OT: HS Coach Who Doesn't Punt/Onside Kicks Every Time

Of course, we played 8-man, where a touchdown is as likely to be 70 yards as 10, so field position didn't matter as much.

No. This only works at the high school level because the players are smaller, slower, and less disciplined.

There is a strong strain of thought that coaches should be more aggressive on 4th down, but nobody thinks that a team could make it at the higher levels without playing the field position game somewhat.

I like the idea, but you have to understand that Pulaski Academy is an elite high school football program that chooses it's athletes. 

Imagine a decidedly less talented football team doing this, and it's easy to see how things would go south for them in a hurry. 

I think Pulaski Academy is also know for running a lot of trick plays as well.

I believe the coach in South Haven, MI also subscribes to the same philosophy. 

There's statistical data to suggest not punting very often, but I don't think there are enough samples of on-side kicks to justify this statistically. I wouldn't expect an analysis to tell you to onside kick very often, just based on the idea that the same statistical analysis that told you to not punt before would give you a result of "We get the ball at midfield? Awesome." when you apply it to your opponent. 

EDIT: And yeah, to echo the sentiment of the posters above me, let's throw these guys and St. Thomas Aquinas on ESPN and see how well the onside kick strategy goes for them. 

This isn't that rare with bad high school teams, usually because they don't have anyone who can kick or their longsnapper is unreliable. 

Going for it on fourth down to me is almost always about understanding the game you are in. If you're a defense playing well against the opposing offense but are having your own offensive struggles and have a good punter you are probably justified punting from the fifty yard line on 4th and 3 even if statistically you are more likely to convert. Failing to convert and giving up 20 yards on defense from the 50 before stopping them means the other team gets a field goal. Punting and giving up  20 yards on defense before stopping them means you get the ball back with solid field position.

especially in a shootout-type game like 2010 Illinois and 2013 Indiana.  There's no reason to kick deep if you're just going to get scored on anyway.  The defense actually got a few stops at the end of the Indiana game, but that Illinois game was a complete defensive catastrophe.

As far as going for two, unfortunately, coaches are very conservative and realize they will never be questioned for kicking extra points and not going for it till they need to (and losing by 2 when the conversion fails), but will certainly be put under scrutiny if the team goes for it early when they don't need it, fails, and ends up losing by 1.

I remember playing against Muskegon Orchard View in 1999. That season, they scored the seventh most points in a season in the history of high school football in the country (not sure where it stands now)! They never punted and they onside kicked every time as well. They also always went for two. Their coach was Shilito who coaches Zeeland West now. I think it's important to take into account that these kind of decisions are affected by the abilities of your kickers too.

Watching the end of the Stanford Oregon game got me thinking about teams who onside kick a lot (as in the OP). Oregon was able to get one out of three, I believe. I was thinking a team like Oregon or Indiana should onside more often. With a high powered offense why not try to increase possessions? Indiana has such a poor defense not sure field position is that valuable.