Playing not to lose

[Landlord]

Worrying about the time left for the other team is playing not to lose.

When you're tied, it's also called smart clock management.

If they would have called the timeout when the playclock died down on Newby's run, I wouldn't have had any problem with it. If they called that timeout right away, that would have been a stupid decision.

 

[huskerdude171]

All we needed was a field goal to take the lead. If we do get the field goal, or even if we don't, you also play to bleed the clock so Wisconsin does not have a chance to answer. Not calling the timeout on Newby's reception was 100% the right decision.

You play to win the game, assume you will need the time to set up a FG, don't play not to lose, which is exactly why that decision was made.

We still had plenty of time.

We did have plenty of time. But nothing was organized and smooth. Call the timeout, get your offense all on the same page with the call. And you can have a couple of plays called for the ensuing play also, based on what the first play does.

Th biggest thing the timeout does is make sure everyone knows what your plan is. You can still control the clock from that point forward while still maintaining your last timeout for a field goal attempt.

Thats exactly what should have been done. The coaching staff needed to know that was their best chance to win the game was having a time out, almost a minute on the clock, a timeout to regroup and plan the next plays, and then go out and execute. If you don't gain a 1st, so be it, Wisconsin gets the ball back with about 30 seconds left worst case scenario.

Their kicker just missed a FG the drive before, so what the guarantee he's gonna hit a long FG as time expires, or that the defense doesn't hold them out of FG range?

The highest probability to win the game was to get a FG at the end of regulation, gving Wiscy a chance in OT was what killed the team and lost them the game. Be the last one with the ball, go out on top without giving the other team a chance to answer is the best way that situation could have been managed.

 

[zoogs]

Yeah, it looked rushed. I would've liked to see a timeout called after running down some more clock. Then again, how much time do you leave yourself if you do succeed on 2nd down? There starts to be a lot of permutations there.

It was just the kind of promising drive we've seen all year. Many of them have ended with clutch moments and big-time scores. But never would've gotten there without a big 3rd down, or 4th down play. This drive was one of those away from being the GW.

Some you get. Some you don't.

I also would've liked to see a Hail Mary attempt at the end of the half. Because #yolo.

 

[3rd and long]

Worrying about the time left for the other team is playing not to lose.

When you're tied, it's also called smart clock management.

If they would have called the timeout when the playclock died down on Newby's run, I wouldn't have had any problem with it. If they called that timeout right away, that would have been a stupid decision.

In that situation, with the game tied, ONE team has the opportunity to win the game in regulation. If you go to OT you've given the other team an equal opportunity. It would have different if we would have been deep in our own territory. But we were at mid-field. Make a play to win NOW. We saw what happens when you give that extra opportunity.

 

[zoogs]

That's not true. If you call timeout and go three and out quickly, you punt the ball and Wisconsin has -- I'm forgetting exactly here -- something like 30 seconds with a timeout in pocket and clock stoppage on first downs.

Your defense would have to go make one more stand to send the game to overtime. This is something that can be avoided.

Nebraska gave themselves plenty of time to make a play for the GW FG, and also made sure to deny Wisconsin anything other than a kneeldown in the process. So that was smart.

 

[huskerdude171]

That's not true. If you call timeout and go three and out quickly, you punt the ball and Wisconsin has -- I'm forgetting exactly here -- something like 30 seconds with a timeout in pocket and clock stoppage on first downs.

Your defense would have to go make one more stand to send the game to overtime. This is something that can be avoided.

Nebraska gave themselves plenty of time to make a play for the GW FG, and also made sure to deny Wisconsin anything other than a kneeldown in the process. So that was smart.

I agree that not giving Wisconsin time to do anything other than take a knee was a smart idea, so not calling the timeout wasn't too terrible of a mistake. The mistake was calling a deep pass on 3rd and 10 with a chance to get into FG range and win the game, instead of run routes towards the line to gain and hope to get a first down and set up a game winning FG.

 

[zoogs]

They burned a lot of clock with that play, though. I would've liked to see something higher percentage, but I can see why they did what they did. If we were punting with 25 instead of 16 seconds left I'd have been quite nervous.

But yeah, it was a super disappointing finish. Thought we'd win the game in regulation.

 

[huskerdude171]

They burned a lot of clock with that play, though. I would've liked to see something higher percentage, but I can see why they did what they did. If we were punting with 25 instead of 16 seconds left I'd have been quite nervous.

But yeah, it was a super disappointing finish. Thought we'd win the game in regulation.

That was their best chance to win, there are too many variables in OT in college football.

If you have a chance to finish it in regulation, you take full advantage. That's Rileys flaw, we saw it last year with all the close losses, and we saw shadows of that today with how the last drive before OT was managed.

 

[lo country]

Clemson vs FSU. Dabo, on that last play played to win. No prevent, brought the house, sacked the FSU QB......

 

[3rd and long]

That's not true. If you call timeout and go three and out quickly, you punt the ball and Wisconsin has -- I'm forgetting exactly here -- something like 30 seconds with a timeout in pocket and clock stoppage on first downs.Your defense would have to go make one more stand to send the game to overtime. This is something that can be avoided.Nebraska gave themselves plenty of time to make a play for the GW FG, and also made sure to deny Wisconsin anything other than a kneeldown in the process. So that was smart.

I'm going to take my chances that the defense (that for the most part has played well all game long)can prevent that from happening. Plus, if we do take TO, that's not saying we have to throw on the next two downs, stoppingthe clock on incompletions. At least we're organized and have a chance to execute. At that point, with them expecting us to throw, we might have popped a quick run and gotten into FG range.
Go for the win when you have the chance. Too many variables come into play when you go into OT. And when you do go OT, you're guaranting the other team their chance. End the game when it's only you with that chance. Or at least give it a better chance than a Hail Mary.

 

[zoogs]

If you take a TO on 2nd & long, with one TO left at around midfield, which down do you run the ball on and give up your final TO?

I think they went for the win. They just didn't get there.

 

[MLB 51]

16 seconds left on 4th down with 2 timeouts left. Should have taken a shot down field with that much time left.

 

[3rd and long]

If you take a TO on 2nd & long, with one TO left at around midfield, which down do you run the ball on and give up your final TO?I think they went for the win. They just didn't get there.

I'm not saying they should have run, just that it might have caught them off guard. Whatever you choose, you can still control the clock. But at least if you use the TO and get everyone knowing what's going on for the next two plays, I think you have a better chance of at least giving yourself that FG opportunity. I would rather do it that way as opposed to basically wasting 20-25 seconds and then throwing a Hail Mary.

High pressure situations like that, I would rather slow things down so everyone is together.

If your defense is going to give up 50-60 yards in 30 seconds then there's a good chance they'll give up a score it OT too.

 

[zoogs]

A score in OT you can answer. Giving up a chunk play or two and then bracing for a GW FG attempt is an avoidable thing.

If they call the TO early, they corner themselves into a situation where they need to take more time off the clock. That, too, is quite limiting. If they get stopped in bounds on 2nd down, they have to either spend the last TO or rush the 3rd down play. Now we're not just talking about giving the Badgers a free one-minute drill, we're talking about putting a scoring chance in jeopardy by running out of timeouts to take for the FG.

The whole point of working on your 2 minute offense, really, is to have plays ready to go and execute in these situations. They went with one. It fell incomplete.

They could have called a TO later, I suppose. But I really think we're picking nits here. They played to win, very clearly, in my mind. They just didn't get there.

 

[huskerdude171]

If you take a TO on 2nd & long, with one TO left at around midfield, which down do you run the ball on and give up your final TO?I think they went for the win. They just didn't get there.

I'm not saying they should have run, just that it might have caught them off guard. Whatever you choose, you can still control the clock. But at least if you use the TO and get everyone knowing what's going on for the next two plays, I think you have a better chance of at least giving yourself that FG opportunity. I would rather do it that way as opposed to basically wasting 20-25 seconds and then throwing a Hail Mary.

High pressure situations like that, I would rather slow things down so everyone is together.

If your defense is going to give up 50-60 yards in 30 seconds then there's a good chance they'll give up a score it OT too.

If your defense is going to give up 50+ yards in under 40 seconds, you don't deserve to win the game in the first place. Go for the kill, don't play for what could happen later.