Why Not Use All Four Downs?

TW: In honor of the kick-off of football season (college at least), I post on something about which I have always wondered. Why not use all four downs all the time instead merely at the end a half in a crunch situation. Any football fan knows the dread of facing a "4 down" offense situation as they seem to work very well.

These pieces (a practical one followed by the professor's) frame that statistically almost any time and anywhere during a game it makes sense for an offense to run four plays forsaking punts. Why do folks not do it? Largely tradition which drives sanctions (of the unofficial sort) against those who would innovate. This dynamic permeates society. One can follow the irrational course as long as that course is the traditional means by which to act. Another consideration is such approaches will not overcome significant talent, effort gaps. If your teams sucks, your team will lose regardless.

From Rivals High:
"Kevin Kelley decided to flip football convention on its head after Pulaski (Ark.) Academy's second game of the 2007 season...his 2008 team did not punt during 14 games. Such an unorthodox strategy may seem like lunacy, but it was successful: Pulaski won the 5A state title on Dec. 6.

...Keeping the offense on the field on fourth down allows for more creative play-calling. Third-and-long does not have to be a passing down. The Little Rock school can run the ball, throw a screen pass or use any number of formations. Defenses do not know whether to use a nickel or dime defense. And Pulaski's offense has less pressure on third down.

If Pulaski converts on fourth down, it creates a momentum change similar to a turnover. Other high school coaches have told Kelley they would rather see his team punt.

The Bruins even avoid punting when the defense has stopped them inside their own 10-yard line..."
http://highschool.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=892888

From Jim Kwak at Baseline Scenario:
" 'In honor of the changing seasons, imagine it’s the first quarter of a football game and you have fourth-and-one at the other team’s 40-yard line. Anyone who studies football statistics will say you should go for it; it’s not even close. (Some people have run the numbers and said that a football team should never – that’s right, never – kick a punt.) If the offense fails to make it, the announcer, and the commentators the next day, will all say that it was a bad decision. That’s completely wrong. It was a good decision; it just didn’t work out.'

....The conclusion is that over most of the field you should go for it if you have four or fewer yards to go; there is a big spike around the opponent’s 33-yard line where you should go for it even on fourth and nine, because the net field position benefit of punting is low and the expected point value of attempting a field goal is low.

The implication, of course, is that football teams don’t maximize. Romer concedes that making the right decision on fourth down would lead to about one more win every three years, and this is probably outweighed by the asymmetric returns: you are more likely to be penalized (as a coach) if you go against convention and are wrong than if you follow convention, since the fans (and the owners) are more likely to notice departures from convention. So the incentives of football coaches are not simply to maximize points, but also to maintain their reputations"
http://baselinescenario.com/2009/09/03/football-statistics-and-agency-problems/.