The opportunity in Conway

With Steve Campbell headed to South Alabama to coach the Jaguars, might this be an ideal time and place for Kevin Kelly to advance to the college ranks?

I don’t know if he has any interest in being a head coach, but if he does that would be a great starting point for Tim Horton, especially given his father’s ties there.

This. Then we can schedule a game with UCA every other year and tell the ASU fans to go shove it. :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

Tim Horton

Absolutely!!!
Unless CCM brings him home.

And as to playing them, fine with me. They are nice folks and would appreciate the boost on prestige.

Dilly Dilly on both

It would be interesting to see how Kelley fared with a smaller recruiting budget. I kid, I kid.

Gus wound up at the only school in the SEC with a bigger recruiting budget than Shiloh, too.

It’s one thing to never punt & always kick onsides kicks in high school. Try that in college, you’d find yourself giving your opponents a short field too often. The other team will stop you on that 4th & 10 & will recover the onsides kick. Too much talent on the other team.

I know Tim would be welcome in Conway. It would be his job if he wants it. Maybe it is the right timing. Of course, he married a Conway girl.

Not that I want to lose him off of our stuff… But it might it also be a good opportunity for Barry Lunney to get his first head-coaching job? I’m taking a little bit of a longer-term view of this as well… What if in five or even eight years… A&M does come calling for Coach Mortis? Well, it sure would be nice to have a seasoned Barry Lunney Jr. ready with a lot of head-coaching experience. And, even if that never happened… Now just might be the right time in his career to make such a move…

Statistically, it makes sense. At any level. Possession of the ball is worth something. So is each yard of field position. Kelley’s statistics, compiled at multiple levels of football, indicate that punting at any point on the field, as well as kicking off deep, give you less chance of winning, and his teams often go for 2 based on the same sort of statistical analysis.

There was an NFL example of the latter choice a few weeks ago. The Eagles’ kicker was injured early in a game against the Cowboys and they had no backup on the active roster; I think a backup linebacker handled kickoff duties for the rest of the night, but he was not equipped to try extra points or field goals. So the Eagles went for two on every touchdown that night, and were successful on three of their four 2-point tries. Thus, they scored two points more against Dallas than they would have scored with a healthy kicker making all four PATs. It was an easy win for Philly that night, but in a close game going for 2 four times could have been the winning edge.

The success rate on NFL extra points last year, with the new 35-yard PATs, was 94 percent. So if you think you could do better than 47% on 2-point tries (the success rate on third and 2 over a 7-year period in the NFL was 51% passing and 62% running), you really should go for 2 every time. But convention keeps coaches from doing it, just like convention dictates you always punt on fourth and 5 or kickoff deep, unless you’re trailing in the fourth quarter. As for onside kicks, a failed one absolutely gives the opponent a short field. But a successful one not only gives you a short field, it denies the opponent a possession. In effect, it’s a turnover, and turnover margin is a game-changing stat.

Kevin Kelley may never get to try his theories at a higher level. But at some point a college coach or even pro coach will realize that the cold hard numbers compel you to avoid punting and onside kick every time. And they’ll recover enough onside kicks and convert enough fourth and 10s that they’ll win games they wouldn’t win otherwise. I firmly believe that.

I’ll take your word for the statistics, but it’s one thing to go for a 4th down when it’s 4th & short and you’re at least some reasonable distance away from you’re own goal line. It’s even one thing when it’s 4th & 10 & you’ve got a high school punter who is lucky to kick it 25-30 yds beyond the line of scrimmage on a good day. It’s quite another when you have a punter who can average 40 yds with no returns. Likewise, kicking an onsides kick is one thing when you kick “deep” to the other team’s 20. It’s another when kicking deep can mean a touchback or a short return. I have no idea how often onsides kicks work, but I bet it’s no much better than 1 in 10.

Certainly rules changes, such as moving the PAT line from the 3 to the 15 can change the calculation, but I don’t think Kelley’s system would work even at the D11 level in college. I suspect there’s a reason beyond conventional wisdom that no coach does it.

The onside kick logic also extends to going for it on fourth down. If you have the ball on your 10 and punt, the other team is going to have a short field and will probably score. If you go for it from the 10 and fail, the other team will have a shorter field and more probably score. But if you go for it and succeed, you keep possession, improve your field position and increase your own chances of scoring. What Kelley’s numbers say is that the gain from going for it, every time everywhere, is greater than the expected gain of punting. So he doesn’t punt.

Conventional wisdom is a stronger force than you think. Football coaches are conservative by nature; I suspect very few of the ones who bothered to vote last year marked ballots for Hillary. There’s the fear of media pressure, writers and talking heads who will echo your criticisms of someone using KK’s theories. There’s fear of fan criticism in the same vein, like an airborne banner saying fire this guy if he doesn’t punt. Safer to do what every other coach does. Tommy Tuberville went for it a lot more often than most coaches and got a riverboat gambler label. He also got fired several times. But somebody will try it at a higher level, whether it’s Kelley or someone who studies his ideas, and they just might succeed.

I am sure Coach Kelley is a very good coach, but using his team,that typically out talents his opposition, as a model for general use could be dangerous in a more equal situation.

And here you are espousing the conventional wisdom. How much is PA’s success due to talent and how much is KK maximizing their chances due to his theories? You don’t know and neither do I. Neither does KK for that matter. But what he does undeniably works right now.

I’d luv to see the hire and Kelley get the opportunity, what fun.

Im pretty confident that the job will end up going to Nathan Brown.

Matt I would like to see Coach Morris offer Tim Horton a job on his staff! If not it would be nice for home to get the ICA job. He’s a good loyal hog at heart!

I don’t care if CKK and CGM ever have any success. I give them credit for what they have accomplished but I think they’ve caused more harm than good.