02-17-2016, 08:50 AM
Today in random statistics
02-17-2016, 09:07 AM
STAN was 68th in net punting at 37.21 net yards. Utah best with 43.7 net yards. Of note, Oregon second-from-worst with 31.85 net yards.
http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/c...team/98/p2
http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/c...team/98/p2
STAN was 68th in net punting at 37.21 net yards. Utah best with 43.7 net yards. Of note, Oregon second-from-worst with 31.85 net yards.
http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/c...team/98/p2
http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/c...team/98/p2
02-17-2016, 09:37 AM
(02-17-2016, 08:50 AM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:https://twitter.com/SportSourceA/status/...1892048896
Is this a bad thing? I've always wondered about this.
Why wouldn't you always punt out of bounds? Developing a technique where you give the ball less hang time but allow it to travel further and eliminate the chance for a return.
(02-17-2016, 08:50 AM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:https://twitter.com/SportSourceA/status/...1892048896
Is this a bad thing? I've always wondered about this.
Why wouldn't you always punt out of bounds? Developing a technique where you give the ball less hang time but allow it to travel further and eliminate the chance for a return.
02-17-2016, 09:59 AM
It would be interesting to ask our special teams coach if we punted out of bounds on purpose. Another possibility is that we were trying to pin the returner against the sideline but missed wide.
Also, did we do that because it's a great idea in the abstract or to make up for a deficiency, such as our punters not being able to kick high and deep?
Also, did we do that because it's a great idea in the abstract or to make up for a deficiency, such as our punters not being able to kick high and deep?
It would be interesting to ask our special teams coach if we punted out of bounds on purpose. Another possibility is that we were trying to pin the returner against the sideline but missed wide.
Also, did we do that because it's a great idea in the abstract or to make up for a deficiency, such as our punters not being able to kick high and deep?
Also, did we do that because it's a great idea in the abstract or to make up for a deficiency, such as our punters not being able to kick high and deep?
02-17-2016, 10:21 AM
(02-17-2016, 09:37 AM)el arbol link Wrote:[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=14617.msg156706#msg156706 date=1455724239]
https://twitter.com/SportSourceA/status/...1892048896
Is this a bad thing? I've always wondered about this.
Why wouldn't you always punt out of bounds? Developing a technique where you give the ball less hang time but allow it to travel further and eliminate the chance for a return.
[/quote]
I suppose the ideal punt, without considering game situations, would be landing just out of bounds, which would mean no return and would also maximize distance. That's risky, though, because you then have to depend on the official's judgment of where the punt went out of bounds, which isn't always particularly accurate.Â
Though what you want from a punt depends on the situation, of course. I want a lot of distance when we're punting from our own 20. I don't when we're punting from the other team's 40 (and I usually don't want a punt at all then, though I'll forgive it if it's 4th and very long). If I could have every punt roll out of bounds (or land just out of bounds) inside the opponent's 5-yard line, then absolutely. But it seems to me that if you aim for just out of bounds, you're as likely to kick it well out of bounds (and thus shorter) than you are into the middle of the field. I know these guys are good at aiming punts, but it's still pretty inexact, yeah?Â
(02-17-2016, 09:37 AM)el arbol link Wrote:[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=14617.msg156706#msg156706 date=1455724239]
https://twitter.com/SportSourceA/status/...1892048896
Is this a bad thing? I've always wondered about this.
Why wouldn't you always punt out of bounds? Developing a technique where you give the ball less hang time but allow it to travel further and eliminate the chance for a return.
[/quote]
I suppose the ideal punt, without considering game situations, would be landing just out of bounds, which would mean no return and would also maximize distance. That's risky, though, because you then have to depend on the official's judgment of where the punt went out of bounds, which isn't always particularly accurate.Â
Though what you want from a punt depends on the situation, of course. I want a lot of distance when we're punting from our own 20. I don't when we're punting from the other team's 40 (and I usually don't want a punt at all then, though I'll forgive it if it's 4th and very long). If I could have every punt roll out of bounds (or land just out of bounds) inside the opponent's 5-yard line, then absolutely. But it seems to me that if you aim for just out of bounds, you're as likely to kick it well out of bounds (and thus shorter) than you are into the middle of the field. I know these guys are good at aiming punts, but it's still pretty inexact, yeah?Â
looking at some stats here
http://pac-12.com/content/football-statistics
it looks like we had
- 48 punts
- 4 were touchbacks
- 21 were inside the 20
- 9 punts of 50+ yards
this compares to our opponents
- 66 punts
- 3 touchbacks
- 12 inside the 20
- 9 punts of 50+ yards
so we might punt out of bounds more than others since we appear to have a lot of punts targeting inside the 20
for Utah
- 61 punts
- 9 touchbacks
- 28 inside the 20
- 23 punts of 50+ yards
http://pac-12.com/content/football-statistics
it looks like we had
- 48 punts
- 4 were touchbacks
- 21 were inside the 20
- 9 punts of 50+ yards
this compares to our opponents
- 66 punts
- 3 touchbacks
- 12 inside the 20
- 9 punts of 50+ yards
so we might punt out of bounds more than others since we appear to have a lot of punts targeting inside the 20
for Utah
- 61 punts
- 9 touchbacks
- 28 inside the 20
- 23 punts of 50+ yards
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
looking at some stats here
http://pac-12.com/content/football-statistics
it looks like we had
- 48 punts
- 4 were touchbacks
- 21 were inside the 20
- 9 punts of 50+ yards
this compares to our opponents
- 66 punts
- 3 touchbacks
- 12 inside the 20
- 9 punts of 50+ yards
so we might punt out of bounds more than others since we appear to have a lot of punts targeting inside the 20
for Utah
- 61 punts
- 9 touchbacks
- 28 inside the 20
- 23 punts of 50+ yards
http://pac-12.com/content/football-statistics
it looks like we had
- 48 punts
- 4 were touchbacks
- 21 were inside the 20
- 9 punts of 50+ yards
this compares to our opponents
- 66 punts
- 3 touchbacks
- 12 inside the 20
- 9 punts of 50+ yards
so we might punt out of bounds more than others since we appear to have a lot of punts targeting inside the 20
for Utah
- 61 punts
- 9 touchbacks
- 28 inside the 20
- 23 punts of 50+ yards
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
02-17-2016, 12:19 PM
Quote:I suppose the ideal punt, without considering game situations, would be landing just out of bounds, which would mean no return and would also maximize distance. That's risky, though, because you then have to depend on the official's judgment of where the punt went out of bounds, which isn't always particularly accurate.Â
I would propose the ideal punt play is to have it land in bounds, thereby maximizing the number of gross yards traveled with an immediate tackle so not gain by the returner or a fair catch. Kicking out of bounds has to be done at an angle, thereby giving up gross yards of distance.
Kicking out of bounds may result in a shorter net/gross performance, but it take variability out of the equation. Takes me back to the BG when Deltha O'Neal destroyed us on every return he had. It was better to kick of of bounds, even on kick offs, than to deal with the chance he would take it to the house.
So, do you trust your special teams coverage or not?
Quote:I suppose the ideal punt, without considering game situations, would be landing just out of bounds, which would mean no return and would also maximize distance. That's risky, though, because you then have to depend on the official's judgment of where the punt went out of bounds, which isn't always particularly accurate.Â
I would propose the ideal punt play is to have it land in bounds, thereby maximizing the number of gross yards traveled with an immediate tackle so not gain by the returner or a fair catch. Kicking out of bounds has to be done at an angle, thereby giving up gross yards of distance.
Kicking out of bounds may result in a shorter net/gross performance, but it take variability out of the equation. Takes me back to the BG when Deltha O'Neal destroyed us on every return he had. It was better to kick of of bounds, even on kick offs, than to deal with the chance he would take it to the house.
So, do you trust your special teams coverage or not?
02-17-2016, 01:39 PM
(02-17-2016, 12:19 PM)FarmBoy link Wrote:I would propose the ideal punt play is to have it land in bounds, thereby maximizing the number of gross yards traveled with an immediate tackle so not gain by the returner or a fair catch. Kicking out of bounds has to be done at an angle, thereby giving up gross yards of distance.
the ideal punt play is when the other team fumbles the punt and we recover for a TDÂ ;)
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
(02-17-2016, 12:19 PM)FarmBoy link Wrote:I would propose the ideal punt play is to have it land in bounds, thereby maximizing the number of gross yards traveled with an immediate tackle so not gain by the returner or a fair catch. Kicking out of bounds has to be done at an angle, thereby giving up gross yards of distance.
the ideal punt play is when the other team fumbles the punt and we recover for a TDÂ ;)
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
02-18-2016, 06:26 AM
The sideline is a 12th defender.Â
Not many things scarier to a punt defense than a returnable ball in the middle of the field; you have to spread the field. If you kick to one sideline instead, you can bracket the returner with a contain guy at around midfield and funnel the returner in a more concentrated mass of defenders.
On a related point, Stanford fans often lament what seems an unnecessarily large number of Stanford kickoffs that go out of bounds, and seem to give the opponent as free 35 yard return. How, they wonder, can a guy who can nail a 55 yard field goal not keep a kickoff in play? Same deal; you want to bring the sideline in as an added defender, and concentrate your return defenders to half the width of the field. It cuts the return man's gaps in half, and also tends to make the returner less decisive; so you see a lot of bad returns on kickoffs near the sidelines.
Not many things scarier to a punt defense than a returnable ball in the middle of the field; you have to spread the field. If you kick to one sideline instead, you can bracket the returner with a contain guy at around midfield and funnel the returner in a more concentrated mass of defenders.
On a related point, Stanford fans often lament what seems an unnecessarily large number of Stanford kickoffs that go out of bounds, and seem to give the opponent as free 35 yard return. How, they wonder, can a guy who can nail a 55 yard field goal not keep a kickoff in play? Same deal; you want to bring the sideline in as an added defender, and concentrate your return defenders to half the width of the field. It cuts the return man's gaps in half, and also tends to make the returner less decisive; so you see a lot of bad returns on kickoffs near the sidelines.
The sideline is a 12th defender.Â
Not many things scarier to a punt defense than a returnable ball in the middle of the field; you have to spread the field. If you kick to one sideline instead, you can bracket the returner with a contain guy at around midfield and funnel the returner in a more concentrated mass of defenders.
On a related point, Stanford fans often lament what seems an unnecessarily large number of Stanford kickoffs that go out of bounds, and seem to give the opponent as free 35 yard return. How, they wonder, can a guy who can nail a 55 yard field goal not keep a kickoff in play? Same deal; you want to bring the sideline in as an added defender, and concentrate your return defenders to half the width of the field. It cuts the return man's gaps in half, and also tends to make the returner less decisive; so you see a lot of bad returns on kickoffs near the sidelines.
Not many things scarier to a punt defense than a returnable ball in the middle of the field; you have to spread the field. If you kick to one sideline instead, you can bracket the returner with a contain guy at around midfield and funnel the returner in a more concentrated mass of defenders.
On a related point, Stanford fans often lament what seems an unnecessarily large number of Stanford kickoffs that go out of bounds, and seem to give the opponent as free 35 yard return. How, they wonder, can a guy who can nail a 55 yard field goal not keep a kickoff in play? Same deal; you want to bring the sideline in as an added defender, and concentrate your return defenders to half the width of the field. It cuts the return man's gaps in half, and also tends to make the returner less decisive; so you see a lot of bad returns on kickoffs near the sidelines.
02-18-2016, 10:35 AM
If you're interested in the punting philosophy (so to speak), this article is worth a read: http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_...ne-noticed
I've later read that it's a tad exaggerated, not everything Koch's doing is totally revolutionary, but it does seem like an overlooked area of the game for improvements, though perhaps more so at the NFL level where the punters and coaches have more time to dedicate to experimentation in practice, vs just getting fundamentals right. Would be interested to hear Alamar's take on this.
I've later read that it's a tad exaggerated, not everything Koch's doing is totally revolutionary, but it does seem like an overlooked area of the game for improvements, though perhaps more so at the NFL level where the punters and coaches have more time to dedicate to experimentation in practice, vs just getting fundamentals right. Would be interested to hear Alamar's take on this.
If you're interested in the punting philosophy (so to speak), this article is worth a read: http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_...ne-noticed
I've later read that it's a tad exaggerated, not everything Koch's doing is totally revolutionary, but it does seem like an overlooked area of the game for improvements, though perhaps more so at the NFL level where the punters and coaches have more time to dedicate to experimentation in practice, vs just getting fundamentals right. Would be interested to hear Alamar's take on this.
I've later read that it's a tad exaggerated, not everything Koch's doing is totally revolutionary, but it does seem like an overlooked area of the game for improvements, though perhaps more so at the NFL level where the punters and coaches have more time to dedicate to experimentation in practice, vs just getting fundamentals right. Would be interested to hear Alamar's take on this.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »