Third down punt

[smithlabs]

The doldrums of college football are here. Spring ball is over. Recruiting is slow and the fall practice is still a quarter away. We have time to consider some of the more abstract points of football. Some of you'll have actual ties to real football programs so you can help out here. I have seen situations were teams have attempted third down field goals. Three points to win and you get to have two tries at it if it's blocked. How about third down punts?

Here the scenario- third and long and the Buckeyes are pinned down inside their own 20.
Do we -
A) Run the obvious play up the middle to try and gain a little room to punt
B) Run a play that has a legitimate shot at gaining a first down
C) Punt on third down

A run up the middle just might get a first down but that is what the defense is expecting. A play that has a legitimate shot a first down might be in order if we need to score. My question is would you ever punt on third down?

I can think of several reasons to punt on third down. Running a play "outside the box" puts the defense on its heels (notice how I used both it"s" correctly in this post). They can either employee a traditional defense or send in the special teams. If they play strait up defense you punt the hell out of the ball. Instead of loosing 10 yards on their return you can gain 10 yards with the ball bouncing in your favor. A 50 yard punt with a 10 yard roll completely switches the field position. With no return man you could probably even line drive the punt all the way down the field. If they set up a return you can always fake the punt. Trepasso was a running back in high school and ran a 65 yard fake punt in kicking practice. If the fake doesn't work you can kick it again on fourth down. Kicking on third down can also avoid major special team errors. Given our long snappers and punt protection in spring ball we might need two chances to punt the ball. Why run a play just to gain a yard or two to get room to punt when you can get a whole extra down to punt.

Obviously, this strategy has limited uses. We want to try and convert a third down whenever possible. However, if we concede the possibility of converting a third down we have more options in punt formation on third down than just burying a running back between the tackles or worse yet a QB sneak.

Just a thought,

 

[jlb1705]

...Or they could just run a Hail Mary and bootleg with the QB. No offense, but punting on third down sounds like some backhanded video game strategy. It sounds like the old old days when scUM thought it was a good idea to keep letting Illinois and Red Grange the ball back when the team that just got scored on got to choose whether to receive or kick.

I can't think of a single situation where punting on third down is a good idea. If you are losing or tied, you should be trying to score. If you're winning, you should be trying to at least hold the ball and use some clock. Even if for some reason you're not winning and you're not trying to score (rather just play for field position) you should still be taking every opportunity to move the ball forward before giving it up.

 

[smithlabs]

I can't think of a single situation where punting on third down is a good idea. If you are losing or tied, you should be trying to score. If you're winning, you should be trying to at least hold the ball and use some clock. Even if for some reason you're not winning and you're not trying to score (rather just play for field position) you should still be taking every opportunity to move the ball forward before giving it up.

I am not to make this into some kind of a Sorites Paradox discussion but I think I can create a situation by nullifying each of your objections. You mention several points:
1) Score
2) Field position
3) Clock

re: score - I agree that late in a ball game if you are losing you would generally want to keep possession of the ball. So we can assume that either we are winning or there is considerable time left on the clock.

re: Field position - For sake of arguments lets assume that the first down is infinitely far away like 40 yards so there is no hope of getting a first down. Perhaps we should make it 20 yards so the potential fake might work. I suppose the correct term would be sufficiently far away that the traditional running play called is not intended to get a first down. In my original post I talked about expect gain for each type of play. I would expect net 20 yards difference between an unfielded punt and a fielded punt (+10 on roll, (-)-10 on the missed return). I would expect 3 yards (and a cloud of dust) on a running play. Even Pittman's 5.8 YPC doesn't even come close to the 20 yards you would get punting an unfielded punt. If they do decide to field the punt you can always run the fake.

re: Clock - Good point here. You miss an opportunity to take 30 seconds of the clock which might be critical at the end of the game. On the other hand, You also might force the opposing team to call a time out if you run a formation they don't expect. There are two sure ways to nullify the clock argument. Either consider a case where the clock isn't a factor (i.e. not late in the game or half) or have this play occur seconds before the two minute warning where an automatic time out would be called if you took the knee, ran up the middle or punted the ball.

Considering score, field postion (down and distance), and clock I can contrive a situation where a third down punt might make sense. I'll go ahead and include that the opposing team's offense has been completely ineffective and the only reason the score is even close is that they have blocked three punts already in the game. The situation is: third and 20, 2:01 seconds on the clock (assuming pro-ball), up by 11 points, pinned on the 8 yard line, opponent has no time outs left. They are down to their third string QB but have block three punts today. Would you A) try for a 20 yard pass, B) run a running play or C) take two chances to punt and ice the game. I would be tempted to do the punt. This is the moral equivalent of huck-and-zone in ultimate.

So there exists at least on situation where a third down punt make sense. Further more, I argue if you are sufficiently behind in down and distance on third down, pinned deep in your territory and not needing to score a third down punt formation (reserving the right to fake) can be better than a run. I have ofter heard announcers on TV talking about how the coach made a good decision to run a draw instead of legitimately trying to pick up a third down. The logic is that playing ball control and try to win down and distance (i.e. Tressel Ball?) is better than making a mistake. If the play isn't there it is better not to force it. I bet there is at least on game next year where a lame ass draw is called but a third down punt would have netted better field postion.

 

[CharlotteBuckeye62]

Woody punted on third down back in the late 50's or early 60's. It rained hard all game, which I think was against Penn State, and we lost.
The fans didn't love Woody that day.
Unless we have a QB who is a really good quick kicker, don't punt on third down.

 

[Zurp]

Unless we have a QB who is a really good quick kicker, don't punt on third down.

I wouldn't mind punting on third down. But I wouldn't bring in my normal punt team. I'd use a "normal" formation, as if to attempt to get the first down, and then punt with my quarterback, running back, receiver, or whoever gives me the best play.

Like EVERY play call, the score, time on the clock, and field position would play a role in making this call. I definitely don't punt from within my 20 on 3rd down if I'm losing. If I'm winning, and there's not much time left in the game, I'd probably run the ball once to get another 30-45 seconds off the clock before punting. Maybe I punt if my defense is playing great football. But even then, it's almost a wash, since the best I can expect (besides getting a turnover) is a 3-and-out, where they punt and get me back where I am right now (except it's first down, instead of third).

Maybe, though, I punt on third down if I'm winning by 3, and not much time left, and I have a great defense, and the other team has an awesome FG kicker, or an awesome punt-returner. A good punt would get them out of FG range, the PR wouldn't be on the field to change the course of the game, and I'd have the confidence that my defense can get the other team into their decision of whether to go for a 4th down conversion, or punt, and hopefully my team will have to punt, again.

And maybe I punt on 3rd down if I'm getting my ass handed to me by the other team and I know that if I pass for a 1st down, it will be incomplete or intercepted. But I don't think I'd ever choose that in that case.

 

[GoBucks459]

I'm not really for punting on third down unless the situation is really bad, pinned very deep. A few years ago, when Randel Ell was callin the shots at IU, I was watching a game where they played Michigan, it was like 3rd and 28 and he just got the snap and himself punt it, no set punt formation though...the first time i saw that i was confused..

hope we never resort to that looking at our high powered offense...

 

[BuckeyeTrail]

Maybe, though, I punt on third down if I'm winning by 3, and not much time left, and I have a great defense, and the other team has an awesome FG kicker, or an awesome punt-returner. A good punt would get them out of FG range, the PR wouldn't be on the field to change the course of the game, and I'd have the confidence that my defense can get the other team into their decision of whether to go for a 4th down conversion, or punt, and hopefully my team will have to punt, again.

this makes a lot of sense to me. i can imagine this situation playing out in the penn st game this year.

it's been a close, hard fought, defensive struggle in happy valley. we lead a gritty nittany lion team 13-10 with under 2 minutes to go. we're stuck inside our own twenty, and we've got a 3rd and long (like 15 or 20 yds). they've got 2 timeouts, so if we run it, they'll just call time. with one timeout and the college first down stop the clock rule, they have plenty of time to score. the penn st crowd is going absolutely berserk. their lone TD was thanks to a punt return by their star freshman, who is anxiously awaiting his chance to be a hero on the sideline. we keep troy in the game, but sneakily put trapasso into the game as one of the tight ends. nobody will notice that something is wierd, because troy and all the skill players are the same. we quickly line up, then trapasso goes in motion, then quickly drops back 10-15 yards and receives the snap. he line drives the ball over the stunned safety's head, resulting in a net punt of 50-60 yds. psu would probably not see this coming and would not be prepared to field the punt, or they could burn a costly timeout in the process. you have eliminated their most dangerous weapon, and now you are forcing their weak offense to go the length of the field to tie/win the game. in this situation, which isn't far-fetched at all, a 3rd down punt makes a lot of sense. Tressel-ball would be taken to a whole other level, and it would cause us to win yet another tough, close game on the road.

this was an excellent and unique post by smithlabs, i laughed when i first started reading it but now it makes a lot of sense. when i was a kid bellichick wasn't exactly loved in these parts and me and my bro used to joke about how he probably wanted to punt on 3rd down (after all, he did kick a field goal as time expired to reduce a 31-10 loss to 31-13, and after the game, when asked about his decision, responded with "I wanted to get 3 pts") and now, 10 years later, the guy is probably the smartest coach in nfl history. the world is a crazy place, and i believe that there is room in it for a 3rd down punt.

 

[kinch]

Are we assuming Ginn is injured?

Whether or not I think it is ever right to punt on 3rd down, I am a big fan of bringing up this type of discussion this time of year. Good stuff.

Anyway, while I can see how, based on percentages, and assuming we hadn't done this before, we may end up with better field position then punting on 4th down. The scenario is plausible.

At the same time, being as this is not baseball (where Bill James may be able to weigh in enough to convince some managment, like Billy Beene or Theo Epstein, that this is good sometimes) I don't see it happening. The level of defeatist attitude necessary for this play is greater than that of any other in football I can think of, and isn't the type of thing teams want to have, I'd think. Even though it would be an extremely rare play, and even though Tresselball seems to make it at least somewhat possible, I can't see us doing it, even if we didn't have the offensive weapons we have now. It just feels like it violates some sort of law of football. . . :)

 

[BB73]

It was a sound strategy in the Snow Bowl of 1950. scUM won that game 9-3 without making a first down.

But I wouldn't do it with a small lead late in the game. Making the other team use their time-out is normally worth a gain of 10-15 yards in field position, and it's hard to believe that a quick kick would net more than that. The other option that comes into play is the intentional safety, which is best used on 4th down with a 6-point lead in the last 2 minutes.

 

[jlb1705]

With the way things went during the spring game, they may want to line up in punt formation on first down, that way when the snap sails over the punter's head, they can fall on it and try again.

 

[Dryden]

The other option that comes into play is the intentional safety

I'm thinking the same thing. If we were looking to milk 30 seconds, force Penn State to burn two (or more) time outs and were even up by 3, I'd rather just direct snap to Ginn and let him run around in circles in the backfield ... do it on 3rd down, then do it again on 4th down and make sure he runs out of the back of the endzone.

 

[seedubya]

Unless we have a QB who is a really good quick kicker, don't punt on third down.

Both Zwick AND Boeckman punted in High School. I think I remember Zwick quick-kicking one time by lining up in the shot-gun. But it was fourth down, and they were "faking" going for it.

 

[thenumber7]

I'd rather just direct snap to Ginn and let him run around in circles in the backfield ... do it on 3rd down, then do it again on 4th down and make sure he runs out of the back of the endzone.

What if he ran circles around PSU so badly that he pulled a barry sanders-esque move and ran for a td. now that'd be crazy!

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

punt on third down? why not just keep taking delay of game penalties until the defense jumps offsides? :2004:

 

[Steve19]

I can see two times that kicking on third down might be very effective.

I would add to what the previous posts have said, the case of a hard-fought "field position" game in wet weather. A game in which there is a chance the opposing team could fumble a kick.

Rugby players use something called a grubber (similar to a squib kick) which is kicked ahead quickly bouncing on the ground. These often break through an opposing team but come to rest in the field of play. Two good things can happen. First, the defense fumbles the kick or touches it on the way through or it comes to rest with the defense trapped deep in its own territory.

The second opportunity concerns a game in which another three points would put the game out of reach. We have lost the art of the drop kick in American football. Drop kicks can be used very effectively and often are a complete surprise to the other team. Ginn is doing everything else, maybe he can kick one of these too!

By the way, Pretorius will have both of these kicks down to a very fine art as these are used often in rugby.