Average field goals per team per game

I make a lot of prop bets on field goals. Especially the total in the game and the total for each team. Lately, I haven't been doing well. For example, I bet heavy on a low number of field goals by Dallas in yesterday's game. Dallas scored four. Suffice it to say -- I got killed. Same thing with the Sunday night game. I had a lot of action on a low number of Steelers field goals. They scored three. Bear in mind the average this season per team per game is 1.65.

Let me present this table of the number of field goals scored in the first 13 weeks this season by team. Keep in mind each team has played 12 games so far.

Team	First 12 Games	Average FG per game
BAL	26	2.17
CHI	26	2.17
KC	26	2.17
CAR	25	2.08
DAL	25	2.08
NYG	25	2.08
PIT	25	2.08
MIN	24	2.00
NEP	24	2.00
TB	24	2.00
ARIZ	22	1.83
DEN	22	1.83
JACK	22	1.83
SEA	22	1.83
WASH	22	1.83
SD	20	1.67
ATL	19	1.58
CLEV	19	1.58
GB	19	1.58
NYJ	19	1.58
CIN	18	1.50
SF	18	1.50
DET	17	1.42
IND	17	1.42
BUF	16	1.33
OAK	16	1.33
PHIL	16	1.33
STL	16	1.33
HOU	13	1.08
NO	12	1.00
TEN	12	1.00
MIA	8	0.67
Average	19.84	1.65

The variance in the number in the first 12 games is 22.265. If we assumed the number of field goals was distributed by a Poisson process, we would expect a variance equal to the mean of 19.84.

However, I fully admit that not all teams are equal. Better teams tend to score more field goals and touchdowns.

The following chart summarizes the information in table above, showing the number of teams by total number of field goals.



My question is how much should I consider a team's propensity to kick field goals in evaluating a proposition bet like will the Cowboys score over/under 1.5 field goals in the game against the Redskins. You can see they are ranked 5th, with 2.08 per game, which is 0.43 more than the average. Is this just that they are on the right side of the bell curve, or there something about the way the team plays that prevents them from making first downs/touchdowns in field goal range, resulting in a FG attempt? I admit the skill of the kickers plays a roll, but I think it is a small one. All the NFL kickers are quite good under 50 yards, where most are kicked from.

Discuss.

IANASB, but have you considered analyzing the number of field goals a team gives up? Maybe a defense is so bad, the opposing team will be less likely to kick a field goal because they are more likely to score a touchdown. Conversely, if a defense is very strong, the offensive team would be more likely to go for a field goal. Again, IANASB.

Skill has a lot to do with it. Some teams (Pittsburgh) have kickers that make you wince while others (Denver) are automatic from very long range.

How about weather and dome/no dome? I think the weather factor in the northeast and Denver has affected scoring strategy, including overall score and whether to run or pass.

Perhaps the lack of rain has increased scoring and field goals?

Dallas' number may be artificially higher this season due to their quarterback problems. If you can't score touchdowns, or convert third and long, you are going to kick more field goals.

I think...

I would look at the defense; punts are just field goals from too far away. Add up the number of punts + FG attempts/game by their opponents. Compare the number of touchdowns scored by the offense, allowed by that same defense (ignore special teams/defensive touchdowns). The higher that ratio is, the more likely that any given team playing them is to kick a field goal than to score a touchdown in any particular drive.

Since you're looking for a number total per team/per game, I would definitely factor in a +/- for each of the things Aye mentioned above; kicking percentage, dome/weather, overall strength of that defense, overall record.

I think an opponent's red zone defense is a key stat here. Teams that give up lots of red zone tries but are good at stopping touchdowns in the red zone are going to allow lots of field goals.

Take a look at https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-red-zone-scoring-pct

You'll see the Jets give up TDs on 35% of opponents red zone tries, while PHI gives up nearly 70%. As such, you may need to assume more field goals than usual when a team plays the Jets, and fewer than usual when playing PHI.

One variable I would investigate is the correlation between FG's and rushing attempts.

Quote: sabre

I think an opponent's red zone defense is a key stat here. Teams that give up lots of red zone tries but are good at stopping touchdowns in the red zone are going to allow lots of field goals.

Take a look at https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-red-zone-scoring-pct

You'll see the Jets give up TDs on 35% of opponents red zone tries, while PHI gives up nearly 70%. As such, you may need to assume more field goals than usual when a team plays the Jets, and fewer than usual when playing PHI.

That post made so much common sense to me I was inclined to agree almost immediately, but then I asked myself, "Well, what if Philadelphia's D just positively sucks?" As it turns out, it does suck. They are 25th in Points Allowed this year to 11th for the Jets.

Still a theory worth investigating, so I went through the scoring summaries for both teams this year and saw that PHI has allowed 19 FG's to 18 allowed by the Jets. While a few of those allowed by the Jets can certainly be attributed to stopping drives in the Red Zone, Philadelphia's Defense is still terrible.

Wizard,

The first thing that you want to look at is the Cowboys were playing the Redskins who are 21st in Yards Allowed this Season and are 17th in Points Allowed. While not deplorable, to be sure, their Defensive Rankings certainly aren't good. If you combine that with Matt Cassel at QB, who has only thrown five TD's in six games, then you have a team who should get some yardage, but a QB who can't get them in the End Zone.

Now, you look at the Steelers who were playing the Colts. The Colts Defense is third worst in the league for Yards Allowed and seventh worst in Points Allowed. You also have to look at Roethlisberger leading the Offense in that game compared to Jones or Vick.

In the case of the Steelers, a big disparity you are going to get is half of the games contributing to your Mean FG's do not have Roethlisberger at QB, so it's really apples to oranges. I mean, I usually try not to over value QB's but Big Ben's Points-Over-Replacement has to be insane.

The bottom line is there is a lot more that needs to be considered with something like this than Mean FG's. Mean FG's are certainly a good place to start and any Line that is a significant deviation from the Mean is certainly worth a closer look, but I think there are many more factors that must be taken into consideration.

1.) Defensive Strength

There seems to be an assumption that bad Defenses give up lots of TD's and very few FG's because they are bad and get scored on constantly. That's only half true. They give up lots of TD's AND FG's because they are bad and get scored on constantly.

Half the battle is getting your team on the opponent's half of the field and doing that means acquiring yards. Defenses that allow opponents to rack up a ton of yards against them will see lots of scoring against them.

In fact, I'd actually be particularly worried about a Defense that is much worse in Yards Allowed than points allowed, because that at least means they are holding opponents to FG's, sometimes.

2.) Other Special Teams

In addition to Defense, you want to take a look at some Special Teams, particularly with respect to the team whose Field Goals are in question is likely to start their average drive.

This is actually a combination of the Offense of the team you are not betting and Special Teams. If you think the Defense of the Field Goal team in question is going to stop the other team deep in their own territory a good bit and get the ball at midfield a lot, then that's going to lead to some TD's and FG's.

3.) Dome v. Weather

This is not as important as most people would think, but it is kind of important. You certainly don't want your kicker to miss (or, maybe you do) when he gets a try. You can get really in-depth with it and figure out situations in which Kickers have not performed well from 40+ and see if that could be the case in the game in question.

Granted, that one shouldn't swing it much.

Let's look at Item 2 applied, briefly:

The Dallas Cowboys had an average starting Field Position of their own 32.6, which isn't bad starting position. Only once did they start inside their own 20 (DAL 5) and even that was compensated for by starting on Washington's 15 once, when that Punt was fumbled. They scored a TD then, though.

The Cowboys scored FG's starting from their own 20, 20, 33 and 44. If their Offense hadn't fumbled the ball every other play that game, they'd probably have had even more TD's and FG's as they had four other opportunities starting outside of their own 30 and did not score.

The Steelers did not start with great average Field Position (22.9 average) but again, they're going to have a more powerful offense than the mean would suggest with Roethlisberger back there. It's also worth noting that the one occasion they did start deep in Colts territory resulted in a FG.

Anyway, like I said before, the Colts give up a ton of yards and Big Ben gets himself a ton of yards, so the correlation is just going to be a ton of opportunities to score. I believe Boswell, or whatever the Steelers kicker's name is, even missed one that he really should have made.

So, I guess I would say the bet is more than just about Mean Field Goals for a given team. It's probably mostly about the strength of an opponent's Defense in terms of Yards Allowed and what sort of average Field Position do their opponents start with.

Quote: Mission146

That post made so much common sense to me I was inclined to agree almost immediately, but then I asked myself, "Well, what if Philadelphia's D just positively sucks?" As it turns out, it does suck. They are 25th in Points Allowed this year to 11th for the Jets.

Still a theory worth investigating, so I went through the scoring summaries for both teams this year and saw that PHI has allowed 19 FG's to 18 allowed by the Jets. While a few of those allowed by the Jets can certainly be attributed to stopping drives in the Red Zone, Philadelphia's Defense is still terrible.

This is why red zone attempts given up also matters. If PHI is twice as bad at allowing red zone TD than the Jets, but gives up twice as many attempts in the red zone, then you'd assume both teams would give up equal FG when their opponent gets in the red zone.

I think the key is to try to identify the "bend but don't break" type defenses which should give up more FG than expected, as well as the "boom or bust" blitz type defenses that should give up fewer FG than expected.

Thanks for all the comments thus far.

Regarding the weather, I submit that the main thing that matters is wind. I don't think temperature, rain, and snow have that much to do with it.

The limits on these props are rather small so I don't want to put a great deal of analysis of this bet for every single game. I'm going to try to come back with some evidence that after all is said and done, the average field goals scored per game is correlated to the teams overall strength and differences could be explained by normal random variation.

Where I think this model may be flawed is teams like the Ravens that tend to nickel and dime their way down the field have more opportunities to get stuck in the mud in field goal range and kick one. Teams that take chances with big passing plays might be more apt to get a touchdown or punt/turnover trying.

Field conditions matter and poor field conditions increase FG attempts. If the turf sucks, the RB/WR's are basically running up hill. when the D can load up on 3rd and short or on passing downs you get a field goal festival. WAS has one of the worst fields in football along with Oak, Chi, NY, Pit, Bal. With the natural grass fields when the weather worsens FGA go up at these places as well.

Teams that take chances end up getting stuck in FG range quite a bit. RB depth matters. Teams with backs who can catch kick fewer FG.