and more recently, Football Outsiders has ramped it up even more.

the book really expands.

Take punting. If you have a good offense and defense, and you're past the fifty, a punt can often be ignored. Why risk a bad snap, a dropped snap, a blocked punt, a poor punt or a big punt return for approx 25-30 yards of field position (depending on the success of our offensive play)?

We also almost never kick deep on kick-off. We know we have a good defense. We know we've out-scouted our opposition. Why would we ever give the most dynamic player on the other team the ball in the open field? So we exchange 10 to 20 yards of field position to eliminate the best player on the other team running the ball in the open field.

Boring to most, but these decisions are huge at the HS level.

the conventional wisdom regarding decisions in both football and baseball-was essentially correct when "written" despite the lack of sabermetrics, computers, etc.

When George Wright and Wilbert Robinson and John McGraw and all those early managers figured out basic strategies (corner infielders guard the line in late innings with a lead to prevent a double, bunting a runner over to second, etc.) I think they were all just about right.

The same with the "book" that Knute Rockne and Pop Warner and others developed about when to punt, when to take a field goal, etc.

Really, I think what's going on now is just updating those "books" to the changing game. In a game where top hitters hit home runs every 20 or so at bats (and all the other changes in the game, like error rates, etc.), that changes the relative value of an out and advancing a base.

In football, if you have a passing offense that can complete two-thirds of its passes with almost no interceptions, you have to re-evaluate your success rate on fourth down and whether to go for it.

I think a lot of the benefit of sabermetrics has been updating strategy to changed circumstances that the games have been slow to recognize, as opposed to proving those original decisions, when made, were wrong.

[For whatever reason, I don't think basketball has ever quite gotten "the book" down. Like fouling when up by three points at the end of a game.]

Player Efficiency Rating, True Shooting %, advanced plus/minus, Effective Shooting %...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/

just kidding, I've always thought percentages were important to football decisions.

FTR, every NFL, college and high school football I watch where teams make idiotic time management decisions, I die a bit inside.

It isn't easy to be a football coach who can actually add.

Obviously, Sabermetrics have made their mark on baseball, and I suspect versions of this are starting to take hold in the NBA (maybe they are there already - I don't follow the NBA).

But it seems that I am reading more and more these days about the decision science behind football. "Age old" questions like when to go for it on fourth down, run/pass mix, and when to onside kicks are starting to emerge with concrete answers (even though they must be adapted to the individual team and circumstances).

Is anyone else thinking that this is gaining traction or is it just me noticing something because I'm out there looking for it?

Using calculations as to the value of different field positions, Nate Silver explains why the Saints' big gambles last night were both playing the odds.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/go-for-it-saints-understand-value-of.html