"Special" Teams
by kayakyakr on Oct 23, 2008 1:00 PM CDT
in Texas Tech Football
Email
PrintThe Texas Tech special teams have been on the top of a lot of people’s minds lately. It’s a unit that can be characterized in much the same way as one of its focal members: the deep snapper. When it does its job, no one notices, but when things go wrong, well, people start calling for the kicker’s, holder’s and that snapper’s heads. It’s not too out of the question, either. In the last two games, Texas Tech was put on the ropes by a missed extra point in overtime against Nebraska as well as suffering a 3 point swing on a blocked extra point against Texas A&M.
People say that it is unacceptable that a top ten Texas Tech team doesn’t have a solid option for extra points. So what are our options? Read on after the break.
There Is No Such Thing as Free Points
Right now, Texas Tech ranks 113 in the nation in extra point kicks. That’s 86% or 37/43 (For bonus fun stats, TTU is 8th in made extra points/game). Not to sugar coat things too much, but we’re not in the worst company. Top 25 teams TCU, Minnesota, Florida State, and Georgia Tech are all in the bottom 25 of XP percentages with Florida State coming in the highest at #98, 92%.
That said, no one’s missed more than Texas Tech. TCU was next, missing 4 of 33. I just don’t see. A number of teams have missed 3, but no one of note. The question we have to ask is what is a reasonable expectation of results. We have been spoiled by the automatic leg of Trilica and probably all expect 100% by now, but I would be happy with Oklahoma and Alabama’s 95% success rate.
As we all know, Mike Leach is a crazy man. He’s willing to take the chance at going for two every, and if you doubt that, you’re deceiving yourself. What I’m trying to look at is if it would be a good move for us. Not many sites have combined 2 point conversion statistics, but for the last 5 years (and really since it normalized in 1960, 2 years after the 2 point conversion was first introduced), the 2 point success rate has hovered around 40% nationally. Counting a single two point conversion as two extra points, this puts us at around an 80% success rate for extra points, within range of our current success rate for kicked extra points.
But that’s still nowhere near the 95% success rate that a top 10 team really should be able to attain. But, you say, TTU has a great offense, we should be able to attain a conversion rate much greater than the 40% nationally. Very good point, I say. Since 2004, Texas Tech is 50% even on 2 point conversions. That’s 12 attempts with 6 successful tries in 3.5 years.
These still aren’t anywhere near the number of attempts that the air raid would be making on a yearly basis. We’ve already attempted 43 extra points this year. Since 2004, the most anyone has completed was 6, a feat held wholly by the New Mexico State Aggies in 2004, the year before Hal Mumme arrived. They also hold the mark for most 2 point conversions attempted at 9 (66%), followed by the other Aggies of Texas A&M who went 4 of 8 in 2006 and 2005 Cincinnati (2 of 8). The 2004 NMSU team only had 34 extra point attempts, going for 2 on 25% of those, presumably because they too were having kicking troubles (21/25, 84%).
Of a special note, of the teams that have tried a large number of 2 point conversions, only 6 teams out of over 30 failed to convert at a rate matching or better than 50% (ok, I didn’t look at all the teams, there could be a number with 4 attempts and 1 success). Houston does already have 5 attempts (and 2 successes) this season. Maybe they’re going for the record?
Before I can come to any sort of conclusion, I do have to throw in some mention of the other concerns when you go for 2. No one’s ever gone for as many 2 point conversions as a TTU team that decides to abandon all ye kickers. How will defenses react? More importantly, how will the offense react? Teams that have a lot of success at converting 2 points often have a need to convert the extra point, usually in a close game and are usually playing with the momentum of the moment. Very few teams have come out after scoring on the first drive to put the bonus points on the board.
A notable exception was Oregon in their game against Arizona State last year. They scored on their first drive and, as a statement, went for two and converted. It was a massive momentum boost that held them through most of the game, until their quarterback went down for the last time with a torn ACL and MCL.
The drawbacks? Momentum is the first concern. It’s always a defensive lift to get a stop and when you only have 1 play and a potentially low conversion rate, that has to be weight heavily on your mind. In the same class of psychological concerns, you have to ask what this will do to the heads of your kickers. While we’re no longer relying on them for extra points, there will still likely be a time this year when we must ask our kicker to pick up 3 for us from a longer range.
I think I’ve put together enough information to postulate a theory: Texas Tech would be well served by abandoning the kicking game while games are close if our kickers can’t figure out what they’re doing this upcoming game. I say this because I have to believe that Tech would be very adept at putting the ball across the goal-line, especially once we have a defense on the ropes. The momentum risk is minimized since I believe that our defense, this year, isn’t feeding off of negative offensive momentum, nor is our offense getting down on itself when things don’t go right.
Let’s do it, why not? What do you think?
(Special thanks to http://cfbstats.com for any statistics)
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Keep kicking PAT's
Get a cool soccer style individual. There is no shame in copying others success. Whoever is the most agile kicker on the Soccer tea m gets a try out. How is that we have a Tech Men’s Soccer team and no strikers willing to punch the oblong "American" football? How very different is this from a free kick? ( yes I know I am going to attract a lot of kicking technicians scrutiny on this – but aside from the obvious shape) I see soccer dudes striking balls under pressure all the time and lifting them for headers into the goal etc .
The way too obvious answer is twofold A. These TTU soccer folks don’t (or aren’t allowed to) want to play the game. B. If that’s the case – We can’t let out kicker(s) lose faith in their ability. IE the coach doesn’t trust my ability so I perform exactly like he expects me to – Look at Minnesota team in the 06 campaign. No faith in the kicker equals problematic results on the field. The more pressure filled the kick the more they fouled up. I hear on Tech Talk 950 Alex Trlica said … "Carona’s problem is one of technique… as to how he places his feet or strikes the ball.. ??? … and it’s not an easy correction/habit to break or modify". There it is I just talked us into letting the Matt Williams kick or going for 2 if he doesn’t become consistent. I say don’t go for 2 unless required by the situation. Continue to kick PAT’s . Our defense is salty and it’s an added incentive to create another three and out and get the O back on the field
Keep Kicking PAT's( with typos fixed)
Get a cool soccer style individual. There is no shame in copying others success. Whoever is the most agile kicker on the Soccer team gets a try out. How is it that we have a Tech Men’s Soccer team and no strikers willing to punch the oblong "American" football? How very different is this from a free or penalty kick? (Yes I know I am going to attract a lot of kicking technician’s scrutiny on this – but aside from the obvious shape) I see soccer dudes striking balls under pressure all the time and lifting them for headers into the goal etc.
The way too obvious answer is twofold A. These TTU soccer folks don’t (or aren’t allowed to) want to play the game. B. If that’s the case – We can’t let our kicker(s) lose faith in their ability. IE the coach doesn’t trust my ability so I perform exactly like he expects me to – Look at Minnesota team in the 06 campaign. No faith in the kicker equals problematic results on the field. The more pressure filled the kick the more they fouled up. I hear on Tech Talk 950 Alex Trlica said … "Carona s problem is one of technique… as to how he places his feet or strikes the ball.. ??? … and it’s not an easy correction/habit to break or modify". There it is I just talked us into letting the new kicker Matt Williams kick or going for 2 if he doesn’t become consistent. I say don’t go for 2 unless required by the situation. Continue to kick PAT’s. Our defense is salty and it’s an added incentive to create another three and out and get the O back on the field.
go for it
I don’t see how we lose by just going for two every time. It will really challenge their D and it will also increase the “real” plays their D has to play in the game. We should be able to convert 50% and probably more. If we can convert 50, then we basically have a 100 conversion rates compared to kicking it. If we find we are dropping below 50, then we rethink it, but there is NO reason that an offense that has been averaging somwhere near 9 yards a play on offense and has one of the highest 3rd down conversion rates in football cannot convert 50 of 2 point conversions.
Leach is crazy, and hopefully he is crazy enough to change the mentality in college football that kicking extra points is the third rail of options on the board.
Peace
... I'm just sayin'
Drop Kicks would be too cool
I imagine that Coach Leach would be doing back flips if someone actually could execute a drop kick from the 30 yard line. Say with a 95 percent accuracy rating. I can’t help but believe an innovator like the Head Pirate would fail to embrace a throwback tactic / technique for scoring literally with impunity.
Again a Soccer player would seem to be the modern best fit for this skill. Oops he would be just as obvious as the onside kicker- specialist – getting on the field – you are right Kayakyakr it has to be regular starter in order to be effective.
Go for it.
I’ve been beating this drum so I won’t too far into it. This is a math question, though. I have no idea why peopl can’t comprehend that the decision to go for 2 or kick an XP is really, simply, a math question. There are no sacred cows in CFB, there is only the end goal of winning. Whichever strategy maximizes scoring maximizes winning and is thus preferred.
I believe the math you’ve set out above given our success rate on XP combined with what I think is a reasonable expectation of our 2PC success rate (some amount at or near 50%, I’d wager) informs us quite certainly that:
Going for 2 is the correct, objectively right decision.
go for it
I don’t see how we lose by just going for two every time. It will really challenge their D and it will also increase the “real” plays their D has to play in the game. We should be able to convert 50% and probably more. If we can convert 50, then we basically have a 100 conversion rates compared to kicking it. If we find we are dropping below 50, then we rethink it, but there is NO reason that an offense that has been averaging somwhere near 9 yards a play on offense and has one of the highest 3rd down conversion rates in football cannot convert 50 of 2 point conversions.
Leach is crazy, and hopefully he is crazy enough to change the mentality in college football that kicking extra points is the third rail of options on the board.
Peace
... I'm just sayin'
Short Field Inefficiency
You guys all bring up very good points regarding whether or not to always go for two. What I think has been glossed over here is the general inability of our offense to punch the ball into the endzone on one play. From what I have seen and heard of our games, when we get down inside the 5 yard line it always seems to take us 2-3 plays to get the TD. On the two point conversion, one shot is all we have.
I considered that, but we also tend to call low percentage, “safe” plays on 1st and 2nd down when we’re close to the goal line. Simple traps, qb sneaks, fades or that slant turn that crabs likes to run.
Allowing Graham the opportunity to stand back and look for things to open up if the initial option isn’t open would give us the best shot.
After thinking on this, I think it would be hard tof Tech. Our offense is much easier to defend when you only have 10 yds to work against. The players are spread side to side, but not vertical at all. So there are literally 22 bodies in a 10 yd deep box. Makes it a challenge to squeeze the ball in there.
my only argument is
we generally have woods in the backfield for goal line not batch:
8. Baron Batch, Texas Tech attempts:65 yards:491 avg:7.6 tds:4
that is batch’s standings in the nations for avg per carry
we could be better at goal line with him in the backfield dont you think?
what would that do for our chances when going for 2?
If you not having fun....then your not playing the game right.
I'm not doom and gloom...
on the kicking game like so many. And that doesn’t mean that I don’t think it may cost us a game. I just tend to believe that the coaches are doing everything they can, to find someone who can kick it thru the uprights. If they don’t find someone, then Leach will begin going for two and or faking fieldgoals to keep the defense more honest. And I believe we would convert enough to be ok.
But there’s not much I can do about it anyway.
I’m WAY MORE concerned about our defense. Deep down inside I’m hoping Ruff has been holding something back, even though, that is against my best judgement. But that’s a whole nother can of worms.
I think that we have a lot of talented players on this team, and any one of them could make a mistke that could cost us a game. But such is life. Yes I would be disappointed, but am I going to sit here and act like I know more than Leach? No. It is what it is man. I’m just getting a little tired of people saying fire this coach or cut that guy.
Leach has done a good job getting us this far! We’ve got a great team and I’ve never been more proud of my Red Raiders! We are on the cusp of possible bigtime publicity! This will help with better recruiting. (I view everything this team does with recruiting in mind. It’s not about the rankings and the polls, it’s about the Jimmys and the Joes) Even the publicity we’ve gotten already will help some, unless we completely tank the rest of the season…and that is a possibility, but I believe we have the leadership and chemistry on this team, to keep that from happening.
We are breathing rare air in Raiderland!! Don’t rob yourself of enjoying this, by only seeing the negative.
GUNS UP BABY!!! GUNS UP!!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Double-T Nation
Related FanShots on Double-T Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
