Playoffs, a season early Topic

Looked up his name, which I had forgotten.  Jernigan.  And apparently he had the flu. Regardless..
1/8/2014 1:15 PM
Again, in a vacuum, true.  My earlier point was that this would be something that you'd have to have drilled into your players' head at some point, and the last thing I want to drill into my players' head when we're almost 40 yards away from a go ahead score is "Don't score."
1/8/2014 1:17 PM

The time outw would have given the fatty time to rest. 

Anyway, coaches don't play that game.   It's a known fact that punting at midfield is somewhat pointless.    Yet teams continue to do it.    Going for it on 4th is often the better option but teams don't.    Coaches play it safe because that keeps them employed.    I'm not really arguing what would have been the better play.   I'm arguing that Malzahn decided what he'd prefer to do rather than "OMG!!!  I should have told him to take a knee at the 1!!!!!" after the fact.

1/8/2014 1:23 PM
It's happened in the NFL before. It's had to have happened in college somewhere at some point. We'll see it again. I'd like to see it on a big stage like the other night. Unlikely, but I'd just like to see someone have the guts to do it. He can live in my basement if it backfires and he loses his job.
1/8/2014 3:34 PM
It happened in the NFL with Brian Westbrook.   However, they were up by 3, didn't want to give the opponent the ball, with time and the opportunity for an onside kick.    No one, needing a TD to win, has stopped at the 1.    Probably at any level from the NFL to PeeWee football.
1/8/2014 3:38 PM
Posted by trsnoke on 1/8/2014 3:34:00 PM (view original):
It's happened in the NFL before. It's had to have happened in college somewhere at some point. We'll see it again. I'd like to see it on a big stage like the other night. Unlikely, but I'd just like to see someone have the guts to do it. He can live in my basement if it backfires and he loses his job.
I've seen it happen in the NFL when a team is already ahead and can then end the game by taking a knee, or can win the game with a chip shot field goal as time expires - I can't recall seeing someone give up a touchdown that they actually needed in favor of running more clock.  Maybe I'm not remembering something though.
1/8/2014 3:39 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 1/8/2014 3:38:00 PM (view original):
It happened in the NFL with Brian Westbrook.   However, they were up by 3, didn't want to give the opponent the ball, with time and the opportunity for an onside kick.    No one, needing a TD to win, has stopped at the 1.    Probably at any level from the NFL to PeeWee football.
Yep, that's the one I remember.  I also remember that Ahmed Bradshaw attempted to do it in the Super Bowl a couple years ago but didn't think about it until too late and went in anyhow.  They were behind in that situation, but by 2, so they could have run out the clock and won with a chip shot field goal as time expires.  Not the same thing.
1/8/2014 3:44 PM
The Giants tried to do it in their last Super Bowl.  But a FG would have won the game, so it's different.
1/8/2014 3:54 PM
Is there an echo in here?
1/8/2014 4:00 PM
That's right - I've seen it when the team was ahead so not exactly the same. I meant I've seen the kneel to keep from scoring but the circumstances did change the risk profile so I guess that's not a very good comparison.
1/8/2014 4:22 PM
1/8/2014 6:44 PM
Posted by trsnoke on 1/8/2014 4:22:00 PM (view original):
That's right - I've seen it when the team was ahead so not exactly the same. I meant I've seen the kneel to keep from scoring but the circumstances did change the risk profile so I guess that's not a very good comparison.
Right - kneeling instead of scoring when you're already ahead and can run out the clock yields essentially a 100% chance of winning, doing so when you can run out the clock and kick a chip shot field goal for the win as time expires must be in the high 90% (basically whatever the conversion rate for an extra point is). 

I'm honestly surprised that (based on the article you went on to post) the odds don't really support the strategy in this scenario. 
1/8/2014 8:23 PM
I am, too. I think Auburn punches it pretty easily the way they were running the ball but if all that does is cause FSU to burn one timeout, maybe nothing changes in the end, anyway. I'd rather have them burn that TO then not, though, since at that point you don't know what is going to happen next. I think where it breaks down is that any penalty - a false start for example - pushes Auburn back and starts to move the percentages out of their favor (if you think they were even in their favor to begin with).

I'm also interested in how FSU would respond if it happened. A TO to stop the clock is a no-brainer but then do they try to stop Auburn, knowing the chances are high that Auburn will score eventually since its first and goal at/inside the 1, or do they let Auburn score on next play to maximize the time they have to respond? Moot point, most likely, but it brings up some nonstandard scenarios that may create a little confusion/uncertainty for the other side.
1/8/2014 9:10 PM
Also, I do think you are right that you probably don't want your guys thinking about scoring slowly or trying not to score when they are still 35 yds away. FSU still had to score a TD to win so shame on Auburn defense.
1/8/2014 9:25 PM
As I mentioned earlier, something as simple as a fumbled exchange or snap would cause you to lose when a tie was obvious and a win was likely.   No one takes that gamble.
1/9/2014 8:17 AM
◂ Prev 1...25|26|27|28 Next ▸
Playoffs, a season early Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.