[jcmanson]

(FYI, I broke all this down in today's News & Notes post)

With all of Lunsford's struggles this season, I spent some time this week studying his stats and I found an interesting trend. Here's some of his stats:

This season:
FGs < 30 = 4/4
FGs > 50 = 3/5
FGs 30-49 = 2/9

That's consistent with his career numbers:
FGs < 30 = 14/15
FGs > 50 = 11/18
FGs 30-49 = 19/40

I would think after 4 years of data, we would change our strategy on FG attempts between 30-49 yards. Either go for it or try Echols.

Thoughts?

[forbidden]

in all honesty would it be worse if echols missed than if JL was out there for the attempt anyways.

[flameshaw]

Obviously it is a lack of coaching.

[BJWilliams]

I'd rather just go for it...

Lunsford's in between struggles are like a golfer that is a great putter, and a great driver, but their fairway game is lacking.

[Purple Haize]

Obviously it is a lack of coaching.

Agreed!

[olldflame]

Pretty much any D1 kicker is going to be almost automatic inside 30, so there is no reason not to use Echols for those if you want to shake things up. It´s simple geometry. The angle is such that you need to really shank or pull it badly to miss. I´m not sure he has range much beyond 40 though. I really believe our chances are still better with Lunsford on anything longer than 42 or 43 yards.

[Purple Haize]

Pretty much any D1 kicker is going to be almost automatic inside 30, so there is no reason not to use Echols for those if you want to shake things up. It´s simple geometry. The angle is such that you need to really shank or pull it badly to miss. I´m not sure he has range much beyond 40 though. I really believe our chances are still better with Lunsford on anything longer than 42 or 43 yards.

Not sure what putting Echols in for those would do to Lunsfords confidence on the other kicks.
Probably nothing good

[Humble_Opinion]

Pretty much any D1 kicker is going to be almost automatic inside 30, so there is no reason not to use Echols for those if you want to shake things up. It´s simple geometry. The angle is such that you need to really shank or pull it badly to miss. I´m not sure he has range much beyond 40 though. I really believe our chances are still better with Lunsford on anything longer than 42 or 43 yards.

Not sure what putting Echols in for those would do to Lunsfords confidence on the other kicks.
Probably nothing good

Interesting find Manson. Knowing that it's been on-going for 4 years leads me to believe it's some sort of technique issue. Boggles my mind to think that someone so good from beyond 50 struggles so terribly from 31-45.

[LUDad]

Pretty much any D1 kicker is going to be almost automatic inside 30, so there is no reason not to use Echols for those if you want to shake things up. It´s simple geometry. The angle is such that you need to really shank or pull it badly to miss. I´m not sure he has range much beyond 40 though. I really believe our chances are still better with Lunsford on anything longer than 42 or 43 yards.

Not sure what putting Echols in for those would do to Lunsfords confidence on the other kicks.
Probably nothing good

Interesting find Manson. Knowing that it's been on-going for 4 years leads me to believe it's some sort of technique issue. Boggles my mind to think that someone so good from beyond 50 struggles so terribly from 31-45.

Would be interesting to have stats on which hash mark (excepting the kicks in the middle of the field) the kicks were made from. If for instance, he was making most from the right hash but not the left, it would likely mean he was drawing the ball into the goal posts really good. If so, he could adjust his alignment/approach to the ball to compensate for kicks from the left hash.

[LUDad]

Not sure if there is a way to look that up other than video. However, I am 100% sure that John knows which hash mark he would prefer to kick from. So, in 3rd down situations hopefully they take that into at least a little bit of account when calling plays.

I would think that the special teams coach would keep track of something like that. A golfer can strick the ball perfectly but if their alignment is off, the result will be off.

[BJWilliams]

BYD is right...you would need to analyze a TON of game video to really be able to break down which hash he launches from and where he has more success. I know if you watch the video of his 60 yarder against RIchmond last year he went from the left hash and he had to really push the ball to he right to bring it back when it finally hit the crossbar and went in

[SuperJon]

Beej - 50 video clips would take all of five minutes to look at. It wouldn't be a TON of game video.

[Purple Haize]

Beej - 50 video clips would take all of five minutes to look at. It wouldn't be a TON of game video.

Since they don't kick FG every possession and you can actually know the time in the game he kicked a FG it's something you could get done by lunch

[SuperJon]

With as advanced as the video system is, you'd only have to put in "field goals" and they'd all come up.

[Purple Haize]

With as advanced as the video system is, you'd only have to put in "field goals" and they'd all come up.

I was trained on the VHS days. Ha!
But you are right