Where are all the don't go for it on 4th down haters?

[ranco]

As others have already noted, the critics of going for it on 4th down, especially near the goal line, seem to have disappeared. It's amazing what a difference converting on a play, and not fumbling it for a 98 yard fumble return, makes. Does anyone think that short FG kicks are automatic this year?

Dimwit. Your football ignorance is showing through. Not every fourth down call is the same. You cannot even compare the two situations giving rise to the calls in UCD and NA games. Only football tard would try.

 

[grizatwork]

Signs of the Armageddon. Alpha and PR agreeing on something.

 

[DuCharme]

Bass ackward statement... so if you agreed with it, you probably walk with your nose in somebody's butt.

PR didn't mean... DON'T-go-for-it-on-4th-down-haters.
He meant the Go-For-It-On-4th-Down-Haters.

But you all knew that. Right?

 

[grizindabox]

I have no issue with going for it at NAU, I just was not excited by the playcall.

 

[PlayerRep]

We weren't down 14-0 this time. They weren't moving the ball at will on us.

THIS.
Having a lead opens up your options. Plus the fact we weren't facing going into halftime scoreless at Davis.
:ugeek:

Being down and not playing well means that you have to look for opportunities, and take chances, to get back into the game. I am surprised that some of you don't understand that.

 

[PlayerRep]

As others have already noted, the critics of going for it on 4th down, especially near the goal line, seem to have disappeared. It's amazing what a difference converting on a play, and not fumbling it for a 98 yard fumble return, makes. Does anyone think that short FG kicks are automatic this year?

Dimwit. Your football ignorance is showing through. Not every fourth down call is the same. You cannot even compare the two situations giving rise to the calls in UCD and NA games. Only football tard would try.

Sure there are differences in 4th down calls. However, in my view, the biggest differences that influenced the 4th down critics were the lack of success of the play, and the 98 yard fumble return for TD. Had UM gotten the TD, no one would have complained. Some of the differences also include what I just posted above, i.e. that UM was down and not playing well, and needed to find a way to change the momentum and get back into the game. In order to do this, you have to look for opportunities and take risks. You don't start playing conservative when you're down and struggling. It is you who is showing he doesn't understand the game.

 

[Fahque]

As others have already noted, the critics of going for it on 4th down, especially near the goal line, seem to have disappeared. It's amazing what a difference converting on a play, and not fumbling it for a 98 yard fumble return, makes. Does anyone think that short FG kicks are automatic this year?

Dimwit. Your football ignorance is showing through. Not every fourth down call is the same. You cannot even compare the two situations giving rise to the calls in UCD and NA games. Only football tard would try.

Sure there are differences in 4th down calls. However, in my view, the biggest differences that influenced the 4th down critics were the lack of success of the play, and the 98 yard fumble return for TD. Had UM gotten the TD, no one would have complained. Some of the differences also include what I just posted above, i.e. that UM was down and not playing well, and needed to find a way to change the momentum and get back into the game. In order to do this, you have to look for opportunities and take risks. You don't start playing conservative when you're down and struggling. It is you who is showing he doesn't understand the game.

That's in your mind. Bye bye now.

 

[Grizzlies1982]

We weren't down 14-0 this time. They weren't moving the ball at will on us.

THIS.
Having a lead opens up your options. Plus the fact we weren't facing going into halftime scoreless at Davis.
:ugeek:

Being down and not playing well means that you have to look for opportunities, and take chances, to get back into the game. I am surprised that some of you don't understand that.

I agree for the most part. Yet at NAU we hadn't been playing well. Finally we put together a drive to get to the five. Then we blew three plays to get to the three. It was not late in the game where a touchdown is needed. Yet there was only enough time where this was likely our last series before halftime. We are down 14-0. Put some points on the board before half. After all the earlier frustration just get some payoff for the drive then go regroup at halftime. At that point we simply needed a little positive momentum not necessarily a touchdown.
:ugeek:

 

[ranco]

We weren't down 14-0 this time. They weren't moving the ball at will on us.

THIS.
Having a lead opens up your options. Plus the fact we weren't facing going into halftime scoreless at Davis.
:ugeek:

Being down and not playing well means that you have to look for opportunities, and take chances, to get back into the game. I am surprised that some of you don't understand that.

No, it was only the first half. You know you can and will play better. Take the points, build a little momentum before the half and come out and score to start the second half... or panic and go for it

 

[AZGrizFan]

We weren't down 14-0 this time. They weren't moving the ball at will on us.

THIS.
Having a lead opens up your options. Plus the fact we weren't facing going into halftime scoreless at Davis.
:ugeek:

Being down and not playing well means that you have to look for opportunities, and take chances, to get back into the game. I am surprised that some of you don't understand that.

I agree for the most part. Yet at NAU we hadn't been playing well. Finally we put together a drive to get to the five. Then we blew three plays to get to the three. It was not late in the game where a touchdown is needed. Yet there was only enough time where this was likely our last series before halftime. We are down 14-0. Put some points on the board before half. After all the earlier frustration just get some payoff for the drive then go regroup at halftime. At that point we simply needed a little positive momentum not necessarily a touchdown.
:ugeek:

I'm way more pissed about the 2nd and 3rd down calls than I am about the 4th down call. Even if stopped on 4th down, THAT debacle doesn't happen one time out of a thousand.

 

[kemajic]

We are down 14-0. Put some points on the board before half. After all the earlier frustration just get some payoff for the drive then go regroup at halftime. At that point we simply needed a little positive momentum not necessarily a touchdown.
:ugeek:

Agree; but to be correct, we were down 14-3 at the time; another field goal makes it 14-6, a one score margin and receiving the opening kickoff of the second half. If (big if) the coaches could make adjustments to the D overloads NAU was presenting, I like our chances, no need to get desperate. In spite of what our expert, PR claims, the game would not be lost at 14-6 with a half to play and the opening 3rd quarter possession.

 

[Griz2k]

I respect the opinions of those that said going for it at NAU was the right call. I however, would have taken the points. I'm sure I had people looking at me funny at Brannigans as I was yelling at the TV screaming "kick it!". 3 points gets you within one score. You look at how bad we played up to that point and you use that as motivation to say you're only down 1 score and you can't play much worse. In my opinion it was a little early to panic, which is what I thought Delaney did. The subsequent fumble was just shit house bad luck.

 

[Darksim]

+10 for OP :thumb: :clap:

 

[PlayerRep]

We weren't down 14-0 this time. They weren't moving the ball at will on us.

THIS.
Having a lead opens up your options. Plus the fact we weren't facing going into halftime scoreless at Davis.
:ugeek:

Being down and not playing well means that you have to look for opportunities, and take chances, to get back into the game. I am surprised that some of you don't understand that.

I agree for the most part. Yet at NAU we hadn't been playing well. Finally we put together a drive to get to the five. Then we blew three plays to get to the three. It was not late in the game where a touchdown is needed. Yet there was only enough time where this was likely our last series before halftime. We are down 14-0. Put some points on the board before half. After all the earlier frustration just get some payoff for the drive then go regroup at halftime. At that point we simply needed a little positive momentum not necessarily a touchdown.
:ugeek:

No, it was not likely UM's last series of the half. If you don't make it on 4th and 2, with 2:31 to go and 3 time outs left, then the other team has to come out of their end zone. They might give up a turnover or goof up a punt. If you hold them, you get the ball back in good field position--with another good chance at scoring. Also, the coaches felt we needed a momentum changer given how the game had gone so far, not a little positive momentum. NAU was playing great, with no signs of letting up. UM was not playing well.

 

[PlayerRep]

We weren't down 14-0 this time. They weren't moving the ball at will on us.

THIS.
Having a lead opens up your options. Plus the fact we weren't facing going into halftime scoreless at Davis.
:ugeek:

Being down and not playing well means that you have to look for opportunities, and take chances, to get back into the game. I am surprised that some of you don't understand that.

No, it was only the first half. You know you can and will play better. Take the points, build a little momentum before the half and come out and score to start the second half... or panic and go for it

Going for it from the 2, with 2:31 left and 3 timeouts, has nothing to do with panic. It's a good play. It's a good percentage call. It likely gives you two bites at the apple.

 

[PlayerRep]

We are down 14-0. Put some points on the board before half. After all the earlier frustration just get some payoff for the drive then go regroup at halftime. At that point we simply needed a little positive momentum not necessarily a touchdown.
:ugeek:

Agree; but to be correct, we were down 14-3 at the time; another field goal makes it 14-6, a one score margin and receiving the opening kickoff of the second half. If (big if) the coaches could make adjustments to the D overloads NAU was presenting, I like our chances, no need to get desperate. In spite of what our expert, PR claims, the game would not be lost at 14-6 with a half to play and the opening 3rd quarter possession.

As I keep pointing out, going for it from the 2, with 2:31 to go and 3 time outs, is not desperation. It's a chance to turn around the momentum. It's a good percentage play. There's a good chance of scoring and a good chance of getting the ball back with another chance at scoring even if you don't score.

 

[kemajic]

Even if the Griz get three there they still lose.

Pure speculation. Montana has turned around many games in the past that looked much bleaker than this one at 14-6 still in the first half. When leads are surmountable in college football, anything can happen.

 

[Mr. Greenjeans]

THIS.
Having a lead opens up your options. Plus the fact we weren't facing going into halftime scoreless at Davis.
:ugeek:

Being down and not playing well means that you have to look for opportunities, and take chances, to get back into the game. I am surprised that some of you don't understand that.

I agree for the most part. Yet at NAU we hadn't been playing well. Finally we put together a drive to get to the five. Then we blew three plays to get to the three. It was not late in the game where a touchdown is needed. Yet there was only enough time where this was likely our last series before halftime. We are down 14-0. Put some points on the board before half. After all the earlier frustration just get some payoff for the drive then go regroup at halftime. At that point we simply needed a little positive momentum not necessarily a touchdown.
:ugeek:

I'm way more pissed about the 2nd and 3rd down calls than I am about the 4th down call. Even if stopped on 4th down, THAT debacle doesn't happen one time out of a thousand.

BINGO :clap:

 

[mtgriz]

After four pages of back and forth can we all at least agree there isn't a correct answer? It's a coaching philosophical question.

Personally, I was against going for it at NAU, and for going for it at UCD. And I said as much in both instances before each play was run.

In the NAU situation, my philosophy is to assume that the poor first half play is not going to continue, and to get within 8 points after a poorly executed first half is a victory in itself.

Teams with ability, confidence and swagger don't reach for points until the endgame is within sight. Teams (coaches) that lack confidence or intestinal fortitude reach early for points, in my opinion.

 

[PlayerRep]

After four pages of back and forth can we all at least agree there isn't a correct answer? It's a coaching philosophical question.

Personally, I was against going for it at NAU, and for going for it at UCD. And I said as much in both instances before each play was run.

In the NAU situation, my philosophy is to assume that the poor first half play is not going to continue, and to get within 8 points after a poorly executed first half is a victory in itself.

Teams with ability, confidence and swagger don't reach for points until the endgame is within sight. Teams (coaches) that lack confidence or intestinal fortitude reach early for points, in my opinion.

It is not a "reach" to go for it on 4th and goal on the 2, with 2:31 to go in the half, and 3 TO's. The fact that alot of you apparently believe going for it in that situation is some act of desperation astounds me. Teams/coaches who don't take advantage of situations like that, either a TD or chance to get ball back to get another chance at scoring, or even to get a turnover or block a punt, may be the ones who "lack confidence or intestinal fortitude". Trying a FG is the the easy way out.