导出博客文章NFL broadcasts and coaching news conferences are full of football proverbs. Very
often, these are simply explanations for a why a situation demanded avoiding
risk, or at least delaying it. And very often, the numbers -- while not perfect
-- tell us otherwise.In many cases, these unwritten laws of coaching and game
management in football are more a function of history and tradition without a
space for self-reevaluation or change. Thats not acceptable. Teams who spend all
week looking for the tiniest little competitive advantages abandon them when
given the opportunity to impact a game. Thats a waste, and its time for a
change.Lets run through some of these close scenarios and explain why the
traditional method of thinking about them is antiquated. Starting with a classic
...Never take points off the board.Points are valuable! Of course we want
points! And when you have to battle for 60 yards, then turn to a questionable
kicker who narrowly sneaks one through the uprights, the last thing you want to
do as a coach is repeat this process while running the risk of coming away with
no points. The possibility of scoring seven points, though, should make three
seem much less valuable.There are obvious situations in which teams should keep
their points -- to tie or take the lead in a close game, for one -- but early in
a game, when the only goal should be to score as many points as possible,
coaches need to be open to the idea of leaving their offense on the field to
score a touchdown. Since kickers are better than ever before and turnover rates
are at their lowest since 1932, the chances are slim that an offense will take
three off the board and end up with zero.Lets use the expected points model that
underpins ESPNs QBR metrics. Heres a simple scenario: Its early in the second
quarter of a 7-7 game with league-average offenses and defenses. Your kicker
hits a field goal on fourth-and-2, but the defense is offside, giving you a
first down if so inclined. Heres how many points your team would expect to score
with a new set of downs from each given yard line:These numbers account for the
risk of turning the ball over or not scoring at all versus the reward of scoring
a touchdown. In a vacuum, when you expect to score more than three points from a
given yard line, you should wipe the field goal off the board and go back out on
offense. Just about every feasible situation in which you would be kicking a
field goal seems to suggest that taking the points off of the board is the
superior option. Even if you are conservative and have an subpar field goal
kicker, a new set of downs would most likely get you inside the 30-yard line.
Send your quarterback back out there, coach.Never throw when youre running a
four-minute offense to kill clock.Thirty years ago, when quarterbacks were
throwing farther downfield and completing a far lower percentage of their
passes, it made sense for teams to strictly limit their quarterbacks to handing
off the football in situations where running clock was more important than
picking up a first down. Quarterbacks simply couldnt be trusted not to screw up,
and most receivers werent good enough to regularly win one-on-one
matchups.Todays game is different. Quarterbacks routinely throw bubble screens
and other short passes designed to get the ball out quickly, and their success
rate on those throws is remarkable: They complete 70.9 percent of their passes
within five yards of the line of scrimmage and throw interceptions 1.1 percent
of the time. Thats similar to the fumble rate on rushing plays since 2012 (1.2
percent, although only 0.7 percent are lost to the opposition).Repeat: Many
passes are high-percentage plays.In situations where teams are one or two first
downs away from ending the game, passing simply has to be part of the equation,
if only to prevent teams from teeing off on your running game. The screen Dak
Prescott set up with Cole Beasley to seal the game against the 49ers is a
perfect example. And, with run-pass options, you can ask your quarterback to
make a simple check at the line of scrimmage and either hand the ball off or
make a pass that is likely to be completed.In situations where teams simply want
to run as much clock as possible and punt without any real concern about getting
a first down, theyre probably better off kneeling than running offensive plays,
if only because of the risk of a fumble. Theres little logic behind teams
half-trying to succeed on offense. Another example of that ...Run to start your
two-minute drill, because if it fails, just run out the clock.Many NFL teams are
fond of starting their final drives before halftime with a draw or another sort
of running play to try to test the waters. If the play goes well, theyll kick it
into second gear and start sprinting down the field to try to score. If the play
fails, theyll slow down and waste time before hitting the locker room for
halftime. In a league where teams constantly talk about dictating the game and
imposing their will upon the opposition, the halftime draw is weirdly
passive.But the halftime draw doesnt suit either master. If the play works and
gains 10 yards, youre now sprinting up to the line of scrimmage to run your next
play while wasting precious seconds or youre burning a timeout. Given how far
these plays likely are from the end zone, theyre the most likely passes on your
drive to be completed and the mostly likely to end with a free pass out of
bounds to stop the clock. Teams are afraid of throwing incomplete passes and
being stuck punting to the opposition, but if thats such a concern, youre better
off kneeling and avoiding the risk of fumbles.The classic example of end-of-half
clock mismanagement came in Week 3 from the Titans, who ran a draw on first down
for 8 yards from the 25-yard line with 33 seconds left in the first half. The
opposing Raiders were down to one timeout. Oakland didnt call a timeout after
the play, so Tennessee could have let the game go to halftime or called one of
their own remaining timeouts to try to set up the next couple of plays. Instead,
they rushed to the line and threw a pass with 11 seconds left, a meaningless
3-yard in-route that was telegraphed and nearly intercepted. On the next play,
with eight seconds left, Marcus Mariota threw another pass over the middle that
was tipped and intercepted by Reggie Nelson, who stepped out of bounds during
his return with no time left on the clock. It was the polar opposite of how to
manage a late-half or late-game situation.Teams can get in trouble throwing the
ball in these spots, although its often with low-reward decisions; think about
the Cowboys throwing a checkdown with time running out in the half against
Washington in 2010 and having Tashard Choices fumble returned for a touchdown --
which ended up as the margin of victory in a 13-7 loss. And there are times when
the draw works, too. But thats not the point. Its better to have a plan and go
all-out in attack or time expenditure without letting the opposition decide what
to do on your behalf.When teams are dealing with this decision in the fourth
quarter of a tie contest, chances are its better to be aggressive and try to win
games. There are too many teams throughout history who have sat on the ball
after allowing a late score and regretted the tale. The flip side of that, quite
famously in opposition to John Maddens commentary, was the 2001 Patriots. They
allowed a back-breaking touchdown to Ricky Proehl with 1:36 left in the Super
Bowl to tie the score at 17, and while Madden suggested the Patriots kneel on
the ball, Bill Belichick rightly realized he was a massive underdog and would
only be running the risk of giving Kurt Warner the ball in overtime.Tom Brady
promptly drove the Patriots 53 yards for a game-winning Adam Vinatieri field
goal.Never go for two before you have to.The rule differs around the league, but
there are a fair number of NFL playcallers who dont go for two until the end of
the game is in sight. For some, you start at the beginning of the fourth
quarter, while others might not even think about their two-point plays until
there are seven minutes or less remaining in the contest.The argument says you
shouldnt chase the score until theres a good chance it might be the final score,
which makes some sense, even if many of those same teams and commentators ignore
that logic in more conservative situations. (Many of them will argue how teams
should kick a field goal to tie the score or make it a one-possession game at
similar times of the contest.) Its true that teams shouldnt treat the numbers on
the scoreboard as if theyre guaranteed to be the final score, but its also naive
to suggest that scoring is entirely random from that point forward.Its
impossible for humans to imagine all of the possibilities in their head in real
time, but its far from impossible to imagine them with a computer, which is why
coaches should look to models. The one created by Football Commentary is
outdated because it doesnt account for the new extra point rules, but it gives
us some broader insight into how teams should think about these sorts of
decisions.Their model suggests going for two isnt as meaningful or clear-cut
early in the second half as it might be later in the contest, but there are
still situations where the choice to go for two should be quite obvious. Teams
should basically always be going for two when they are up by five or down by
five. The same is true when they are down by two, eight, nine, 13 or 15, which
leads to another unwritten rule ...Kick the extra point when down nine to make
it a one-score game.The Browns ran into the furor surrounding this unwritten
rule a couple of weeks back, when Hue Jackson decided to go for two down 28-19
with 2:10 left to try to make it a one-score game. He failed. This essentially
ended the contest: The Browns recovered an onside kick and scored a touchdown,
but that was only enough to make it 28-26. They failed on a second onside kick
try and subsequently lost.Lets flip that scenario and say the Browns kick the
extra point first to go down 28-20 with 2:10 left. Then, lets say that the same
stuff happens. The Browns recover the onside kick, score another touchdown, and
then go for two and fail. Theyre in the same situation. Theyre down 28-26, but
now, its with 30 seconds to go. There is no time left to overcome their failed
two-point play.The outcomes are exactly the same. If you get the two-pointer,
you need only one score to tie, regardless of whether you get it early or late.
And if you dont get the two-pointer, you need two scores to tie, regardless of
whether you miss with the first attempt or the second one. The only difference
between the two plays, as Chase Stuart first pointed out to me, is that teams
who go for two and fail on their first drive have more time to adapt their
decision-making for the fact that theyve failed by getting more aggressive with
blitzes or offensive playcalling. The team who goes for it late and fails has
spent the preceding few minutes assuming they were going to get the two-pointer
to tie. (A team who gets the two-pointer on their first drive also can win by
going for a two-pointer again on their second touchdown drive, but that is an
avenue of aggressiveness coaches are unlikely to pursue.)Coaches dont go for two
on the earlier drive for a couple of reasons. 1) They rarely want to do
something that will influence the game or take it out of their players hands,
and 2) the decision-making is based on putting off losing for as long as
possible as opposed to attempting to actively win, which is why they pass up
fourth-and-short early in the fourth quarter and are often stuck going for
fourth-and-12 later.Ive also heard the argument that players will be demoralized
by failing to go for two early and then get shut down, but Im more skeptical
there. The Browns had every reason to turn off the switch after failing to score
their two-pointer, given the general hopelessness of the short-term situation in
Cleveland, and they promptly played their butts off to get the ball back and
score again.?The Browns situation wasnt the classic example, if only because
they didnt really have a ton of time to optimize their decision-making either
way. It makes going for two on the earlier drive less meaningful, but theres
still no added argument toward going for two on the later drive. Youre fooling
yourself if you think getting the early extra point does anything more to make
it a one-score game.Kick the field goal in a low-scoring game because points are
at a premium.Ive never been able to understand this one. When scoring is low,
some points -- any points -- could be the difference, so take em.Problem: Isnt
the flip side of that argument even more compelling? If youre not expecting to
move the ball and come away with a drive deep into opposing territory, shouldnt
you take advantage of that rare opportunity to score a touchdown? If three
points are valuable, seven seems significantly more useful, given that it would
take the opposing team a touchdown drive of its own (or three field goals) to
match what youve accomplished on one drive.Heres the benefit that comes whenever
you miss a fourth-and-short deep in opposing territory: field position. In a
low-scoring game, field position is critical. Teams punt in their oppositions
side of the field and play it safe on third down to try to ensure a
field-position advantage. If you kick a field goal, youre giving the other team
the ball back after a missed field goal or an ensuing kickoff. If you go for it
inside the 5-yard line and fail, you leave your defense in an advantageous
position. That sort of field position advantage will add up, both over that
drive and in the one to come.There are more maxims to delve into while talking
about football coaches and commentators. I still dont understand why teams on
the road have to take the points, or why NFL teams try to ice kickers when the
evidence suggests it has no meaningful strategic value (and can often allow a
practice kick). But well keep hearing these, because sometimes, superstition and
tradition rule the way over reality and logic.
Cheap Jerseys UK Online . --
Jonathan Drouin gave Halifax the boost it needed to edge host Sherbrooke Phoenix
3-2 in a shootout in Quebec Major Junior Hockey League action.
Stitched Jerseys UK .
Zvonareva, who won the tournament in 2009 and 10, couldnt handle her opponents
big groundstrokes in only her third event back after 17 months out with a
shoulder injury. Zvonareva made her comeback in January in Shenzhen and played
in the Australian Open but lost her first matches at both tournaments.
http://www.cheapjerseysauthenticuk.com/
. Houston won 3-0 to advance to face New York in the Eastern Conference
semifinals. Last in the game, Di Vaio and Romero got into a shoving match with
several Houston players. Romero appeared to elbow and kick Houston defender Kofi
Sarkodie.
Cheap Nike NFL Jerseys
UK . How great will be revealed in the next couple of days at the board of
governors meeting in Pebble Beach, Calif.
Discount Jerseys UK .
Vancouver Whitecaps and Toronto FC failed to make the postseason while Montreal
Impact fell at the first hurdle losing heavily to Houston Dynamo in the Eastern
Conference Knockout Round. Jaromir Jagr became the third player to join the NHLs
750-goal club when he scored Thursday night in the Florida Panthers 4-2 loss to
the Washington Capitals.Jagrs power-play goal tied the game at 2 with 5:50
remaining in the second. Jagr took a pass in the slot from Aleksander Barkov,
who was behind the goal line, and beat Braden Holtby.Jagr trails only Wayne
Gretzky (894) and Gordie Howe (801) in career ggoals.ddddddddddddThe power-play
goal was the first in 11 opportunities for the Panthers this season.Jagrs goal
was his first in 10 games, including one last season, six playoff games last
season and three this season.Information from The Associated Press was used in
this report.
China NFL Jerseys
Cheap Nike NFL Jerseys
NFL Jerseys Cheap
Wholesale NFL Jerseys
Cheap Basketball Jerseys
Online Stitched Hockey
Jerseys Wholesale Baseball
Jerseys Football Jerseys
Outlet College Jerseys For
Sale Cheap MLB Jerseys
Wholesale Soccer Jerseys
Wholesale Jerseys For Sale
Wholesale NFL Jerseys ' ' '
Find in Directory
Find in Events
Find in Marketplace