Interesting Stats On Kickoffs And Touchbacks.
-
Well going into the season I thought one of the more interesting things to see pan out was touch backs. I was quoted on here as saying at the end of the regular season would be 50%. Well, based on my research and math according to this site http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/kickoff-touchback-pct I was pretty dang close. I tallied the data of total touchbacks from each time as one 1/2 (Monday after last week of regular season) and divided by all the teams to get the mean or average for the 2011 regular and this is what I got.
Average 2011 Touchback percentage: 43.37%
Median 20111 Touchback Percentage: Houston, 44.19%
For Those who forgot calculus, the median is the number in the middle of the set of data. For NFL teams, this is 16 and was Houston. This shows that the mean number is pretty accurate as it is only roughly 1% off
Here's the thing that matters most though. The touchback percentage last year was around 16%. This means the touchback percentage changed nearly 30% over the course of the year.
Interesting notes: Cleveland's own Phil Dawson boasted the lowest touchback percentage in the NFL at a low 16.95%, almost 5% lower than the next up, the NYJ. His average is again nearly 30% lower than the average, which just isn't good enough. I like Phil a lot, but we have to consider if we keep him a guy on the roster a kickoff specialist a la moorstead for the saints.
Fact 2: From the punting standpoint, Brad Maynard actually posted the lowest (or best here) touchback percentage in the NFL and was 6th of percentage of punts inside the 20. I know this is an extremely flawed stat but I just thought I'd throw it up there.
So what does this all mean? I personally think it's ridiculous and the rule needs to be changed right away. The Browns in particular have been extremely hurt by this not only from Cribbs not getting a chance to return but as I stated above we have a kicker who can't come close to getting a touchback compared to the average. I double checked my math and I believe this is all right but I reserve the right to change a few numbers if the math came out wrong haha.
-
I just checked your numbers, they're right. When I get back on campus, I think I'll graph some of this data. I don't want to do it in Excel.
-
Thanks for double checking me. I did this when I basically woke up so I figured something was wrong haha. It'd be cool to see this as a graph too, I'm good at math and that type of stuff but I'm sure you can do that better than me.
-
Does anyone have an opinion on this? I feel like this was an underlying issue of the NFL this year that really changed the game.
-
My only opinions on the matter are that Dawson can't kick far enough and the new rules need reversed because commercial, touchback, commercial pisses me off.
BTW, We have all witnessed Dawson not kicking the ball into the endzone, but then how does he make those long ass field goals?
-
My only opinions on the matter are that Dawson can't kick far enough and the new rules need reversed because commercial, touchback, commercial pisses me off.
BTW, We have all witnessed Dawson not kicking the ball into the endzone, but then how does he make those long ass field goals?
My only opinions on the matter are that Dawson can't kick far enough and the new rules need reversed because commercial, touchback, commercial pisses me off.
BTW, We have all witnessed Dawson not kicking the ball into the endzone, but then how does he make those long ass field goals?
It truly is an awful rule and takes away the excitement from kickoffs. However, the league is becoming pussified, so I bet even more rules are on the way for next season.
And Dawson should stay because he's led the team in scoring the past 5 years, and he still only scores half what other players score.
-
How about judging Dawson's net avg for kickoffs instead of the # of touchbacks. Who cares if he doesn't get a lot of touchbacks if the opponent start at a field position worse than their own 20.
-
How about judging Dawson's net avg for kickoffs instead of the # of touchbacks. Who cares if he doesn't get a lot of touchbacks if the opponent start at a field position worse than their own 20.
How about judging Dawson's net avg for kickoffs instead of the # of touchbacks. Who cares if he doesn't get a lot of touchbacks if the opponent start at a field position worse than their own 20.
This is true, but I would have to believe that it would be significantly higher than the 20 yard line. I have been looking for this stat for a minute but can't really find much. The biggest thing that is concerning is just the top part, that nearly half of kickoffs lead to touchbacks and the opportunity to change the game on special teams.
-
wow ghoolie, I can only imagine how cool of a guy you are in real life. I never stated once that I was a wizard of math, I was just helping out people who didn't quite get the idea. The mean and median is used just in calculus as well but it is a statistical function. I don't think I did some magical mathematical evaluation there, but you're such a douche you just assume everything about everyone. I realize that the median would technically be 16.5 there, but it was still at 44% either way give or take.
Why are you the way you are? That's a serious question, I don't get why people act the way you do. Instead of talking about football you take the time to point out little things I wrote that wasn't spot on correct to boost your ego and make you feel like you're some big man talking crap on an internet football forum. I just hope I don't get to be an over the hill man who resorts to doing this in my life. I'm sure if you respond you'll write something you think is witty and intelligent, but it's just sad.
-
Just ignore him. I've taken all the math courses he has, and then some. He's right, it's stats, and no calculus is involved, but he didn't have to be such a dick about it. Why bite his head off for trying? Anyways, I'm glad you presented the data.
-
@king-ghoolie-lives said:
Calculus is mathematics. Statistics is simple arithmatic, NOT MATH.
Despite being a complete asshole, you were right until the above statement. Stats isn't math?! Stats can involve simple arithmetic but can also be very complex. Topics involving stochastic processes, Bayesian Methods, time series analysis, life contingencies, investment analysis, portfolio theory, ect. all involve plenty of complex probability and statistical theories and analysis.
The point is, you chastise someone for making incorrect mathematical statements and then make the same error yourself. You are the epitome of a hypocritical douchebag..
-
@vaportrail said:
ITT: Mathematics dick measuring contest
I guess while we're at it. I've got a graduate level math course that starts today. I haven't taken a math or physics course for 3 semesters. This feels like an eternity. That said, it's biostatistics, since we're on the topic. It should be a cakewalk.
Here are the only "Biostatistics you need": Men are men, women are women.....and then there are eunuchs.
Which one are you?
http://www.kenyon.edu/biology.xml
(my son is a bio major)
-
@king-ghoolie-lives said:
I thik we all agree whether by statistics or calculus............. Joshua Cribbs is a turd.
You mean he is a fractional interest like turdy tree and a turd? 33 1/3 (rpm)?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login