Official Saturday Games Thread Episode 3: Air Force, Army, National Guard

ScionOfSouthland said:
Pac-12 after dark off to an early start tonight. It's usually illegal to show this stuff before 2am
Click to expand...

I'll turn it on if it holds halfway through the fourth quarter. Stanford is a boring team and I'd hate to see them win a game they were supposed to.
 
18in32 said:
Why does starting in FG range mean the first team usually wins? Common way of thinking is that it's better to go second.
Click to expand...
The team to win the coin toss (i.e., the second team to get the ball) usually wins. It was like 62% of the time last time I ran the numbers. Knowing how many points you need to score to win is a substantial advantage.

If the first team fails to score, all the second team has to do is play conservatively and set up for a FG. Instead if you started at the 35, the second team would at least have to gain some yards to attempt a medium-range field goal. (I think the 40 yard line would be ideal, but 35 would be a big improvement.)
 
BTW I can't remember the last time Tech won an overtime coin toss. We lost 2013 UGA, 2014 UGA, 2017 UT... Any other overtime games? Maybe we won 2009 WF
 
gtzulu said:
If the first team fails to score, all the second team has to do is play conservatively and set up for a FG. Instead if you started at the 35, the second team would at least have to gain some yards to attempt a medium-range field goal. (I think the 40 yard line would be ideal, but 35 would be a big improvement.)
Click to expand...
Doesn't make sense to me. Why would the first team fail to score but not the second?

I agree it's best to go second, but moving the field position back reduces that advantage by making it harder for either team to score -- and hence lengthening overtime.

The current starting field position was chosen precisely to give both kickers a good chance.

I think the way they do it is pretty good and way way better than the stupid NFL system.
 
18in32 said:
Doesn't make sense to me. Why would the first team fail to score but not the second?

I agree it's best to go second, but moving the field position back reduces that advantage by making it harder for either team to score -- and hence lengthening overtime.

The current starting field position was chosen precisely to give both kickers a good chance.

I think the way they do it is pretty good and way way better than the stupid NFL system.
Click to expand...

He's saying the second team knows how many points they need to score, and if all they need is 3 points to win, they already pretty much start in field goal range, provided they have a decent kicker. They can conceivably play very conservatively in that case, knowing that there is a 100% chance their opponent did not just score. If you get the ball first, you have no way of knowing whether it's going to take a field goal or touchdown to get the win, so you can't really play for the field goal. You have to take chances, which is more likely to result in something bad happening. There's just a lot more uncertainty.

All of that said, both college and the pro overtime significantly favor the team that wins the coin toss, despite each employing a very different overtime system.
 
18in32 said:
Doesn't make sense to me. Why would the first team fail to score but not the second?
Click to expand...

Suppose Team A has the ball first and it's 4th and goal from the 2. They don't know if Team B will score a touchdown, so they decide to go for it. They come up short. Then team B just runs up the middle 3 times for a couple yards and kicks a 40-yarder to win. Team A doesn't deserve to lose though--they could've easily kicked a 19-yard field goal had they known Team B would only score 3.

The general problem is when you start in field goal range, it increases the frequency with which the less-deserving team wins. The team that wins the coin toss will always have an advantage with alternating possessions, but I'm saying starting outside of FG range would significantly reduce the advantage.

18in32 said:
I agree it's best to go second, but moving the field position back reduces that advantage by making it harder for either team to score -- and hence lengthening overtime.
Click to expand...

(1) I think overtime should be lengthened a little if necessary to improve fairness. (2) It wouldn't necessarily lengthen overtime because it would reduce FG-kicking stalemates.

18in32 said:
I think the way they do it is pretty good and way way better than the stupid NFL system.
Click to expand...

I agree it's better than NFL, and I'm only suggesting a tweak.
 
It would be much more satisfying to me if a team had to at minimum kick a 52-yard FG to win in overtime. (That is the distance if teams started at the 35.) A 40-yard FG isn't earning victory, it's just an easy putt. I'd rather say "That was a great kick" than "That was an unlucky coin toss".
 
Clemson is good, great on defense, but I think we have a better chance of beating them this season than last.
 
JJacket said:
Clemson is good, great on defense, but I think we have a better chance of beating them this season than last.
Click to expand...
Of course, after typing this, I realized we have no chance at all of beating them last season
 
gtfan088 said:
If you get the ball first, you have no way of knowing whether it's going to take a field goal or touchdown to get the win, so you can't really play for the field goal. You have to take chances, which is more likely to result in something bad happening. There's just a lot more uncertainty.
Click to expand...
gtzulu said:
Suppose Team A has the ball first and it's 4th and goal from the 2. They don't know if Team B will score a touchdown, so they decide to go for it. They come up short. Then team B just runs up the middle 3 times for a couple yards and kicks a 40-yarder to win. Team A doesn't deserve to lose though--they could've easily kicked a 19-yard field goal had they known Team B would only score 3.
Click to expand...
You guys are overstating the advantage of having the ball second. It is helpful. But you still gotta block and tackle. And since when is a 40 yard FG an "easy putt"? Those get missed in college all the time — including on Labor Day night. In the first article I found, from 2014, FBS kickers made 40-49 yd FG's less than 60% of the time. That's neither a gimme nor completely impossible — exactly what we want in OT play.
 
Breaking news from the International Space Station:

ASTRONAUTS ABOARD THE ISS CONFIRM THAT LES MILES’ SMUG GRIN CURRENTLY VISIBLE FROM SPACE

On the back of LSU’s 37-7 defeat at the hands of Mississippi State this evening, astronauts aboard the International Space Station have confirmed that Les Miles’ smug grin is currently visible from their current position.

“It was a spectacular phenomenon to see”, said [astronaut] Randy Bresnik, “Usually it’s just the Great Wall of China that we can see from up here, so it was a welcome change.”
 
18in32 said:
You guys are overstating the advantage of having the ball second. It is helpful. But you still gotta block and tackle. And since when is a 40 yard FG an "easy putt"? Those get missed in college all the time — including on Labor Day night. In the first article I found, from 2014, FBS kickers made 40-49 yd FG's less than 60% of the time. That's neither a gimme nor completely impossible — exactly what we want in OT play.
Click to expand...

I was just explaining the rationale. I'm not overstating anything. There is an advantage, but it's not out of this world.
 
18in32 said:
You guys are overstating the advantage of having the ball second. It is helpful.
Click to expand...

The number I remember is you have a 62% chance of winning the game if you win the coin toss.

So your chance of winning goes down by 25% if you lose the coin toss: (0.5 - (1 - 0.62)) / 0.5 ~= 0.25 . That's a big difference!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top