Williams & Blum Pod: Fire up the trumpets!

[joefrog]

Agree. It was a chicken s**t ultra conservative call that loses you games. No reason whatsoever to put that poor kid out there again to take the heat for the loss when you knew his head was messed up.

Even if you have a good kicker it's the wrong call in my mind. I just want to point that out, because up to that point we appeared to have a good kicker that hadn't missed all year.

When you're on the road you don't play for OT. Not when you need a foot for a 1st down with over a minute left.

One of the most cowardly AND cruel things I have ever seen any coach ever do. And a guy in his 7th year at his school does this? On the road? In a conference game against a lesser opponent? And the idea was, what, you don't trust your offense to go 20 yards in a minute, but you expect your clearly rattled kicker to get you to overtime AND also make the kick there because you won't go for the win then either? Neither honor nor victory. Awesome.

$5 million a year to decide these were the optimal choices for victory in that situation. I don't know what is worse, the fact this was done, or the fact that no Cyclone media will ask about these specific scenarios.

I mean, we're in South Park gnome world now.

1lay cowardly and hope for best.
2: ??????
3: Victory?

 

[Didley]

One of the most cowardly AND cruel things I have ever seen any coach ever do. And a guy in his 7th year at his school does this? On the road? In a conference game against a lesser opponent? And the idea was, what, you don't trust your offense to go 20 yards in a minute, but you expect your clearly rattled kicker to get you to overtime AND also make the kick there because you won't go for the win then either? Neither honor nor victory. Awesome.

$5 million a year to decide these were the optimal choices for victory in that situation. I don't know what is worse, the fact this was done, or the fact that no Cyclone media will ask about these specific scenarios.

I mean, we're in South Park gnome world now.

1lay cowardly and hope for best.
2: ??????
3: Victory?

I think a decent alternative would have been to let Shackford or Nettles kick it. I’m in the boat of saying that kicking the FG is probably a decent coaching decision in that game situation. But I do agree you can’t put Gilbert in that situation because of the stakes, his age, and the location.

I generally felt like if we had gone for it, made it, we end up just kicking a FG anyways. And so we risk missing the 4th and 1, a turnover, or running out of clock on a stupid play call.

 

[stewart092284]

Agree. It was a chicken s**t ultra conservative call that loses you games. No reason whatsoever to put that poor kid out there again to take the heat for the loss when you knew his head was messed up.

Even if you have a good kicker it's the wrong call in my mind. I just want to point that out, because up to that point we appeared to have a good kicker that hadn't missed all year.

When you're on the road you don't play for OT. Not when you need a foot for a 1st down with over a minute left.

Forget the missed kick part - we also had a horrible snap that lead to the two point conversation ironically AND already had a PAT blocked.

So taking out the idea that the kid had already doinked it twice - you're asking a unit that two times in the last three weeks had pretty big errors outside of the kicker and now you're asking a kid who is probably thinking about hooking it to avoid his nemesis in the up-right or its in his head - and it just doesn't seem like a great call - coupled that with the issue with time management and the time out - it just was a strange sequence that seemed doomed to fail from the start

 

[stewart092284]

I've never coached FB at any level, but I always thought you play to win on the road. Seemed like the O was doing okay at that point in the game.

Yes and No. Generally yes but also at the same time - its a feel thing. In the KU game I think it would have been better to go for it based on the earlier misses and snap on the PAT but that is easy to say after the fact even if I felt that way live.

It also depends on the opponent and what you are feeling. Yes, I get it from the standpoint of our defense is really good but they have an explosive offense that would essentially be starting in the red zone.

Basically if it were NFL rules for over time with our defense - I'm all for playing for over time and making them drive the length of the field. College rules over time - and a bend but don't break defense, I'm probably playing for the win on the road

 

[clonehome]

ISU goes for it on 4th and gets it, but ISU still needs a TD which the way they were playing was far from guaranteed.

Even if we don’t score a TD we get a new set of downs and have the opportunity to center the ball on third down, and likely kick from a shorter distance. As soon as they trotted out the psyched out freshman for a 38 yarder from the left hash I knew the game was over. No way he makes that kick. Now a 32 yarder down the middle I like our chances much better.