[BostonCard]

Thoughts on the game:
1. 4 straight wins on the road to end the season is a tremendous accomplishment. Kudos to the coaches and the players
2. THAT WAS THE MOST PAC-12 REFS ENDING TO ANY GAME I'VE EVER SEEN
3. Mills' rally after throwing the pick-six reminded me of Andrew Luck in the 2011 game at U$C. That took real guts. I hope he stays another year
4. I would've gone for two at 34-33. I had no confidence in that defense to stop UCLA in OT after the way they played in the second half
5. Punting from the UCLA 33????? AGAIN?????????

Haven't read through others' insights yet.

I didn't like punting from the 33, but Toner had already missed an extra point and maybe was gimpy (?), so I could see not trying the 50-yard field goal. And it was pretty long yardage to make a first down, so I expected Shaw to play for field position by punting even though it made us fans grind our teeth. Sadly the punt didn't pin UCLA really deep, plus it only took them one play, a running play no less, to get out to the 33, so it ended up ineffective.

Any reason not to let Toner's back up try the field goal?
He was known for hitting 55 yarders in HS.
If you have a lock down defense punting from the opponents 33 makes sense. We clearly don't.
Then again, that's what Shaw does and will continue to do.
And, I suppose, Cardboarders will continue to complain about it.

Actually, there are two circumstances where it doesn't make sense to play for field position and one case where it does (aside from when game circumstances support it or don't).  If you have a really good or really bad defense, field position doesn't make much of a difference.  In the extreme case (a perfect defense), no matter where you give the ball up, the expected value of the opponent's possession is 0, as a perfect defense will give up no points.  In the other extreme, where you have a completely porous defense, the expected value of an opponent's possession is 7 (or 8 if they go for 2), again, no matter where they get the ball.  Our defense is probably close to that, as witnessed by the fact that it took UCLA one play to get back to the place we punted from.

Where playing for position makes sense is when you have a good but not great defense, and the expected point value of a drive starting at the opponents 10 is much lower than one starting at the opponents 40.  The BCF tools have a look at defensive points per drive for long drives (those starting within an opponents 20) and medium drives (those starting between the opponents 20 and its own 40).  If there is a large delta between those two, then it makes some sense to punt.

Otherwise, better to just go for it.

BC

[BostonCard]

Thoughts on the game:
1. 4 straight wins on the road to end the season is a tremendous accomplishment. Kudos to the coaches and the players
2. THAT WAS THE MOST PAC-12 REFS ENDING TO ANY GAME I'VE EVER SEEN
3. Mills' rally after throwing the pick-six reminded me of Andrew Luck in the 2011 game at U$C. That took real guts. I hope he stays another year
4. I would've gone for two at 34-33. I had no confidence in that defense to stop UCLA in OT after the way they played in the second half
5. Punting from the UCLA 33????? AGAIN?????????

Haven't read through others' insights yet.

I didn't like punting from the 33, but Toner had already missed an extra point and maybe was gimpy (?), so I could see not trying the 50-yard field goal. And it was pretty long yardage to make a first down, so I expected Shaw to play for field position by punting even though it made us fans grind our teeth. Sadly the punt didn't pin UCLA really deep, plus it only took them one play, a running play no less, to get out to the 33, so it ended up ineffective.

Any reason not to let Toner's back up try the field goal?
He was known for hitting 55 yarders in HS.
If you have a lock down defense punting from the opponents 33 makes sense. We clearly don't.
Then again, that's what Shaw does and will continue to do.
And, I suppose, Cardboarders will continue to complain about it.

Actually, there are two circumstances where it doesn't make sense to play for field position and one case where it does (aside from when game circumstances support it or don't).  If you have a really good or really bad defense, field position doesn't make much of a difference.  In the extreme case (a perfect defense), no matter where you give the ball up, the expected value of the opponent's possession is 0, as a perfect defense will give up no points.  In the other extreme, where you have a completely porous defense, the expected value of an opponent's possession is 7 (or 8 if they go for 2), again, no matter where they get the ball.  Our defense is probably close to that, as witnessed by the fact that it took UCLA one play to get back to the place we punted from.

Where playing for position makes sense is when you have a good but not great defense, and the expected point value of a drive starting at the opponents 10 is much lower than one starting at the opponents 40.  The BCF tools have a look at defensive points per drive for long drives (those starting within an opponents 20) and medium drives (those starting between the opponents 20 and its own 40).  If there is a large delta between those two, then it makes some sense to punt.

Otherwise, better to just go for it.

BC