FG versus 4th and 1 Pass Play

[cm husker]

Leaving aside the questionable play call, why didn't Riley kick a field goal there? The points were going to be needed no matter what.

 

 

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Leaving aside the questionable play call, why didn't Riley kick a field goal there? The points were going to be needed no matter what.

 

 

 

Bizarre to me as well. Maybe he didn't think they'd be getting the ball back again? But with 2 timeouts and Iowa going into the wind, you'd think they'd have been able to get the ball back. It absolutely couldn't have been a lack of confidence in Drew Brown because he'd already drilled a 40+ yarder into the wind.

 

Really confusing decision and an equally confusing pass with Cethan being wide open in the flat.

[zoogs]

I could definitely see going for that one. Heck, to me that made sense. Don't go all that way for Iowa to just turn it into a 2-score game again with a FG (as opposed to when it's closer to the end of the game).

 

It was just mind-blowing that they went with such a low percentage throw. Especially because I do remember seeing a checkdown option who was wide open and thinking, for a split second, "Ah, right, there we go" before Tommy chucked up the prayer. I mean, holy cow.

[stargazer]

I just don't understand why you don't run the ball a couple of times to pick up the yard. That Carter was an option is just testament to Tommy's inability to check down.

[Landlord]

I think the field goal was the right call. Especially when you consider, we made it back down in the redzone again, when we did kick the field goal. If we had those 3 points on the 4th and 1, that next drive becomes a do or die touchdown goal but we wouldn't have needed the onside kick if it worked.

 

 

 

Have we EVER fielded an onside kick?

[huskerfan92]

I think the field goal was the right call. Especially when you consider, we made it back down in the redzone again, when we did kick the field goal. If we had those 3 points on the 4th and 1, that next drive becomes a do or die touchdown goal but we wouldn't have needed the onside kick if it worked.

 

 

 

Have we EVER fielded an onside kick?

 

I don't know, but our onside kick attempts were awful this year

[zoogs]

I think the field goal was the right call. Especially when you consider, we made it back down in the redzone again, when we did kick the field goal. If we had those 3 points on the 4th and 1, that next drive becomes a do or die touchdown goal but we wouldn't have needed the onside kick if it worked.

I think the difference was there was a moderate amount of time left in the game the first time. So, you go for a score if you can and if they get a FG, it's still a 1-score game. If you don't convert, there's time still to get back to the same situation later (which Nebraska did in fact, do ... underscoring the correctness of the go for it call, IMO).

 

The second time there was so little time left and that's where we see teams that need are down by 1 TD + 1 FG often go for the FG first, because the ensuing situation is a clear case of "get the ball back with any amount of time possible VS run out the clock." In other words, it's a resort for desperate times and desperate measures.

 

In fact, two weeks ago I believe there was an NFL game (Cowboys?) where a team settled for a 4th & short FG rather early, it bit them, and they were criticized for it. It's at least a pick 'em.

[zoogs]

Ah, here we go. Can always count on BigWillie for some on point stuff. Thanks, BW. Here we have the screen, so we know we weren't crazy about the underneath stuff.

 

BLAME LANGSDORF! FIRE FIRE FIRE!

 

 

Two guys WIDE open running routes. Tommy goes with the lowest percentage throw of any on this play. (...)

Serves as a reminder that when a play is called, it's not exactly as if the QB is told where to throw it. Heck, that route could just be there to clear out some safeties from the underneath stuff. And in fairness, a 1-vs-1 deep shot for a touchdown is a pretty reasonable shot to take when you identify the matchup ... WHEN IT'S NOT FOURTH DOWN AND ONE. Awareness. That's what it comes down to.

 

Seriously. Tommy will fix this when he is forced to. And Nebraska will replace him at the first opportunity when they are able to, if he can't. But for all our sake, we have to acknowledge that Tommy fixing it is the best scenario. Players improve. Root for that outcome.

[Kernal]

You go for the TD first if you need 11 points. That way you know whether or not a field goal will do it for you, or if you need to score another TD. If you kick the field goal, then score a TD, your fate rests on the two-point conversion. And NU isn't exactly lighting up the short-yardage situations this year.

 

So on 4th and 1 you try to continue the TD drive. On 4th and 10, you kick and hope you hold them and score a TD, and can convert the two-point attempt.

[California Husker]

Ah, here we go. Can always count on BigWillie for some on point stuff. Thanks, BW. Here we have the screen, so we know we weren't crazy about the underneath stuff.

 

BLAME LANGSDORF! FIRE FIRE FIRE!

 

 

Two guys WIDE open running routes. Tommy goes with the lowest percentage throw of any on this play. (...)

Serves as a reminder that when a play is called, it's not exactly as if the QB is told where to throw it. Heck, that route could just be there to clear out some safeties from the underneath stuff. And in fairness, a 1-vs-1 deep shot for a touchdown is a pretty reasonable shot to take when you identify the matchup ... WHEN IT'S NOT FOURTH DOWN AND ONE. Awareness. That's what it comes down to.

 

Seriously. Tommy will fix this when he is forced to. And Nebraska will replace him at the first opportunity when they are able to, if he can't. But for all our sake, we have to acknowledge that Tommy fixing it is the best scenario. Players improve. Root for that outcome.

 

But he hasn't improved. Well, he has moderately, but not enough to make any real measurable difference and he is what he is. I have said this MANY times...I really like Tommy and I don't call out players and blame players for the team's lack of success. This is on the coaches. Tommy has a skill set and passing 45 times in a game is not within that skill set...never has been...and I doubt seriously that it will be "fixed" during another off season so that he is capable of being THAT GUY.

 

Tommy was recruited as a run-first QB. He must have been. He was a .44 percent passer in high school. He has improved, but seems to have settled in at around a little over 50%. I'd love to think this can get "fixed", but how can they? I think the coaching has done what it could do and now the insistence to throw the ball 35-45 times a game doesn't help matters, it just exposes the fact that Tommy is not the right kind of QB for this system.

[HuskerfaninOkieland]

I was thinking we should've ran the ball with Cross, pick up the 1st down, THEN take a shot down field for the TD. If we don't get the TD, we take the 3pts.

[VectorVictor]

 

But he hasn't improved. Well, he has moderately, but not enough to make any real measurable difference and he is what he is. I have said this MANY times...I really like Tommy and I don't call out players and blame players for the team's lack of success. This is on the coaches. Tommy has a skill set and passing 45 times in a game is not within that skill set...never has been...and I doubt seriously that it will be "fixed" during another off season so that he is capable of being THAT GUY.

 

 

 

This x1000. How many times were fans sold on the idea that the coaches had experience and could work with what they have before the season started? And now that the season has come (and possibly gone), we see that instead of molding a gameplan around Tommy's talents, Langsdorf was content to continue banging square pegs through round holes. This playcall is case-in-point for this, and a problem that the local media (like Sipple) has picked up on.

 

The coaches should be working with Tommy and know what they have by now under center...but the playcalling suggests otherwise. Hell, Langsdorf can't even call running plays conducive to the strengths of the RBs he has on the field (e.g. stretch/finesse plays for Imani, power runs for Newby), so it's not a shock he failed to playcall around the strengths of Tommy and the rest of the team.

 

Folks can keep trying to defend the coordinators by putting pictures up to subtly throw the players under the bus instead. But if you know you don't have a high-percentage passer under center that routinely fails to check down in critical pass plays...are you going to call a pass play that involves him checking down and with the primary option being a low-percentage pass?

 

Probably not...unless you're Langsdorf, still trying to bang that square peg through a round hole.

[darkhorse85]

If there was ever a time that you were going to trust Janovich with the ball, this particular play would have been it. Let the boy smash. These are the type of things that have been keeping me up at night all season long.

[QMany]

If there was ever a time that you were going to trust Janovich with the ball, this particular play would have been it. Let the boy smash. These are the type of things that have been keeping me up at night all season long.

It was Senior Day, and that would have actually made sense to give him one carry.

[VA Husker Fan]

You go for the TD first if you need 11 points. That way you know whether or not a field goal will do it for you, or if you need to score another TD. If you kick the field goal, then score a TD, your fate rests on the two-point conversion. And NU isn't exactly lighting up the short-yardage situations this year.

 

So on 4th and 1 you try to continue the TD drive. On 4th and 10, you kick and hope you hold them and score a TD, and can convert the two-point attempt.

I agree with this. If it's 4th and longer, kick the FG. But you should be able to pick up the yard and go for the TD. No guarantee at all you get the 2 pt conversion so find out now, and play the rest of the game knowing if you're down by 3 or5.

 

As far as the play goes, it sounds like Tommy was coached (in general, not for that play), if his receiver has 1 on 1 for a fade, take it. So he never looked to his wide open check offs. If they wanted him to hit the short pass, call a different play that doesn't include that low percentage option. Or communicate to him who his primary receiver is. This is the second time with the game on the line that they've sent in a play with a secondary option they wanted him to take, and he didn't. Maybe they should learn that's not a good thing to do.