• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Decision Analysis: 1st and Goal at WFU 1, Down 3, 0:29 Left

Everyone knows that Clawson made the right decision last week taking the field goal and this week by not taking the safety. He wasn't going to give them a chance to win it with the field goal. I just encourage everyone not to assign ridiculous outcome percentages to pretend we would have been twice as well off doing something we didn't do than something we did (like someone did last week) when in fact Clawson gave us a great chance to win last week and we got the win this week. Let's enjoy the win without criticizing our coaches.
 
MysteryMen said:
I call BS. The odds are not that high of a fumble on three running plays.

We've run 205 running plays this season and have only lost two fumbles. That's one every 100 plays

We played that possession perfectly other than the last play. We had a third and 3 where a first down would seal a win. That's much better than giving the other team the ball back
Click to expand...

Bottom line, you've got to hang onto the ball. Colburn will learn from it, he's our best rusher I think, at least this year with Reid shirting.
 
Last edited:
liveanddiedeac said:
Button line, you've got to hang onto the ball. Colburn will learn from it, he's our best rusher I think, at least this year with Reid shifting.
Click to expand...
Button line, shifting

Good stuff, homie.
 
MysteryMen said:
I call BS. The odds are not that high of a fumble on three running plays.

We've run 205 running plays this season and have only lost two fumbles. That's one every 100 plays

We played that possession perfectly other than the last play. We had a third and 3 where a first down would seal a win. That's much better than giving the other team the ball back
Click to expand...

Actually in my head I was ballparking 1-2% fumble chance on each running play. That is what I meant by "too high." I don't really feel strongly about this issue though. Running 3 times is fine in the spot we are in.

I think kneeling and taking the safety is also fine.
 
When I saw Flutie at QB on the sneak,fumble entered my mind . He looked so weak and feeble. The other QB should have been in there . On the Colburn fumble , we had him running to the left, which exposed the ball more. It was a risky play and ALMOST cost us the game. Worst I've ever felt after a win but it beats a loss any day.
 
wfu22fan said:
When I saw Flutie at QB on the sneak,fumble entered my mind . He looked so weak and feeble. The other QB should have been in there . On the Colburn fumble , we had him running to the left, which exposed the ball more. It was a risky play and ALMOST cost us the game. Worst I've ever felt after a win but it beats a loss any day.
Click to expand...

Don't feel bad, our offense is still not good and went up against a legit premier defense in the country. If we were going to win it was going to be ugly. Of course nobody thought that ugly and strange, but it counts as a W.
 
FckVwls said:
Actually in my head I was ballparking 1-2% fumble chance on each running play. That is what I meant by "too high." I don't really feel strongly about this issue though. Running 3 times is fine in the spot we are in.

I think kneeling and taking the safety is also fine.
Click to expand...

Couldn't kneel on first or second down. We were on the 1 yard line. Third down was an option, but I think you have to try to get 3 yards to end the game, especially after gaining 5 or 6 on the prior rushing attempt
 
deac29 said:
Couldn't kneel on first or second down. We were on the 1 yard line. Third down was an option, but I think you have to try to get 3 yards to end the game, especially after gaining 5 or 6 on the prior rushing attempt
Click to expand...

We started the drive on like the 4.5 yard line
 
FckVwls said:
We started the drive on like the 4.5 yard line
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're right. That's still pretty tight to take a knee (and I recognize that you're not necessarily advocating for that).
 
FckVwls said:
I shouldn't add so much content to a joke thread....

But I do favor taking 3 knees in the situation we faced. With 1:09 left, BC with 1 timeout. Would bring us to 4th down at own 1 with 0:23 left.

I think the odds are too high of a fumble on 3 regular running plays.


Edited to slightly change the times
Click to expand...

And punt from your 1 yard line? That's crazy pants.
 
deacvision7 said:
And punt from your 1 yard line? That's crazy pants.
Click to expand...

Obviously would be taking the safety. Would be taking the safety after getting stopped running too, most likely....

Like even if Colburn doesn't fumble and gets tackled at the 6 yard line on that play, I think you have to take the safety, yeah?
 
FckVwls said:
Obviously would be taking the safety. Would be taking the safety after getting stopped running too, most likely....

Like even if Colburn doesn't fumble and gets tackled at the 6 yard line on that play, I think you have to take the safety, yeah?
Click to expand...

Yeah. The clear play was run the clock down...take the delay of game. Run around in the end zone and take the safety. Punt with a 1 point lead and the game is over if you stop the punt return.
 
Considering we had 1 first down the previous 28 minutes and we absolutely had to execute up the middle running plays given the clock, I think the odds of getting a first down are very low against that BC defense. Even after the offsides made it 3rd and 3.

So the main advantage to running plays is that you get to take extra time per play (probably 3 extra seconds/per play over a kneel down). So then you end up taking the safety with 5-10 seconds left instead of 15-20 seconds left. That's definitely a very valuable 10 seconds.

So the question is: Is the extra 10 seconds you get to burn off the clock (and the minimal chances you get a first down) worth the risk of fumbling (or even another disaster like a holding penalty that is declined that stops the clock but burns a down or a RB accidentally running out of bounds etc).

I'm not sure on this one. I think it is interesting discussion, but I think both choices are fine.
 
I think if you asked the players, they'd want to keep the shutout and try to hold them instead of giving up points.

I feel bad for BC. They look like our best teams without Skinner and with the opposite of Swank.
 
PhDeac said:
I think if you asked the players, they'd want to keep the shutout and try to hold them instead of giving up points.

I feel bad for BC. They look like our best teams without Skinner and with the opposite of Swank.
Click to expand...

Well that is pretty much worthless to me. If Colburn is tackled instead of fumbling, we can take a delay of game with 15 seconds or so left. And then take the safety with under 10. That is definitely the play rather than punting from your own endzone.
 
We should have taken the safety almost completely eliminates the chance of losing
 
FckVwls said:
Well that is pretty much worthless to me. If Colburn is tackled instead of fumbling, we can take a delay of game with 15 seconds or so left. And then take the safety with under 10. That is definitely the play rather than punting from your own endzone.
Click to expand...

Yes. You have to run it on 3rd and 3. People need to chill. Safety would've made sense on 3rd. Especially with our best player punting the free kick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top