Nick Setta

since when is a sense of humour a crime around here???

Habman…I post here cause I enjoy the level of enthusiasm here as opposed to the other forums. Secondly, unless you are a season ticket holder, I bet I attend Ticat games as often as someand more than many out here. When the Als aren’t in town I’m sitting in Section G with my Printers Jersey, and like you I;m tired of watching the Cats lose, so If I chose to post, and you don’t like it, I won’t be upset if you choose not to read it. Find something else to do, watch Jesse’s Future shop commercial, write him a fan letter, but don’t even think that I don’t belong or have a right to be here.

The point that I was trying to make is that many have suggested that jesse should be converted to a wideout or TE or slotback or fullback…why not PK??? I was using irony here habman.

it’s been a long season for you habman, 3-15 again probably, Jesse’s misses a bunch of games again, career is now in doubt and now he is a free agent … :cry: :cry: :cry:

I think the decision to kick for the field goal rather than punt was the right decision. Yes, it was a long shot but it showed that we were playing to win..not to tie.

If our defense (or the defensive schemes) were better yesterday, we wouldn't have needed to rely on that kind of kick. Or maybe when we were marching up the field, perhaps Porter should have run the ball a few times. Sask was only sending a three man rush and the LB's were playing deep so as to not allow any long bombs. Porter runs well and I think could have gained some needed yards.

And as for drafting a Cdn kicker....NOT UNTIL WE SHORE UP THE O-LINE AND THE D-LINE!

It was actually a team record 57 yarder.

Whenever a kicker has to fully crank a kick, there is more oppoortunity for things to go wrong.
Setta had to put 100% in to that game ending kick, and had the leg but not the accuracy.
It was well worth the try.
It would have required a 68.5 yard punt...on the fly to get a single and the tie.
No way you do that when you are within a FG kickers range.
Instead of getting cranky over the missed FG, why not put the blame squarely on the offence.
They knew how much time was left, and how far they had to go.
That was a painful last minute. The offence seemed lost facing the expected 3 man rush and did a poor job of clock management.
We were also the victim of the hometown score clock.
On more than one occasion, and specifically on the procedure call at least 3 seconds ran off the clock after the play was dead. I was suprised nobody on the Ticats picked up on that!

He missed it. Its part of the game. He has had a different holder this year and it has affected him. He is paid to make kicks and he missed it but its a team game and I am sure he was part of the decision to kick a fg. Coaches ask before the final drive.......whats your range here with the wind? where do we need to get to to kick a fg? can you make it? would you rather punt it? whats your thoughts nick? The team got to where they needed to get for a shot at it.
they went for what they collectively thought was the best option and in my opinion they were right, distance was good but it sailed wide. That happens.
Setta has already shown that he can be better than he has been this year. If they can sign him it would be good but competition at camp is healthy for everyone and a canadian doing his job should only get it if he is better. Too many games come down to the kicker for the cats to not have the best one they can have regardless of where he is from.

There are some guys that the Ti Cats should scout. Chris Milo of Laval kicks several field goals every time Laval. He has booted one for 49 yards this season. Rene Parados of Concordia has been kicking field goals in the 40's and Rob Maver of Guelph if punting 44.6 yds per game.

Find something else to do, watch Jesse’s Future shop commercial, write him a fan letter, but don’t even think that I don’t belong or have a right to be here.

Is that an example of your humour ??? And yes Als im a season ticket holder and have been for years . Ill say it again bud Lumsden is a great back and the Cats have to sign him !!!

BG nobody said it was automatic and i am not bashing Nick Setta . I think im one of the more positive posters on this forum so I dont think im out of line saying he could of and should of made it . Our recievers dropped way to many balls yesterday now is that bashing ?? I dont think so , its their job just like its Settas job to make field goals especially when a game is on the line !!!

I was disappointed that Setta missed the potential game winner, especially by such a small margin.

As some folks have pointed out, a 55 yarder is always difficult.

Here is a link to an interesting article about a study that breaks down the probability of success on field goal attempts by distance from the hold to the goalposts.

The study was based on the stats of kickers in the 1995-96 NFL regular season.

As the article points out, the study has several shortcomings or missing data, such as: accounts for the presence of strong winds, but not their direction and strength at the time of the kick; evaluates all kickers in the study together and doesn't differentiate between probabilities for "better" versus "worse" kickers; ignores the effect of lateral placement of the hold (i.e. hash marks) and left versus right footed kicking; doesn't give special consideration to kicks to win or tie with very little time remaining.

[url=] ... -pat-good/[/url]

Based on their findings, for a field goal attempt of 50 yards (actual distance required of the kick) the probability of success is only 60% in a game with winds less than 15mph, and falls to 23% in a game with winds greater than 15mph.

I assume that that one of those two probabilities is also meant to include the case of winds of exactly 15mph. :wink: Note also that they don't account for direction of wind, and wind strength was measured at the start of the game rather than at the time of the kick itself. At a distance of 50 yards, I would speculate that teams are less likely to bother making an attempt if the winds are unfavourable.

I dug a bit deeper and found the formula Christopher Bilder and Thomas Loughlin arrived at to model NFL place kick probabilities.

The original paper is here:

[url=] ... 8_ILS2.pdf[/url]

Their formula can be expressed as (apologies for the ugly formatting here):


or to simplify the presentation:


Where X is this ugly beast:

change=1 if the kick would change the lead; change=0 if the kick would not change the lead
distance=the distance in yards
PAT=1 if the kick is a point-after-touchdown; PAT=0 if the kick is not a point-after-touchdown
wind=1 if the wind at the beginning of the game was greater than 15mph; wind=0 if the wind at game time was less than or equal to 15mph at game time or the placekick is attemted inside a dome

Out of curiosity, I plugged this formula into a spreadsheet and looked up what Bilder and Loughlin's model would predict for Setta's kick on Sunday.

For a 54 yard field goal attempt to change the lead, their model predicts the following probabilities of success:
Wind less than or equal to 15mph at game start: 45.3%
Wind greater than 15mph at game start: 9.9%

According to this model, for lead-changing field goal attempts the rate of decrease in probability over distance is steepest at 49 yards in the "non-windy" case and 42 yards in the "windy" case.

I think I am missing something there is no way the punt would have been 68 yards. My friends, the endzone is 25 yards deep. Unless Nick could have angled the punt then you are talking about a 75 to 90 yard punt. The field goal was the way to go and he missed it. A tough loss but I thought the team should a huge amount of character considering their record. Count me in the group that would sign Setta a.s.a.p.

My concern was why in the last month the Cats continued to use Porter as the holder? I don't understand that.

Have to correct my last comment there:
The steepest drop-off in the "non-windy" case it is at 52 yards.
The steepest drop-off in the "windy" case is at 42 yards.

For fun, here are a few choice datapoints. As always, the predictions of a model like this need to be taken with a grain of salt. See the full paper linked in my earlier post for additional limitations and caveats from the authors. Anyone wanna volunteer to start attempting 109 yarders to see if you can make 1%? :wink:

Windy case:
99%: 14 yards
95% (94.9%): 24 yards
90% (90.4%): 28 yards
80% (80.1%): 33 yards
70% (70.6%): 36 yards
60% (58.9%): 39 yards
50% (50.46%): 41 yards
40% (37.8%): 44 yards
30% (30.2%): 46 yards
20% (21.0%): 49 yards
10% (9.9%): 54 yards
1% (0.99%): 68 yards

Non-windy case:
98%: 4 yards
95% (95.1%): 15 yards
90% (90.3%): 24 yards
80% (80.6%): 34 yards
70% (70.2%): 41 yards
60% (59.3%): 47 yards
50% (49.3%): 52 yards
40% (39.4%): 57 yards
30% (30.2%): 62 yards
20% (19.8%): 69 yards
10% (9.9%): 79 yards
1% (0.97%): 109 yards

The Cfl endzones are 20 yards.

My bad stil makes the punt in the 75 - 85 yard range if my numbers are right instead of a 54 yard attempt, correct?

I find this kinda funny, as much as its cool to look at the chances of Sabastian Janikowski, Nick Setta, or Jamie Boreham and Alexis Serta making the kick are VERY different.

Maybe true but his punts if it doesn't get out will travel alot farther with the wind as well as giving our special teams guys time to get down there and make a play. However they would probably punt the ball out if they were smart. However I still think the odds were better with a punt and tie. Oh well lets hope we have a good game friday night and have some fun!!

I'll take a 54 yr field goal on the road with the wind for the win versus a punt of roughly 80 yards with the same factors involved for the tie any day.

At 3-12 I agree with that sentiment. If we were challenging for a playoff spot then the single point and single point (tie) may have made a difference but in my mind nothing to loose by trying the field goal.