4th and a long 1

[Landlord]

Disclaimer: I am not criticizing the coaching staff's decision to punt, only looking at what could have possibly been alternatives.

 

 

 

People are saying it was the right call to punt with how our defense was playing, but since our defense was playing SO well, doesn't that mean we should have went for it because even if we didn't get it and gave them the ball further up field, our defense would be able to stop them?

 

 

 

Another thing I don't see people discussing is why we didn't try a field goal, if we didn't want to go for the first down. If I remember right, it would have been 53 yards. Certainly a risk, but then again, if you get it, you're up 8 points and give them virtually no shot at WINNING, only maybe forcing overtime.

 

 

 

 

Any thoughts?

[nebraskapit]

Now.. I'd say punting it would be the last option (first behind going for it, and then the next option would be kicking the fg, with punting being the last option).

 

But.. at the time, I agreed with punting it. I had thought a field goal would be a good choice since I was thinking we had the favorable direction of wind (after watching us kick off from both directions.. but was this correct?) But if you looked at our defense and TT's passing... punting seemed like a good idea. As for trying for the conversion/field goal, I imagine we were also thinking if we were stopped or missed it... 1- the crowd/players would be fired up, 2- the negative/disappoint for our players, 3- 'good' field position... Not necessarily a good or bad decision, but this may have been some factors I was thinking about..

[Captain K]

I'm beginning to think it didn't matter what we actually tried, we would have lost anyway. A higher power was controlling the outcome. I just tortured myself by replaying the end of the game again and noticed that Prince Amakamura batted the pass down on the deciding touchdown. He totally redirected the flight of the ball right into the guy's hands. I'm not exactly sure that the receiver wouldn't have caught it anyway, but it was a curveball of a pass that looked headed for the shoulder pad. the receiver had already handcuffed himself and since his feet were sliding out from under him, he couldn't have adjusted. You have to watch the slo-mo to see it. That is my thought. Regardless of what I think, we still lost.

[zoogs]

Momentum. It's their house. If we don't get it it's not the 20 yard difference. It's the shot of life you inject into the stadium and the fire and confidence you give to their offense.

 

And I second Captain K. I'm beginning to think good things just aren't meant to happen to us.

[Scarlet Overkill]

When it was 4th and 1 on the 37, I said out loud, you have to go for it here. My thinking was along the following lines:

 

1) If you can't make 1 yard when it counts, well, at least it was an aggressive attempt to win, instead of playing not to lose.

 

2) Va Tech has special teams that could A - block the punt or B - block the field goal attempt, making their last drive even easier. Going against VT's special teams, IMO, was far far riskier than trying to get a yard and then run out at least most of the clock.

 

Summary: Trying to get that one yard was low risk, high reward, while kicking of any sort was high risk, low reward.

[HuskerT]

I wrestled with this question most of the night, can't blame coaches for punting, but I definitely thought the play calling in that sequence was too conservative.

[Alamo City Husker]

Why not put SUH in???? Besides that even though the defense played well the score was too close with a playmaker in Taylor. Thats all it took is one play. How about the time wasted after the pass with defensive stops and no timeouts, do you let them score so your kicker who has been lights out can win the game for you??? Good questions and good discussions. So all the haters don't hate for our "fantasy coaching"!!!!!

[AngryHusker88]

Why not put SUH in???? Besides that even though the defense played well the score was too close with a playmaker in Taylor. Thats all it took is one play. How about the time wasted after the pass with defensive stops and no timeouts, do you let them score so your kicker who has been lights out can win the game for you??? Good questions and good discussions. So all the haters don't hate for our "fantasy coaching"!!!!!

I get what your saying, but no you never let them score. Always go 100% on defense no matter what, never let them score

[HuskerT]

Why not put SUH in???? Besides that even though the defense played well the score was too close with a playmaker in Taylor. Thats all it took is one play. How about the time wasted after the pass with defensive stops and no timeouts, do you let them score so your kicker who has been lights out can win the game for you??? Good questions and good discussions. So all the haters don't hate for our "fantasy coaching"!!!!!

 

You got it right, but it's all meaningless. You all had to know that when we kept exchanging FG's for TD's that eventually it was going to bite us in the ass. One TD would have put the game out of reach, but instead they were able to stay in the game.

[EbylHusker]

People are saying it was the right call to punt with how our defense was playing, but since our defense was playing SO well, doesn't that mean we should have went for it because even if we didn't get it and gave them the ball further up field, our defense would be able to stop them?

 

No, it doesn't mean that. In any situation like that, defenses will almost always go into a deep cover scheme (unless they are blitzing) to prevent the long pass. This typically leaves the shorter passes rather wide open since you're making sure you're keeping everything in front of you so as to not get burned by the deep ball. Hence, it's usually easier for teams to move the ball, so you want to give them as much field to cover as possible.

 

Now, obviously we failed at executing the whole "keep everything in front of you" concept, but when the decision was made, nobody knew we'd have a breakdown like that. When you're up against a team that hasn't shown any real inclination to be able to move the ball, your highest percentage play is going to be punting to pin them as deep as possible.

[JTrain]

I think you nailed it. As great as our defense was playing, we should have gone for it. There's a 40-50% chance you pick it up, winning the game right there, period. And even if you don't get it, you're making them go 60 yards with no timeouts needing a touchdown. If they only needed a FG, it's a whole different situation, but they needed a TD. Chances of them getting a TD from 90 yards out seemed to be about 5% (although 100% in hindsight), while from 60 yards out it still should have been about 10-15%. Why not buckle down, fire up the O-line and try to make a statement by going for it and playing to win the game.

 

But even with the punt, Pelini made a boneheaded call. Cover 3 all the way and the game is over.

[germanforbigred]

the momentum argument is crap! The message Bo send to the team by punting was far worse than VT fans going all crazy if they had stopped us. If Bo was convinced to get the first down and end the game he would have gone for it. So apparently he didn't trust the offense to make it. And apparently he didn't trust the defense either to cover up 60 yards to prevent VT from scoring. Otherwise he would have gone for the win. No he wanted an extra cushion of 20 or 30 yards. He told his player we are not going for the win we are playing not to lose. What a fatal message that is. Why in the world would you put your own destiny in the hands of the other team. It was just one damn yard. And we were not at our own 20 yard line. And even if you don't make it, f*** it, they still have to go 60 yards to score while they had managed 40 yards the entire second half. Defense was pretty solid, Bo just had to believe, unfortunately he didn't

[VA Husker Fan]

When it was 4th and 1 on the 37, I said out loud, you have to go for it here. My thinking was along the following lines:

 

1) If you can't make 1 yard when it counts, well, at least it was an aggressive attempt to win, instead of playing not to lose.

 

2) Va Tech has special teams that could A - block the punt or B - block the field goal attempt, making their last drive even easier. Going against VT's special teams, IMO, was far far riskier than trying to get a yard and then run out at least most of the clock.

 

Summary: Trying to get that one yard was low risk, high reward, while kicking of any sort was high risk, low reward.

 

At the time I agreed with the punt, and make them have to go as far as possible with an inept offense. But thinking more about it, the chance of a punt block, especially after 2 bad snaps earlier in the game, was the riskiest part. And, there was a high chance we were only going to get 17 yards out of it --kicks like that always seem to go into the end zone, though Henery did a nice job and we wound up getting 25 yards.

 

Another option would've been to keep the offense in and try to draw them offsides. Who cares if it doesn't work and we take a penalty back to the 42?

[knapplc]

This talk only comes after the blown coverage play. Without that play we're not even thinking of this, or if it's mentioned at all it's considered a wise move. VT running the clock out inside their own 20 would be just fine with everyone.

[HuskerFreakz]

This talk only comes after the blown coverage play. Without that play we're not even thinking of this, or if it's mentioned at all it's considered a wise move. VT running the clock out inside their own 20 would be just fine with everyone.

 

I agree, thanks agian #5