gutsy call by the coach on 4th and 1 from around the 50 yd line
- Thread starter marteau
- Start date
It certainly was gutsy and Cunningham in the booth showed why he's in the booth ans not coaching. Riley wanted the game in our hands as he clearly learned from last year. Not to mention the idiot calling for a 2 pt conversion up 8. I'm sure someone explained that to him during commercial.
I'm going to have to... disagree? What was so gutsy about it? It's literally in the perfect area of the field to go for a short yardage 4th down, and if I remember correctly, there was 3 minutes and some change left. So if we punt, the ball would be somewhere between the goal line and 20 most likely, and if Indiana scores, guess how much time that probably leaves NU to respond? I'm going to assume under a minute. You go for it on 4th, and if you convert, it significantly increases your chances of putting up points and killing more clock. You don't get it, and Indiana has less field to move to score, but it also means its most likely takes less time, leaving NU with more time at the end to respond.
That's my reasoning. That didn't take stones to go for it on 4th. All it took was the ability to do some simple math.
And as a bonus, we totally took advantage of the opportunity.
That's my reasoning. That didn't take stones to go for it on 4th. All it took was the ability to do some simple math.
And as a bonus, we totally took advantage of the opportunity.
It's a difference of going 20 yards for the winning field goal or 50 or so yards for the winning field goal... big difference in my book.
I still felt like he had to go for it, but if we didn't make it, I was preparing for a last second loss...
Would've been a HUGE momentum swing in Indiana's favor if we got stuffed so in my opinion it took some stones.
Not every coach would've went for it on 4th in that situation so it's not as simple as stating "simple math".
Not every coach would've went for it on 4th in that situation so it's not as simple as stating "simple math".
That took balls & showed he had confidence in his offense. They could have ran it back for 10-40 yards. He could have punted and tried to pin them deep. If we don't convert, they field just got flipped. That old man showed some balls.
Yeah I'd have to say it was a no brainer to make that call and they did. My only concerns are usually the calls in those situations..
Other factors might have made him make a different decision. If it was a 3-point game instead of two, HCMR might have kicked. If Foltz were our punter with his uncanny ability to kick it out of bounds inside the five, he might have kicked.
It shows me that Riley is here to win games, not moral victories.
I'm sure we'll get burned before to long on these sorts of calls, but I'll take an aggressive call every time.
I'm sure we'll get burned before to long on these sorts of calls, but I'll take an aggressive call every time.
I don't recall actual numbers but I think it's like 6 of 9 or something..
We approached it totally differently. I was thinking what would happen if we didn't convert. We'd give them the ball with a short field, after our defense had played so well, only needing a field goal. I thought it was ballsy as hell. I was behind the decision once it was made, but it's not the one I would have made!
I could see a lot, if not a majority of coaches pooch punting or something.
Had that backfired the haters would have been all over the board talking about how stupid Riley was.
Had that backfired the haters would have been all over the board talking about how stupid Riley was.
I wouldn't say a no-brainer, but actually a pretty simple decision. Nate laid out much of the risk/reward considerations above. Low risk of failing, but huge upside if you convert. The downside of failing to convert is also not that much worse than voluntarily giving the ball back on a punt.
I especially loved how Riley explained it to the media. Something along the lines of "I'd rather have the outcome in our hands than theirs."
I especially loved how Riley explained it to the media. Something along the lines of "I'd rather have the outcome in our hands than theirs."
I loved it because it seems like more often than not in recent years we have been playing it too safe in those situations. It's the difference between playing not to lose and playing to win.
Anybody else remember when Beck would always have us in shotgun on every short yardage play? God that drove me crazy that we couldn't run the most basic offensive play in the history of football!
Its very hard to defend a good qb on a sneak ; they can read the angle they need ; vs a developing play with linebackers shooting gaps and linemen submarining. But our coach showed courage; our linemen were saying they would have had to be dragged and ordered from the field. It seemed a well designed play, with all involved in the push with the new rule; we also won the " rugby " scrum. GBR
One question I have... I have read or heard from multiple sources that it was a generous spot... not from analysts, per se, just from people in general. How was it a generous spot? it seemed to me like they spotted the ball where he eventually came down. Am I wrong?
We got the first down regardless. They did give us a generous spot in the fact that it looks like we got the first easier than what we actually did, but even if they spotted it correctly we still would have gotten the first down.
Definitely. And I think that didn't change much last year with Riley. I'm glad we've worked on short yardage QB sneaks. I would have preferred to see it on 3 & 1.
Looked generous to me as well, but honestly how in the heck can anyone really say for certain? Just a big pile of red semi's all tangled up, who's to say where the ball is exactly.
I think thats how I felt as well. I guess there was no way to tell if it was generous or not because I'm I don't think we really could see where he came down. It was a big mess, that's what I saw. So could have been generous or could have been spot on. Just don't know why many are saying it was generous... liked your analogy of red semis. Thanks.
I liked it and was glad they went for it. Wish more teams in general would take a few more risks like 4th and 1, makes for a more interesting game.
That took balls & showed he had confidence in his offense. They could have ran it back for 10-40 yards. He could have punted and tried to pin them deep. If we don't convert, they field just got flipped. That old man showed some balls.[/QUOTE
Old Man?? I dare you to take this football away from me you whippersnapper!!
