Why did UM kick last FG?

[PlayerRep]

UM gained nothing by taking the FG.

How much did we win by?

I have to agree with the posters who say that he trusted Gregorak's D to stop them giving us a chance to win. The D played great in the 2nd half.

Trusting the D is irrelevant in this particular situation. Why not take a shot at a TD from the 11.? Taking the FG put UM in almost the exact same position as taking one shot from the 11 at a TD and not making it. Why give up the freebie chance of a TD there, and eliminating the risk of having to immediately stop NDSU and then drive 80 for a TD with only 1:39 on the clock?

 

[PlayerRep]

Jack, give it a rest. Your conventional thinking was probably right on as to what most coaches would have done. What we learned yesterday is that coach Stitt is NOT a conventional thinker and he WON the game. Second guessing a win is counter productive. Showing extreme confidence in his players will go a long way as this season progresses.

Betch, you are missing the point. And no, I am not planning to stop on this one. It's the F-ing internet. This is what the internet and a message board is for. Jeez. Also, there is and was nothing conventional or non-conventional about the call. It was whether the call was right or wrong.

 

[Silvertip]

Can the chief nit-picker now lead a discussion on why Lincoln shouldn't have gone to Ford's Theater.

 

[PlayerRep]

PR, do you also disagree with going for it on 4th down six times? And the hook and ladder at the end of the first half? And not kicking an on side kick after the field goal? And basically, all of Coach Stitt's play calling?
A win is a win-to be cliché-and at the end of the year,it will be a win over the 4-time national champions, and this play will be forgotten-as other play calling by Stitt, will pop up to be scrutinized by the e-Griz faithful, who could call a game much better than he does.

No, I don't disagree with any of those calls. They were style and judgment calls. He's a gambler. I'm fine with his/that style. But the one we're discussing is not a judgment or gambling or style or conventional call. The call took away a freebie chance to tie/win the game from the 11. Not making the TD would have resulted in the Griz have to do exactly what they did do, ie get the ball back quickly and march down the field for a TD. I guess all of you must have defended Delaney's decision/mistake to kick off twice too.

 

[OleGriz]

As the game was going on, I thought it was a strange decision, but after thinking about it, it makes a certain logical sense given the relatively low odds of getting a TD on 4th and Goal from the 11 and how much time was left for NDSU to get a winning drive if the game was tied. Consider these scenarios:

1. Griz go for and get the touchdown and extra point (I'd say there was at best a 25% chance of success, probably less). NDSU now has a little less than 3 minutes to get into field goal range (or get a touchdown), plenty of time for their offense especially with 2 time outs. Montana needs a defensive stop (not necessarily a three and out, but can't give up too much yardage) to force overtime, in which they will have to stop NDSU again at least once more to win. (There is also the chance that the Griz stop NDSU and drive for the game winner themselves, much like what actually happened)

2. Griz go for and fail on 4th and Goal from the 11, probably an incomplete pass. NDSU now has the ball at the 11. Montana needs a quick defensive stop, probably a three and out, to have a chance of putting together a game-tying TD drive to force overtime. Then another defensive stop is needed for the win.

3. Griz make field goal, need a quick defensive stop, probably a three and out, to have a chance to put together a game-winning TD drive.

4. In an offshoot of scenario 1, Griz get the touchdown and attempt and make a two point conversion. Montana still needs a defensive stop to preserve the victory. If the conversion fails, a quick stop and scoring drive is still needed.

No matter what, the defense had to stop NDSU at least once and likely couldn't afford to give up more than one first down. Kicking the field goal put the Griz in position to win the game after they made the stop.

 

[PlayerRep]

Hey PR your way doesn't have to be the "right way." I think he did the right thing so do a bunch of others, it's ok to agree to disagree. You're not changing anyone's mind here.

Right? PR is trying way to hard here.. Give it a rest.

Nope, not gonna happen--unless maybe you and others admit that I'm right.

 

[PlayerRep]

that field goal provided the points to win the game. also, to get no points out of the situation would have deflated momentum, and football is, they tell me, a game of momentum.

This. If the Griz had not scored on that drive momentum would have shifted.

Nope, momentum wouldn't have shifted at all. The points didn't do UM the good it needed, as they still needed to get the ball back and score a TD. If you think getting the FG gave UM momentum at that point, you obviously never played the game.

 

[go96griz]

END OF THREAD!!

http://missoulian.com/sports/colleg...cle_e0a72eab-dd90-5ba0-806e-3c7e287b169d.html

With time winding down in the fourth quarter and the Griz trailing by a touchdown, Stitt elected to kick a field goal after the Griz had driven to the NDSU 2, drawing his team within 35-31 with 2:47 to play. That's putting a lot of pressure on your defense to get the ball back.

"We had three timeouts and our defense was playing well in the second half," Stitt said, taking the pulpit. "Again, you have to give yourself a chance to win it. That gave us a chance. You have to have faith. If you don't have faith, you're never going to win games like this, you're never going to have comebacks like this."

And if the Griz had been able to punch it in then to tie the game instead of kicking the field goal? Is there any doubt what Stitt would have called for the conversion try?

"Yeah, we already talked about it," Stitt said. "We were going to win it right there. There's no overtime. One play to beat the national champion, you're going to do it."

 

[PlayerRep]

The FG was easier to convert then a 2-pt conversion would have been.

at that point in the game it was all about prolonging it--kind of like free throws at the end of a tight b-ball game.

Going for it on 4th and goal from the 11 is super hard to convert--much harder than the 4th down Carlson converted in the middle of the field

True on your first line. However, not taking a chance to score a TD from the 11, and eliminating the necessity to get the ball back quickly and score from 80 yards away, was not the right call. Have no clue what your 2d line is about. Yes, converting on 4th and 11/goal is not easy, but I think the chances of doing it are better than 50-50, especially with UM's receivers.

 

[rocklobster]

Hey PR your way doesn't have to be the "right way." I think he did the right thing so do a bunch of others, it's ok to agree to disagree. You're not changing anyone's mind here.

Right? PR is trying way to hard here.. Give it a rest.

Nope, not gonna happen--unless maybe you and others admit that I'm right.

Not gonna happen-unless you admit you're wrong. :argue:

 

[grizcountry420]

END OF THREAD!!

http://missoulian.com/sports/colleg...cle_e0a72eab-dd90-5ba0-806e-3c7e287b169d.html

With time winding down in the fourth quarter and the Griz trailing by a touchdown, Stitt elected to kick a field goal after the Griz had driven to the NDSU 2, drawing his team within 35-31 with 2:47 to play. That's putting a lot of pressure on your defense to get the ball back.

"We had three timeouts and our defense was playing well in the second half," Stitt said, taking the pulpit. "Again, you have to give yourself a chance to win it. That gave us a chance. You have to have faith. If you don't have faith, you're never going to win games like this, you're never going to have comebacks like this."

And if the Griz had been able to punch it in then to tie the game instead of kicking the field goal? Is there any doubt what Stitt would have called for the conversion try?

"Yeah, we already talked about it," Stitt said. "We were going to win it right there. There's no overtime. One play to beat the national champion, you're going to do it."

+1

It was the right call..

 

[PlayerRep]

As the game was going on, I thought it was a strange decision, but after thinking about it, it makes a certain logical sense given the relatively low odds of getting a TD on 4th and Goal from the 11 and how much time was left for NDSU to get a winning drive if the game was tied. Consider these scenarios:

1. Griz go for and get the touchdown and extra point (I'd say there was at best a 25% chance of success, probably less). NDSU now has a little less than 3 minutes to get into field goal range (or get a touchdown), plenty of time for their offense especially with 2 time outs. Montana needs a defensive stop (not necessarily a three and out, but can't give up too much yardage) to force overtime, in which they will have to stop NDSU again at least once more to win. (There is also the chance that the Griz stop NDSU and drive for the game winner themselves, much like what actually happened)

2. Griz go for and fail on 4th and Goal from the 11, probably an incomplete pass. NDSU now has the ball at the 11. Montana needs a quick defensive stop, probably a three and out, to have a chance of putting together a game-tying TD drive to force overtime. Then another defensive stop is needed for the win.

3. Griz make field goal, need a quick defensive stop, probably a three and out, to have a chance to put together a game-winning TD drive.

4. In an offshoot of scenario 1, Griz get the touchdown and attempt and make a two point conversion. Montana still needs a defensive stop to preserve the victory. If the conversion fails, a quick stop and scoring drive is still needed.

No matter what, the defense had to stop NDSU at least once and likely couldn't afford to give up more than one first down. Kicking the field goal put the Griz in position to win the game after they made the stop.

You make some good points. However, I think making a TD on 4th and goal in that game was better than 50-50. Also, if you're going to trust/need your D to get a quick 3 and out, what's wrong with trusting/needing them to stop NDSU from driving down the field. UM's D had been dominating the 2d half. No, another defensive stop is needed for the win. UM needs to convert a 2-pt conversion for the win, or go into OT. Agree with your other points/scenarios. But what's missing is that UM gave up a freebie chance from the 11 to score a TD. You say 25%, and I say over 50%. But who cares? It's a freebie chance for a TD. I think the chance of scoring a TD was better on 4th and 11, than it was on holding NDSU and driving 80 yards, in such a short period of time. And again it was a freebie. UM lost virtually nothing by taking that freebie shot.

 

[grizcountry420]

END OF THREAD!!

http://missoulian.com/sports/colleg...cle_e0a72eab-dd90-5ba0-806e-3c7e287b169d.html

With time winding down in the fourth quarter and the Griz trailing by a touchdown, Stitt elected to kick a field goal after the Griz had driven to the NDSU 2, drawing his team within 35-31 with 2:47 to play. That's putting a lot of pressure on your defense to get the ball back.

"We had three timeouts and our defense was playing well in the second half," Stitt said, taking the pulpit. "Again, you have to give yourself a chance to win it. That gave us a chance. You have to have faith. If you don't have faith, you're never going to win games like this, you're never going to have comebacks like this."

And if the Griz had been able to punch it in then to tie the game instead of kicking the field goal? Is there any doubt what Stitt would have called for the conversion try?

"Yeah, we already talked about it," Stitt said. "We were going to win it right there. There's no overtime. One play to beat the national champion, you're going to do it."

+1

It was the right call..The defense was playing good and we had 3 timeouts to get the ball back.

 

[PlayerRep]

END OF THREAD!!

http://missoulian.com/sports/colleg...cle_e0a72eab-dd90-5ba0-806e-3c7e287b169d.html

With time winding down in the fourth quarter and the Griz trailing by a touchdown, Stitt elected to kick a field goal after the Griz had driven to the NDSU 2, drawing his team within 35-31 with 2:47 to play. That's putting a lot of pressure on your defense to get the ball back.

"We had three timeouts and our defense was playing well in the second half," Stitt said, taking the pulpit. "Again, you have to give yourself a chance to win it. That gave us a chance. You have to have faith. If you don't have faith, you're never going to win games like this, you're never going to have comebacks like this."

And if the Griz had been able to punch it in then to tie the game instead of kicking the field goal? Is there any doubt what Stitt would have called for the conversion try?

"Yeah, we already talked about it," Stitt said. "We were going to win it right there. There's no overtime. One play to beat the national champion, you're going to do it."

+1

It was the right call..

That quote doesn't prove anything. If UM had been done only 6, then the decision might have been a good one. Trading a chance for a TD then, against having to get the ball back quickly and drive for a TD was not correct. The fact that we were down 7 is the key in this analysis. Trusting the defense has zero to do with the debate we are having.

 

[Blue Tears]

The final margin of victory was 3 points so I would say the fg did some good. Stitt made the correct choice. If you want to debate, at least pick a play or sequence that didn't work out for the Griz. By your logic, tieing the game or needing a two point conversion was the way to go. Stitt just won the game instead. I prefer his method.

 

[PlayerRep]

The final margin of victory was 3 points so I would say the fg did some good. Stitt made the correct choice. If you want to debate, at least pick a play or sequence that didn't work out for the Griz. By your logic, tieing the game or needing a two point conversion was the way to go. Stitt just won the game instead. I prefer his method.

This is the internet and a message board. This is what the internet is for. Feel free to explain to us why not taking a shot at a TD from the 11 was risky or not the right call. What would have been lost or given up? Again, I say our chance of getting a TD there was over 50%. Yes, I know it worked out and UM won the game, so you don't need to tell us that.

 

[grizcountry420]

END OF THREAD!!

http://missoulian.com/sports/colleg...cle_e0a72eab-dd90-5ba0-806e-3c7e287b169d.html

With time winding down in the fourth quarter and the Griz trailing by a touchdown, Stitt elected to kick a field goal after the Griz had driven to the NDSU 2, drawing his team within 35-31 with 2:47 to play. That's putting a lot of pressure on your defense to get the ball back.

"We had three timeouts and our defense was playing well in the second half," Stitt said, taking the pulpit. "Again, you have to give yourself a chance to win it. That gave us a chance. You have to have faith. If you don't have faith, you're never going to win games like this, you're never going to have comebacks like this."

And if the Griz had been able to punch it in then to tie the game instead of kicking the field goal? Is there any doubt what Stitt would have called for the conversion try?

"Yeah, we already talked about it," Stitt said. "We were going to win it right there. There's no overtime. One play to beat the national champion, you're going to do it."

+1

It was the right call..

That quote doesn't prove anything. If UM had been done only 6, then the decision might have been a good one. Trading a chance for a TD then, against having to get the ball back quickly and drive for a TD was not correct. The fact that we were down 7 is the key in this analysis. Trusting the defense has zero to do with the debate we are having.

So.. What do you think would have been the outcome of the game if we would have went for it on 4th down and tied the game up?

 

[PlayerRep]

The final margin of victory was 3 points so I would say the fg did some good. Stitt made the correct choice. If you want to debate, at least pick a play or sequence that didn't work out for the Griz. By your logic, tieing the game or needing a two point conversion was the way to go. Stitt just won the game instead. I prefer his method.

Yes, the margin was 3. Under my scenario (and assuming everything else in the game turned out the same), scoring a quick TD (and kicking extra point to tie) would have resulted in UM winning by 7--as they would have gotten the ball back and come down the field and gotten the TD (just like we did).

 

[uofmman1122]

What an idiot.

We won by three points.

Clearly kicking the field goal was the right call.

You can hypothetical all you want, lawyer boy, but you're just wrong.

 

[Blgs Griz Fan]

STATEMENT GAME!

Conventional wisdom says with only 3 minutes left, go for the TD.

Coach Stitt says hell no. I have faith and conviction in our defense. Kick the damn field goal and then get the ball back because we can still score the TD quickly.

Tremendous example of confidence by the coaching staff in their defense, special teams, and offense all in a matter of less than 3 minutes.

Folks, there is a lot of buy-in going on today, with the team and the fan base.

Hat's off to coach Stitt for walking the walk, for the staff in believing in the game plan, and the entire team for the execution.

It's going to be a great season!

UM gained nothing by taking the FG. Confidence in the defense had nothing to do with taking the FG. What do you think UM gained by taking the FG, and giving up the chance of the tying/winning TD?

And the margin of victory in the game was ... 3 points. I agree with the call. Some would go for the td but in any case it is a great win for the Grix, a confidence builder for the team especially the defense, and the team probably has more confidence and respect for their QB. It's a great day to be a Griz.