This came up in the mega game thread this week about the Panthers' strategy at the end of the game. It might not be worthy of a thread, but risk-reward questions interest me so who knows, maybe it will interest others.
The specific scenario I'm interested in is when a team is losing and has the chance to win with a field goal and the other team does not have the ability to stop the clock, such that the team with the ball can kick with as little time left as it would like. And the team in possession has a time out.
The strategy almost always employed is to get the clock down to under the amount of time that the field goal will take, by kneeling, and then to kick. In other words a premium is put on leaving the other team no time. My question is whether that's sound.
I think the key to the question is that the team with the ball is losing the game. They must execute a penalty-free field goal to win. To me, teams are putting too much of a premium on making sure the other team has no time, given that penalty-free kicks are not a given. There are two potential questions: (1) should you try for a TD on a down earlier than fourth down, before settling for the kick, effectively giving yourself 2 chances to win the game, and (2) if you're going to kick, how much time should you leave?
On the first question, I think if you're losing by 1, and you can try for a TD with under 20 seconds on the clock, you go for it. Yesterday, the Panthers had the ball close to the goal line and, letting the play clock go down 40 seconds each time, could have run a play with about 18 seconds left on third down. If they score the TD, they are up 5 and can go up 7 with a two-point conversion. So, worst case scenario, the other team must score a TD in under 20 seconds with no time outs and may only be able to tie. If you don't get in the end zone, you let the clock run down.
The risks on the play are turnover, penalty, and doing something to stop the clock. I'm thinking about a straight ahead run. If you commit a penalty, it's still third down and you can still run more time on third down before you kick. But you might lose 10 yards. So, I would only do it very close the goal line. I thought yesterday was a perfect situation to try for the TD. I think the fear of a turnover is overrated. Put a premium on ball security. If you don't have a back you can trust, don't do it. If you are tied, then no, it should be kick or OT. But you're losing. Take two chances to win -- although admittedly one of those chances comes with a slight risk that the opponent goes down and scores a TD in 15 seconds. Unlikely, but it happens. More than a missed field goal? I guess that's the question. Of course, the defense can decline a penalty and the clock still stops, so now you've left about 15 seconds. I think this is the biggest risk. Still, the fact is that you're losing. Two chances to win is pretty attractive.
Second, if you do let the clock go all the way down, how much time do you leave? I think one second is a mistake. Yes, a walk off feels great. But the problem is an offensive penalty. Nobody thinks about this, but it's going to happen in a big game. I've seen it happen I think at least once, or maybe twice this year, but it was at halftime so nobody cared as much. The problem is that you only get an untimed down for defensive penalties. For non pre-snap penalties, the clock runs. If the offense committed a penalty, the points come off the board, the time goes off the clock, and the half ends. So, lining up in the neutral zone (this happened to the Cardinals at halftime of a game this year and they lost 3 points), hands to the face, holding, grabbing a facemask, anything like that -- you lose. Compare that to calling time out with 7 second left. Now, if there's an offensive penalty, but you make the kick, you get a second try. Generally made field goals are 4 or 5 seconds. If you make the kick, you force the defense to take the penalty, you get to replay the down, and most importantly you have time left to kick again after the yardage.
If you miss the kick, it's game over either way. If the play takes longer than 5 seconds, it wasn't a made kick, so you lose anyway. What's the downside? Well, it's that you give the opposition the chance to return a kick for a TD and win or tie the game. Or to go 75 yards in 2 seconds. I guess one consideration is whether you have a kicker that can kick touchbacks. If so, how often have we seen 2 second 75 yard TDs? I guess twice? How often are field goals negated by penalties? More often. We've seen a surprising number of holds on field goals this year. That would end the game if you wait for :01. But these are contested plays where the other side is trying to block the kick to win the game and so there is action on the play.
I think being so unnecessarily scared of giving the other team 2 seconds forces teams into a suboptimal play, and when it bites someone, because some moron lines up 4 inches in the neutral zone on the kick, I'm going to be here to say I told you so! (Why offensive neutral zone infractions actually are allowed to be run and aren't pre-snap penalties like false starts is an interesting question, but that's the NFL rule.)
The specific scenario I'm interested in is when a team is losing and has the chance to win with a field goal and the other team does not have the ability to stop the clock, such that the team with the ball can kick with as little time left as it would like. And the team in possession has a time out.
The strategy almost always employed is to get the clock down to under the amount of time that the field goal will take, by kneeling, and then to kick. In other words a premium is put on leaving the other team no time. My question is whether that's sound.
I think the key to the question is that the team with the ball is losing the game. They must execute a penalty-free field goal to win. To me, teams are putting too much of a premium on making sure the other team has no time, given that penalty-free kicks are not a given. There are two potential questions: (1) should you try for a TD on a down earlier than fourth down, before settling for the kick, effectively giving yourself 2 chances to win the game, and (2) if you're going to kick, how much time should you leave?
On the first question, I think if you're losing by 1, and you can try for a TD with under 20 seconds on the clock, you go for it. Yesterday, the Panthers had the ball close to the goal line and, letting the play clock go down 40 seconds each time, could have run a play with about 18 seconds left on third down. If they score the TD, they are up 5 and can go up 7 with a two-point conversion. So, worst case scenario, the other team must score a TD in under 20 seconds with no time outs and may only be able to tie. If you don't get in the end zone, you let the clock run down.
The risks on the play are turnover, penalty, and doing something to stop the clock. I'm thinking about a straight ahead run. If you commit a penalty, it's still third down and you can still run more time on third down before you kick. But you might lose 10 yards. So, I would only do it very close the goal line. I thought yesterday was a perfect situation to try for the TD. I think the fear of a turnover is overrated. Put a premium on ball security. If you don't have a back you can trust, don't do it. If you are tied, then no, it should be kick or OT. But you're losing. Take two chances to win -- although admittedly one of those chances comes with a slight risk that the opponent goes down and scores a TD in 15 seconds. Unlikely, but it happens. More than a missed field goal? I guess that's the question. Of course, the defense can decline a penalty and the clock still stops, so now you've left about 15 seconds. I think this is the biggest risk. Still, the fact is that you're losing. Two chances to win is pretty attractive.
Second, if you do let the clock go all the way down, how much time do you leave? I think one second is a mistake. Yes, a walk off feels great. But the problem is an offensive penalty. Nobody thinks about this, but it's going to happen in a big game. I've seen it happen I think at least once, or maybe twice this year, but it was at halftime so nobody cared as much. The problem is that you only get an untimed down for defensive penalties. For non pre-snap penalties, the clock runs. If the offense committed a penalty, the points come off the board, the time goes off the clock, and the half ends. So, lining up in the neutral zone (this happened to the Cardinals at halftime of a game this year and they lost 3 points), hands to the face, holding, grabbing a facemask, anything like that -- you lose. Compare that to calling time out with 7 second left. Now, if there's an offensive penalty, but you make the kick, you get a second try. Generally made field goals are 4 or 5 seconds. If you make the kick, you force the defense to take the penalty, you get to replay the down, and most importantly you have time left to kick again after the yardage.
If you miss the kick, it's game over either way. If the play takes longer than 5 seconds, it wasn't a made kick, so you lose anyway. What's the downside? Well, it's that you give the opposition the chance to return a kick for a TD and win or tie the game. Or to go 75 yards in 2 seconds. I guess one consideration is whether you have a kicker that can kick touchbacks. If so, how often have we seen 2 second 75 yard TDs? I guess twice? How often are field goals negated by penalties? More often. We've seen a surprising number of holds on field goals this year. That would end the game if you wait for :01. But these are contested plays where the other side is trying to block the kick to win the game and so there is action on the play.
I think being so unnecessarily scared of giving the other team 2 seconds forces teams into a suboptimal play, and when it bites someone, because some moron lines up 4 inches in the neutral zone on the kick, I'm going to be here to say I told you so! (Why offensive neutral zone infractions actually are allowed to be run and aren't pre-snap penalties like false starts is an interesting question, but that's the NFL rule.)
