The decision to punt..

[GoSU96]

that late punt worked out OK for us but face it if they make even 1 first down it's game over.
just not worth that gamble. i guess i'd have gone for it.really good chance we don't see the ball again.

Really, they had run for less than 70 yds all game, the QB had just thrown a pick that was taken to the goal line the possession before, and they were 1 for 12 on 3rd down. Yeah real good chance they would get a 1st at that end of the field.

Not.

It was one of the best calls they made all day.

 

[Bayside44]

Bayside, let me ask you, because clearly my understanding of space and time is lacking here - how exactly did getting the ball back change the probabilities of a choice made in the past?

This really isn't difficult, you guys are taking the punting is for meatheads argument and applying it to a situation where it doesn't belong.

The probability of them going 3 and out was far greater than us getting a first down on 4th and 7. And the game proved that to be the case.

 

[BuffOrange]

Ok so tell me what I'm missing...

3:03 to go, fourth and 7 at your own 42. If PSU gets the ball back a first down wins the game. If PSU gets the ball back and you stop them they are going to punt it back to you, and you will get the ball back with approx 2 minutes to go with no to's.

So, what you gain by punting is 30 yards of field position if you stop them. What you lose is that if they get a first down you lose the game, and you lose the chance of converting the first down.

What you gain by going for it is the chance of converting and having a first down at midfield with 3 minutes left and two timeouts. What you lose is 30 yards of field position if you don't convert and you are then able to stop PSU.

Doesn't that suggest that it is entirely illogical to punt?? The cost\benefit just doesn't make sense.

You're of course right but there's no such thing as math or cost benefit analysis for football coaches; otherwise hardly anyone would ever kick on 4th&1. The arguments for punting always boil down to abstract cliches like "momentum" and "what if it doesn't work". Its why I <3 Chip Kelly.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

 

[OttoinGrotto]

And you guys act like it doesn't matter where PSU starts their possession or where SU would start their last one.

Because in a sense it doesn't. You still need your defense to get the ball back ASAP. You still need your offense to score a TD there. That doesn't change depending on field position.

Again, there is a certain probability that we don't see the ball again. We accepted that risk over the risk of failing to gain 7 yards.

Look, this is really crude, but I looked over the stats and for this one game (caveats of small sample size yadda yadda yadda) we had 74 offensive snaps and got a play of 7 or more yards on 13 of them, which is 17.5%. PSU on the other hand up to that point had 15 possessions and had gotten a 1st down on 8 of them, which is 53%.

So basically, the odds are better that they get a 1st down on a possession, which means you don't see the ball again, than they are that you get the 7 yards. Given that, try to get the 7 yards.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

This really isn't difficult, you guys are taking the punting is for meatheads argument and applying it to a situation where it doesn't belong.

The probability of them going 3 and out was far greater than us getting a first down on 4th and 7. And the game proved that to be the case.

No, it wasn't. See my response to Go that I just barely posted.

 

[Bayside44]

No, it wasn't. See my response to Go that I just barely posted.

Coaches get paid to think strategically, think multiple steps ahead. WE GOT THE BALL BACK. I really don't know how to say it any plainer.

 

[tbonezone]

3 and out is in no way a given.PSU scored 23 points on us. one penalty,one slipped tackle,etc... and it's over.
offensively we still had several big plays to make to ever get the lead. if 7 yards is too far then...

 

[Chip]

This really isn't difficult, you guys are taking the punting is for meatheads argument and applying it to a situation where it doesn't belong.

The probability of them going 3 and out was far greater than us getting a first down on 4th and 7. And the game proved that to be the case.

Agree. I'm generally a control your own destiny guy, don't let the game end as Penn State's ball.

But coaches have to make the call according to how the game is going. They were obviously thinking low probability of converting 4th and 7. Not just because 4th and 7 is generally low probability, but with THIS offense on THIS day, it felt damn near impossible. So the likely result is a PSU 3 and out and then pinning us deep, our 20 if we're lucky.

You have 2 TOs so with the punt, and knowing PSU will go conservative (thanks Welsh INT), you can get a fresh set of downs on our 40 with 2 minutes left. You can then make a play call like swing pass to PTG, which was a great call, but poor execution.

There is so much more to worry about right now. That call worked out fine. Offense needs to be better prepared across the board.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - http://tapatalk.com/m/

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Coaches get paid to think strategically, think multiple steps ahead. WE GOT THE BALL BACK. I really don't know how to say it any plainer.

We traded a 17.5% chance to give them a 50% chance to close the game to just go straight to giving them a 100% chance at the 50/50. We did not play the percentages. WE GOT THE BALL BACK does not mean we played the right percentages.

I agree with Chip though, the offense is a bigger concern.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Millhouse]

And you guys act like it doesn't matter where PSU starts their possession or where SU would start their last one.

Their last possession might have been the one they were on. Which was pretty good field position. Field position and time is part of the reason to go for it

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[RF2044]

Agree. I'm generally a control your own destiny guy, don't let the game end as Penn State's ball.

But coaches have to make the call according to how the game is going. They were obviously thinking low probability of converting 4th and 7. Not just because 4th and 7 is generally low probability, but with THIS offense on THIS day, it felt damn near impossible. So the likely result is a PSU 3 and out and then pinning us deep, our 20 if we're lucky.

You have 2 TOs so with the punt, and knowing PSU will go conservative (thanks Welsh INT), you can get a fresh set of downs on our 40 with 2 minutes left. You can then make a play call like swing pass to PTG, which was a great call, but poor execution.

There is so much more to worry about right now. That call worked out fine. Offense needs to be better prepared across the board.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - http://tapatalk.com/m/

Spot on.

 

[Millhouse]

Did we get the ball back with plenty of time to score and about the same field position? Yes we did.

Did anything positive happen once we did? Nope.

Not sure what else needs to be said.

Ok then they should've gone for it earlier when they had the bad snap.
Results aren't probabilities.



Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[OrangePA]

I would have gone for it.

It worked out, but I was surprised and disappointed with the decision.

 

[skurey]

It's not even a discussion. It's not an opinion. You can type as many paragraphs as you want trying to convince yourself but punting was wrong.

 

[RF2044]

It's not even a discussion. It's not an opinion. You can type as many paragraphs as you want trying to convince yourself but punting was wrong.

Comical.

 

[2013 Final 4]

Not necessarily, with a pair of time outs and more than 3 minutes of game time when the punt occurs.

The staff gambled on [1] the D's ability to hold them to 3 and out, and [2] that after being pinned back, PSU would play ultra-conservative with the lead and a true frosh QB. The gamble paid off, we just couldn't move the ball--which was the case all game.

Regardless, while a risk, punting the ball wasn't as off the wall as some suggest.

Hindsight is 20/20. If PSU got a first down EVERYONE would be saying, "why did we punt?"

 

[RF2044]

Hindsight is 20/20. If PSU got a first down EVERYONE would be saying, "why did we punt?"

And yet, the decision to punt accomplished exactly what it was supposed to. We got the ball back in approximately the same area of the field, with 4 plays to pick up a first down instead of 1 to pick up 7. We used our timeouts to minimize the time that went off of the clock, and had 2 minutes to go half the field.

You're right--if Penn State had gotten a first down, then they would have been able to run the clock down close to zero. Or maybe they would have fumbled trying to run the ball. Nobody knows--because the game wouldn't have played out the way it did, and the transitive property doesn't apply.

What I do know is that if we'd gone for it and not picked up the first, then Penn State at minimum would have been able to punt us down deep into our territory and forced us to go 80 or more yards. With last year's offense, going for it there would have been a no brainer because the coaches would have been confident in our ability to [1] move the ball to pick up the yardage, and [2] execute a play that would pick up the yardage. But I have a difficult time understanding how anyone might have watched our offensive performance yesterday and been confident about our ability to pick up that first down.

It was a calculated gamble, and it paid off. Christ, every play call has an element of risk--people are acting like there is only one absolute right approach regardless of game situation, and ignoring all relevant contextual factors that informed that decision.