Cornell Football 2021

[Scersk '97]

Everyone knows the key to a successful Cornell football season (really anyone's) is good punting. Today's was pathetic. Not auspicious.

[Trotsky]

Since Ivy offenses and kicking and typically bad I wonder if it would be a net successful strategy to just start going for it on 4th all the time unless we're within our own 30.  We might prolong the drive only about 30% of the time, but would the opponent be able to take advantage that often?

[jtwcornell91]

Since Ivy offenses and kicking and typically bad I wonder if it would be a net successful strategy to just start going for it on 4th all the time unless we're within our own 30.  We might prolong the drive only about 30% of the time, but would the opponent be able to take advantage that often?

I seem to recall that when I was a student (1987-1990 seasons) we often did the opposite and punted on third down.  I suspect that was in the odd-numbered years, when we were pretty bad, rather than in the even-numbered years when we were Ivy co-champions.

[Trotsky]

Since Ivy offenses and kicking and typically bad I wonder if it would be a net successful strategy to just start going for it on 4th all the time unless we're within our own 30.  We might prolong the drive only about 30% of the time, but would the opponent be able to take advantage that often?

I seem to recall that when I was a student (1987-1990 seasons) we often did the opposite and punted on third down.  I suspect that was in the odd-numbered years, when we were pretty bad, rather than in the even-numbered years when we were Ivy co-champions.

The teams when I was an undergrad would have been better served punting on first down.

[Scersk '97]

I seem to recall that when I was a student (1987-1990 seasons) we often did the opposite and punted on third down.  I suspect that was in the odd-numbered years, when we were pretty bad, rather than in the even-numbered years when we were Ivy co-champions.

Always quick kick: they'll never see it coming!

[Scersk '97]

From the Sun article:

"I use an outside company that helps me with some analytics, and they tell me the odds on [each] down and distance," Archer said. "The odds were slightly in my favor and I was feeling pretty aggressive. I liked the defense and I liked the O-line, so we rolled the dice."

I guess everyone around me and I should start an "analytics" company. We all agreed prior to the snap that it was an inexplicable, boneheaded call.

[upprdeck]

From the Sun article:

"I use an outside company that helps me with some analytics, and they tell me the odds on [each] down and distance," Archer said. "The odds were slightly in my favor and I was feeling pretty aggressive. I liked the defense and I liked the O-line, so we rolled the dice."

I guess everyone around me and I should start an "analytics" company. We all agreed prior to the snap that it was an inexplicable, boneheaded call.

prettty much the same play thats on ESPN right now as Minn Sun not going from that spot in their game and being one of the worst calls of the season to kick .. The Analytics guys think going for it on that spot of the field is a better call than not..

What i wonder  is what happens if Ala goes for it there 20 times and it works that doesnt mean Cornell should do it.

[Al DeFlorio]

From the Sun article:

"I use an outside company that helps me with some analytics, and they tell me the odds on [each] down and distance," Archer said. "The odds were slightly in my favor and I was feeling pretty aggressive. I liked the defense and I liked the O-line, so we rolled the dice."

I guess everyone around me and I should start an "analytics" company. We all agreed prior to the snap that it was an inexplicable, boneheaded call.

prettty much the same play thats on ESPN right now as Minn Sun not going from that spot in their game and being one of the worst calls of the season to kick .. The Analytics guys think going for it on that spot of the field is a better call than not..

What i wonder  is what happens if Ala goes for it there 20 times and it works that doesnt mean Cornell should do it.

Especially given the track record of the guy who calls the spevific play.

[CU2007]

From the Sun article:

"I use an outside company that helps me with some analytics, and they tell me the odds on [each] down and distance," Archer said. "The odds were slightly in my favor and I was feeling pretty aggressive. I liked the defense and I liked the O-line, so we rolled the dice."

I guess everyone around me and I should start an "analytics" company. We all agreed prior to the snap that it was an inexplicable, boneheaded call.

prettty much the same play thats on ESPN right now as Minn Sun not going from that spot in their game and being one of the worst calls of the season to kick .. The Analytics guys think going for it on that spot of the field is a better call than not..

What i wonder  is what happens if Ala goes for it there 20 times and it works that doesnt mean Cornell should do it.

Especially given the track record of the guy who calls the spevific play.

This sort of reads like he was told he has a slightly better than 50% chance of converting, and not considering the fact that we were on OUR OWN 35 YARD LINE.  I would have agreed if we were on the opponent's 41 or something like that where a punt doesn't really help field position as much and a failure isn't catastrophic (and basically guaranteed points against) as we saw. It was the wrong call any way you look at it.

[George64]

Maybe Archer input the wrong 35 yard line!

[George64]

I think I need to learn to like this type of football!

[Trotsky]

I think I need to learn to like this type of football!

We any good?

[George64]

4-1-1.  The tie Tuesday against a usually dominant 'cuse team.

[Ken711]

From the Sun article:

"I use an outside company that helps me with some analytics, and they tell me the odds on [each] down and distance," Archer said. "The odds were slightly in my favor and I was feeling pretty aggressive. I liked the defense and I liked the O-line, so we rolled the dice."

I guess everyone around me and I should start an "analytics" company. We all agreed prior to the snap that it was an inexplicable, boneheaded call.

prettty much the same play thats on ESPN right now as Minn Sun not going from that spot in their game and being one of the worst calls of the season to kick .. The Analytics guys think going for it on that spot of the field is a better call than not..

What i wonder  is what happens if Ala goes for it there 20 times and it works that doesnt mean Cornell should do it.

Especially given the track record of the guy who calls the spevific play.

This sort of reads like he was told he has a slightly better than 50% chance of converting, and not considering the fact that we were on OUR OWN 35 YARD LINE.  I would have agreed if we were on the opponent's 41 or something like that where a punt doesn't really help field position as much and a failure isn't catastrophic (and basically guaranteed points against) as we saw. It was the wrong call any way you look at it.

Agreed, using "analytics" as an excuse is pretty sad. Dumb call by Archer.

[Swampy]

From the Sun article:

"I use an outside company that helps me with some analytics, and they tell me the odds on [each] down and distance," Archer said. "The odds were slightly in my favor and I was feeling pretty aggressive. I liked the defense and I liked the O-line, so we rolled the dice."

I guess everyone around me and I should start an "analytics" company. We all agreed prior to the snap that it was an inexplicable, boneheaded call.

prettty much the same play thats on ESPN right now as Minn Sun not going from that spot in their game and being one of the worst calls of the season to kick .. The Analytics guys think going for it on that spot of the field is a better call than not..

What i wonder  is what happens if Ala goes for it there 20 times and it works that doesnt mean Cornell should do it.

Especially given the track record of the guy who calls the spevific play.

This sort of reads like he was told he has a slightly better than 50% chance of converting, and not considering the fact that we were on OUR OWN 35 YARD LINE.  I would have agreed if we were on the opponent's 41 or something like that where a punt doesn't really help field position as much and a failure isn't catastrophic (and basically guaranteed points against) as we saw. It was the wrong call any way you look at it.

Agreed, using "analytics" as an excuse is pretty sad. Dumb call by Archer.

Shit, if you go by analytics, neither Cornell nor the NY Jets would step foot on the field.