4th down haters and critics, where are you

[Mr. Greenjeans]

Anybody know why Jamal Wilson has not ran the ball at all this year? Maybe on 4th and short?

Very good question, a battering ram vs. a dancer (no offense intended to Canada) seems to be something that should be considered on short yardage, just my .02 pennies. :thumb:

 

[Mr. Greenjeans]

Good point. Look where CP's non-aggressive play-call got them. A blocked FG and a loss. Goes to show that a FG is not automatic. I thought CP might go for it and end the game with a first down. On the other hand, I had no problem with CP's call. The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game. CP punted several times, where I thought they might go for it too.

Or, we have confidence in our O and JJ to get the TD (look at the last 4th down play yesterday), but if we don't, we'll have NAU on their 2 or 1 and have confidence in our D holding them to a 3 and out, perhaps causing a bad punt, and perhaps even causing a turnover; and then we have confidence that with 3 TO's in the time remaining, JJ and the O can move down the field and get a score (again look at last drive yesterday). Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday). Some of you watch too many (conservative) NFL games. College football is different.

So first you state that "Goes to show that a FG is not automatic." Then you say "The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game." Then you follow up with "Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday)""

Dude, you are all over the place there...maybe you better talk to your fellow coach Delaney about short field goals.

"Was Delaney concerned when Cal Poly went into field goal formation? Let’s just say the veteran skipper has been in the game long enough to realize the odds of blocking a short field are about the same as blocking an extra point.

“That should be automatic to cinch the game,” he offered. “We could not have beat them if they kicked that field goal.” -Missoulian-

Also, it's a good thing the prior two or three failed 4th down attempts took place and boosted the offense and defenses confidence or else maybe JJ and the O could not have moved down the field and gotten a score.

That is some pure college football knowledge right there. I can tell you do not watch too many (conservative) NFL games. :clap:

It's true that the NFL is a don't make a mistake bunch but they are starting to wise up. The only beef I had was going for it was late, 4th and 3 I believe around the 25. We were not doing well running it so 3 yards was a reach(that's another story), in that case I think Worst has a 70 percent chance of hitting that kick, in that case I'll take the 3 points. It's all relative and won't work every time. Thats where you man up and play the percentages, anything that improves your chance of winning should be pursued. See Brown, Mack and Texas, old school is going to end his tenure there.

Stay aggressive coach, but consider the odds .

 

[PlayerRep]

Good point. Look where CP's non-aggressive play-call got them. A blocked FG and a loss. Goes to show that a FG is not automatic. I thought CP might go for it and end the game with a first down. On the other hand, I had no problem with CP's call. The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game. CP punted several times, where I thought they might go for it too.

Or, we have confidence in our O and JJ to get the TD (look at the last 4th down play yesterday), but if we don't, we'll have NAU on their 2 or 1 and have confidence in our D holding them to a 3 and out, perhaps causing a bad punt, and perhaps even causing a turnover; and then we have confidence that with 3 TO's in the time remaining, JJ and the O can move down the field and get a score (again look at last drive yesterday). Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday). Some of you watch too many (conservative) NFL games. College football is different.

So first you state that "Goes to show that a FG is not automatic." Then you say "The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game." Then you follow up with "Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday)""

Dude, you are all over the place there...maybe you better talk to your fellow coach Delaney about short field goals.

"Was Delaney concerned when Cal Poly went into field goal formation? Let’s just say the veteran skipper has been in the game long enough to realize the odds of blocking a short field are about the same as blocking an extra point.

“That should be automatic to cinch the game,” he offered. “We could not have beat them if they kicked that field goal.” -Missoulian-

Also, it's a good thing the prior two or three failed 4th down attempts took place and boosted the offense and defenses confidence or else maybe JJ and the O could not have moved down the field and gotten a score.

That is some pure college football knowledge right there. I can tell you do not watch too many (conservative) NFL games. :clap:

My statements on short FG's are completely consistent with each other. Not only do you not understand the game, you can't read or think very well. I thought you said you had things set up so that you couldn't read my posts. Did that only last a few hours, or did you lie about that?

 

[PlayerRep]

Good point. Look where CP's non-aggressive play-call got them. A blocked FG and a loss. Goes to show that a FG is not automatic. I thought CP might go for it and end the game with a first down. On the other hand, I had no problem with CP's call. The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game. CP punted several times, where I thought they might go for it too.

Or, we have confidence in our O and JJ to get the TD (look at the last 4th down play yesterday), but if we don't, we'll have NAU on their 2 or 1 and have confidence in our D holding them to a 3 and out, perhaps causing a bad punt, and perhaps even causing a turnover; and then we have confidence that with 3 TO's in the time remaining, JJ and the O can move down the field and get a score (again look at last drive yesterday). Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday). Some of you watch too many (conservative) NFL games. College football is different.

So first you state that "Goes to show that a FG is not automatic." Then you say "The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game." Then you follow up with "Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday)""

Dude, you are all over the place there...maybe you better talk to your fellow coach Delaney about short field goals.

"Was Delaney concerned when Cal Poly went into field goal formation? Let’s just say the veteran skipper has been in the game long enough to realize the odds of blocking a short field are about the same as blocking an extra point.

“That should be automatic to cinch the game,” he offered. “We could not have beat them if they kicked that field goal.” -Missoulian-

Also, it's a good thing the prior two or three failed 4th down attempts took place and boosted the offense and defenses confidence or else maybe JJ and the O could not have moved down the field and gotten a score.

That is some pure college football knowledge right there. I can tell you do not watch too many (conservative) NFL games. :clap:

It's true that the NFL is a don't make a mistake bunch but they are starting to wise up. The only beef I had was going for it was late, 4th and 3 I believe around the 25. We were not doing well running it so 3 yards was a reach(that's another story), in that case I think Worst has a 70 percent chance of hitting that kick, in that case I'll take the 3 points. It's all relative and won't work every time. Thats where you man up and play the percentages, anything that improves your chance of winning should be pursued. See Brown, Mack and Texas, old school is going to end his tenure there.

Stay aggressive coach, but consider the odds .

The statistics show that going for it on 4th down increases chances of winning, and should be done more often.

 

[PlayerRep]

Or, we have confidence in our O and JJ to get the TD (look at the last 4th down play yesterday), but if we don't, we'll have NAU on their 2 or 1 and have confidence in our D holding them to a 3 and out, perhaps causing a bad punt, and perhaps even causing a turnover; and then we have confidence that with 3 TO's in the time remaining, JJ and the O can move down the field and get a score (again look at last drive yesterday). Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday). Some of you watch too many (conservative) NFL games. College football is different.

You finally got it. Subsequent events show that we are correct at times on the 4th down call and other times we're wrong.

I think you probably watch too many John Wayne movies. College football isn't different.

No, I was just politely showing that your view was not correct in the particular 4th down situation.

 

[rimrockgriz]

Suckers... :lol: :lol: :lol: :egriz:

 

[Fahque]

Good point. Look where CP's non-aggressive play-call got them. A blocked FG and a loss. Goes to show that a FG is not automatic. I thought CP might go for it and end the game with a first down. On the other hand, I had no problem with CP's call. The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game. CP punted several times, where I thought they might go for it too.

Or, we have confidence in our O and JJ to get the TD (look at the last 4th down play yesterday), but if we don't, we'll have NAU on their 2 or 1 and have confidence in our D holding them to a 3 and out, perhaps causing a bad punt, and perhaps even causing a turnover; and then we have confidence that with 3 TO's in the time remaining, JJ and the O can move down the field and get a score (again look at last drive yesterday). Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday). Some of you watch too many (conservative) NFL games. College football is different.

So first you state that "Goes to show that a FG is not automatic." Then you say "The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game." Then you follow up with "Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday)""

Dude, you are all over the place there...maybe you better talk to your fellow coach Delaney about short field goals.

"Was Delaney concerned when Cal Poly went into field goal formation? Let’s just say the veteran skipper has been in the game long enough to realize the odds of blocking a short field are about the same as blocking an extra point.

“That should be automatic to cinch the game,” he offered. “We could not have beat them if they kicked that field goal.” -Missoulian-

Also, it's a good thing the prior two or three failed 4th down attempts took place and boosted the offense and defenses confidence or else maybe JJ and the O could not have moved down the field and gotten a score.

That is some pure college football knowledge right there. I can tell you do not watch too many (conservative) NFL games. :clap:

My statements on short FG's are completely consistent with each other. Not only do you not understand the game, you can't read or think very well. I thought you said you had things set up so that you couldn't read my posts. Did that only last a few hours, or did you lie about that?

 

[PlayerRep]

Good point. Look where CP's non-aggressive play-call got them. A blocked FG and a loss. Goes to show that a FG is not automatic. I thought CP might go for it and end the game with a first down. On the other hand, I had no problem with CP's call. The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game. CP punted several times, where I thought they might go for it too.

Or, we have confidence in our O and JJ to get the TD (look at the last 4th down play yesterday), but if we don't, we'll have NAU on their 2 or 1 and have confidence in our D holding them to a 3 and out, perhaps causing a bad punt, and perhaps even causing a turnover; and then we have confidence that with 3 TO's in the time remaining, JJ and the O can move down the field and get a score (again look at last drive yesterday). Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday). Some of you watch too many (conservative) NFL games. College football is different.

So first you state that "Goes to show that a FG is not automatic." Then you say "The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game." Then you follow up with "Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday)""

Dude, you are all over the place there...maybe you better talk to your fellow coach Delaney about short field goals.

"Was Delaney concerned when Cal Poly went into field goal formation? Let’s just say the veteran skipper has been in the game long enough to realize the odds of blocking a short field are about the same as blocking an extra point.

“That should be automatic to cinch the game,” he offered. “We could not have beat them if they kicked that field goal.” -Missoulian-

Also, it's a good thing the prior two or three failed 4th down attempts took place and boosted the offense and defenses confidence or else maybe JJ and the O could not have moved down the field and gotten a score.

That is some pure college football knowledge right there. I can tell you do not watch too many (conservative) NFL games. :clap:

My statements on short FG's are completely consistent with each other. Not only do you not understand the game, you can't read or think very well. I thought you said you had things set up so that you couldn't read my posts. Did that only last a few hours, or did you lie about that?

Can you really not understand that short FG's are "high percentage" and "usually made", but are not "automatic"?

 

[tnt]

I only know two things. MD said before the season started that this would be his strategey. As someone said in the Post Game Interview if Dan carpenter were still here MD wouldn't have done anything Different. The second thing is as PR pointed some folks have TERRIBLE math skills. A loss by one point is still a loss.

 

[cclarkblues]

One thing that all you geniuses who are arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin are forgetting that it is a GOOD thing to have the opportunity to go for it on 4th down deep inside opponent territory. It is also a good thing that the Griz have had the opportunity to go for it so many times this year.

It sure beats punting from your own 10 yard line.

 

[mtgriz]

Sure glad we weren't up just 7-0 on Furman when they hit the Hail Mary. Those two pussy FGs came in mighty handy. Yeah I know we could have been up 21-0 or 14-0. But we also could have been up just 7-0.

 

[Mousegriz]

I'm in agreement wiht PR here........and if you aren't you don't know much about the game.......going for it on that last 4th down of the game was a good call.

 

[mtgriz]

While it has been unspoken so far, I'm thinking the 4th down lovers also loathe the extra point try?

Essentially a 4th and 3; let's always go for 2, right?

If a FG is for pussies, than who's a 1 pt. EP for?

Again, it's all in the math.

 

[1Griz_Fan]

Good point. Look where CP's non-aggressive play-call got them. A blocked FG and a loss. Goes to show that a FG is not automatic. I thought CP might go for it and end the game with a first down. On the other hand, I had no problem with CP's call. The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game. CP punted several times, where I thought they might go for it too.

Or, we have confidence in our O and JJ to get the TD (look at the last 4th down play yesterday), but if we don't, we'll have NAU on their 2 or 1 and have confidence in our D holding them to a 3 and out, perhaps causing a bad punt, and perhaps even causing a turnover; and then we have confidence that with 3 TO's in the time remaining, JJ and the O can move down the field and get a score (again look at last drive yesterday). Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday). Some of you watch too many (conservative) NFL games. College football is different.

So first you state that "Goes to show that a FG is not automatic." Then you say "The percentage is high that they will get the FG and win the game." Then you follow up with "Also, short FG's are usually made (but again look at CP's blocked FG yesterday)""

Dude, you are all over the place there...maybe you better talk to your fellow coach Delaney about short field goals.

"Was Delaney concerned when Cal Poly went into field goal formation? Let’s just say the veteran skipper has been in the game long enough to realize the odds of blocking a short field are about the same as blocking an extra point.

“That should be automatic to cinch the game,” he offered. “We could not have beat them if they kicked that field goal.” -Missoulian-

Also, it's a good thing the prior two or three failed 4th down attempts took place and boosted the offense and defenses confidence or else maybe JJ and the O could not have moved down the field and gotten a score.

That is some pure college football knowledge right there. I can tell you do not watch too many (conservative) NFL games. :clap:

My statements on short FG's are completely consistent with each other. Not only do you not understand the game, you can't read or think very well. I thought you said you had things set up so that you couldn't read my posts. Did that only last a few hours, or did you lie about that?

:lol: Yep I do have you blocked when I am logged on but since you like to troll and stir the pot I thought maybe you would appreciate the same so you don't have to continue having one sided "discussions" with yourself. Not only do you not understand sarcasm but you can't go without having the last word or always trying to come across as the perfect football brains on here. Let's beat that dead horse together coach. Hook line and sinker...sucker

 

[GrizRanger]

In Player Reps world he would always try for a 1st down on 4th down, and never kick a field goal. Of course a field goal is only worth 3 points, while a touchdown is worth 8 points (in Player Reps world why kick it for 1 point after a TD when it is just as easy to run or pass for 2 points, just as it is easy to run or pass to get a 1st down).

Player Rep doesn’t believe in place kickers (or punters). In his world there is no need for any kickers, since you always go for it on 4th down.

Of course a coach with this philosophy may have difficulty in being hired. Player Rep submit your application to coach and prove me wrong.

Although without a need for a place kicker and a punter, that frees up two scholarships for two more real football players. Maybe Player Rep is on to something here. :roll:

 

[PlayerRep]

In Player Reps world he would always try for a 1st down on 4th down, and never kick a field goal. Of course a field goal is only worth 3 points, while a touchdown is worth 8 points (in Player Reps world why kick it for 1 point after a TD when it is just as easy to run or pass for 2 points, just as it is easy to run or pass to get a 1st down).

Player Rep doesn’t believe in place kickers (or punters). In his world there is no need for any kickers, since you always go for it on 4th down.

Of course a coach with this philosophy may have difficulty in being hired. Player Rep submit your application to coach and prove me wrong.

Although without a need for a place kicker and a punter, that frees up two scholarships for two more real football players. Maybe Player Rep is on to something here. :roll:

Just out of curiosity, what are you talking about? I have never said any of those things.

 

[1Griz_Fan]

I'm in agreement wiht PR here........and if you aren't you don't know much about the game.......going for it on that last 4th down of the game was a good call.

The last 4th down of the game is not in question by anyone in Griz Nation, pretty clear being down by 7, with about 18 seconds or whatever was remaining, leading to the score at 12 seconds would make a field goal pointless just like this troll thread.

A better thread would have been, where are all the be aggressive go for the two point conversion and win supporters...