Are Field Goals the Sacrifice Bunts of Football?

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from Maverick74:

AAA,

As a avid football enthusiast here, let me chime in here. Football is one of the greatest strategy games out there. Having said that, there are two very important concepts to keep in mind here when playing football. And they are field position and momentum. The best coaches know this. If you have a 4th and 1 on the 15 and you are in a one possession game, you have to kick. If you go for it and fail, it's not the points you lose, but the momentum!!!! Games are won and lost on momentum. There is no reason to risk the positive momentum that got you down to your opponents 15 only to give the defense the opportunity to stuff you, take away your momentum and drive down the field to win the game.

Coaches fear the idea of turning the momentum over, this is why it almost always makes sense to go for 3 instead of the first down. This is also the reason why coaches don't attempt long field goals if its a long shot. Missing a field goal turns the momentum over to the other team and gives them great field position.

Also, as to your example of going for it inside the 10, I have seen more games lost then I care to remember on teams that do just that. You realize you are letting the defense rise to the challenge and make a 4th down stand. There is probably not a greater momentum changer in the game then stopping a team inside the 10, especially inside the 5 on 4th down. Like I said, take the sure 3, keep the momentum, play good defense, and get the ball back.

Granted a lot of these situations depend on the type of defense you have, your ability to score and the weather conditions.

Momentum should not be a factor for a well-coached team. What is momentum anyway? The last play went our way? BFD. Of course, you need a coach who has the ability to communicate what he is doing to the team and get them to buy in to it. Then they won't be crushed if a decision that was correct on the probabilities goes against them.

Another statistic I wish they would keep is the number of times a defense forces a three and out. To me, that is highly significant. A three and out almost guarantees good field position( and yes, it is a momentum changer). There is a lot of difference in forcing a three and out from the 25 and letting a team get a couple of first downs and forcing them to punt from their 40. I think the logic of it is that defenses should take more chances when they have the other team backed up. Instead, most coordinators tend to play it safe in that situation. They're worried about giving up a big play, which can get them fired. I maintain that a three and out when the opponent is backed up in their own end is almost as good as a turnover and justifies taking some risks.

I probably wouldn't last long as a coach. The owner would fire me for making idiotic decisions. Over the course of a few seasons however, i think they'd play out in my favor. I know this. If I was a coach, I'd spend the resources to know what teh odds were in these situations.

Anyway, this kind of second-guessing is what makes the games interesting for me, since I no longer bet on them.