4th down and getting the 1st is a major emotional/momentum swing. Also not converting is a momentum swing against you. I feel the 50-40 yard line is a good place to take a chance. I wouldn't be a fan of going for it every 4th down but I would like to see some more chances when a punt would only gain 20 yards of field position and it's too long for a FG.

The OP mentioned a high school coach. I remember seeing a mini documentary about him or a special on ESPN about him. It was interesting. His going no punt offense kept the defense off balance because the defense was used to only playing for 3 downs. It was a psychological thing and it worked for him. I don't know if it would work in the pros but it was interesting.
 
Top