|
|
Post by gigglyforshrigley on Aug 4, 2015 5:33:11 GMT -8
We were absolutely running at will against that team, including in the last drive. We were man-handling their front line. There's no way we wouldn't have gotten in with 1 or 2 runs up the middle
|
|
|
|
Post by McQuervo on Aug 4, 2015 6:06:14 GMT -8
See above.
Also, we had two time outs left.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Aug 4, 2015 7:30:25 GMT -8
Then answer question above. 2nd down, 2 yard line, 14 seconds, and 1 timeout left, down 4 points. Your call. Run it in with Chad Young and a TE blocking for DJ. He's a tougher inside runner than given credit for. Even if didn't make it in, we would have had time to immediately call the last time out. A 2 yd run attempt off tackle doesn't use up 14 seconds. If he lost yards, then I guess a pass is picking the better poison I suppose. The point is Toledo didn't use the clock properly and relying on a floating pass by QK was the wrong play. Your play gets one yard and it is 3rd down with 8 seconds left and no time outs. Your call. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Aug 4, 2015 7:40:27 GMT -8
We were absolutely running at will against that team, including in the last drive. We were man-handling their front line. There's no way we wouldn't have gotten in with 1 or 2 runs up the middle We had two choices. 1. 3 running plays. 2. 1 pass play and 3 running plays. Option 1 is the logical choice - just like in the Super Bowl. We did the same thing from the 6 yard line two plays earlier when we passed into the end zone instead of running 2 yards for a first down. It failed so we ran for the first down. It is called combining chances. A very simple strategy that is common in game theory. |
|
|
|
Post by gigglyforshrigley on Aug 4, 2015 7:45:01 GMT -8
We were absolutely running at will against that team, including in the last drive. We were man-handling their front line. There's no way we wouldn't have gotten in with 1 or 2 runs up the middle We had two choices. 1. 3 running plays. 2. 1 pass play and 3 running plays. Option 1 is the logical choice - just like in the Super Bowl. We did the same thing from the 6 yard line two plays earlier when we passed into the end zone instead of running 2 yards for a first down. It failed so we ran for the first down. It is called combining chances. A very simple strategy that is common in game theory. I would've ran (which would've scored) and then if for some crazy reason that didn't score, I'd call a time out and pass. Then run again and call TO. Then run again. We went back and forth back when this happened so we'll never agree on it. The "logical" choice in a vaccuum isn't always the best one. With how the game was going we would've ran it down their throats and there was nothing they were going to do about it. Their defense was gassed and couldn't do a thing to stop us. We ran for like 15 yards IIRC the play right before the pass that got us down to the 4 yard line or whatever it was EDIT: actually since you said we ran for only 2 yards the player prior, the run I'm thinking of was probably the one that got us to the 6. In either case, we were running it all over them and our running game was clearly our strength on that team.. you sleep with the girl you took to prom. (stay with what got you there... the run) |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Aug 4, 2015 8:29:21 GMT -8
We had two choices. 1. 3 running plays. 2. 1 pass play and 3 running plays. Option 1 is the logical choice - just like in the Super Bowl. We did the same thing from the 6 yard line two plays earlier when we passed into the end zone instead of running 2 yards for a first down. It failed so we ran for the first down. It is called combining chances. A very simple strategy that is common in game theory. I would've ran (which would've scored) and then if for some crazy reason that didn't score, I'd call a time out and pass. Then run again and call TO. Then run again. We went back and forth back when this happened so we'll never agree on it. The "logical" choice in a vaccuum isn't always the best one. With how the game was going we would've ran it down their throats and there was nothing they were going to do about it. Their defense was gassed and couldn't do a thing to stop us. We ran for like 15 yards IIRC the play right before the pass that got us down to the 4 yard line or whatever it was EDIT: actually since you said we ran for only 2 yards the player prior, the run I'm thinking of was probably the one that got us to the 6. In either case, we were running it all over them and our running game was clearly our strength on that team.. you sleep with the girl you took to prom. (stay with what got you there... the run) So you think a pass on second down is OK but a pass on first down is proof out OC is terrible? |
|
|
|
Post by gigglyforshrigley on Aug 4, 2015 9:32:36 GMT -8
I would've ran (which would've scored) and then if for some crazy reason that didn't score, I'd call a time out and pass. Then run again and call TO. Then run again. We went back and forth back when this happened so we'll never agree on it. The "logical" choice in a vaccuum isn't always the best one. With how the game was going we would've ran it down their throats and there was nothing they were going to do about it. Their defense was gassed and couldn't do a thing to stop us. We ran for like 15 yards IIRC the play right before the pass that got us down to the 4 yard line or whatever it was EDIT: actually since you said we ran for only 2 yards the player prior, the run I'm thinking of was probably the one that got us to the 6. In either case, we were running it all over them and our running game was clearly our strength on that team.. you sleep with the girl you took to prom. (stay with what got you there... the run) So you think a pass on second down is OK but a pass on first down is proof out OC is terrible? I think you try a run first. I would've been ok with a pass if it got stuffed |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Aug 4, 2015 11:15:26 GMT -8
I would've ran (which would've scored) and then if for some crazy reason that didn't score, I'd call a time out and pass. Then run again and call TO. Then run again. We went back and forth back when this happened so we'll never agree on it. The "logical" choice in a vaccuum isn't always the best one. With how the game was going we would've ran it down their throats and there was nothing they were going to do about it. Their defense was gassed and couldn't do a thing to stop us. We ran for like 15 yards IIRC the play right before the pass that got us down to the 4 yard line or whatever it was EDIT: actually since you said we ran for only 2 yards the player prior, the run I'm thinking of was probably the one that got us to the 6. In either case, we were running it all over them and our running game was clearly our strength on that team.. you sleep with the girl you took to prom. (stay with what got you there... the run) So you think a pass on second down is OK but a pass on first down is proof out OC is terrible? Bill, deal with it. Toledo blew it in that game. We could go back and forth all day about what should have been called, but the bottom line is he's gone. He was Rocky's long time buddy and he still canned him. What does that tell you? |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 4, 2015 15:18:34 GMT -8
I'm with Bill. I had no issue with the play calling at all. If we're forced to pass once, I'd rather see it on 1st down than 2nd. The problem wasn't the call it was the execution - QK got impatient & tried to make a play that wasn't there. Plus, Mills didn't run the best route.
You can definitely argue either way - run or pass; there isn't a right answer. In hindsight it's easy, but in real time and the knowledge you could use 4 plays easier with a 1st down pass it makes sense.
We'll never know if a run would have been successful or not. We'd run the ball a total 6 times all game inside their 20 (5 good; 1 bad), and running inside the 20 (& even more so inside the 10) is a different animal than running between the 20's. We could have lost 3 yards, like we did early in the game, or we could have run for a TD like we also did.
On the last drive we ran for 0, 20 & 4 yards, but only the latter was against a goal line D'. QK was 4-8 for 48 yards. Again, no idea as to which would have prevailed successfully.
All we do know is it wasn't executed properly. QK throws over the top or simply throws it away instead of back shoulder the outcome could have been very different and the argument moot. If it was Ruffin instead of Mills I also think the outcome is different.
I'm glad Toledo is gone as well, but not because of his play calling on this series & DEFINITELY not because of how his offense performed during this game overall. I think we'd take 500+ yards, including 300 in the air ANY day against almost anyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by originalshow00 on Aug 4, 2015 16:06:23 GMT -8
I'm with Bill. I had no issue with the play calling at all. If we're forced to pass once, I'd rather see it on 1st down than 2nd. The problem wasn't the call it was the execution - QK got impatient & tried to make a play that wasn't there. Plus, Mills didn't run the best route. You can definitely argue either way - run or pass; there isn't a right answer. In hindsight it's easy, but in real time and the knowledge you could use 4 plays easier with a 1st down pass it makes sense. We'll never know if a run would have been successful or not. We'd run the ball a total 6 times all game inside their 20 (5 good; 1 bad), and running inside the 20 (& even more so inside the 10) is a different animal than running between the 20's. We could have lost 3 yards, like we did early in the game, or we could have run for a TD like we also did. On the last drive we ran for 0, 20 & 4 yards, but only the latter was against a goal line D'. QK was 4-8 for 48 yards. Again, no idea as to which would have prevailed successfully. All we do know is it wasn't executed properly. QK throws over the top or simply throws it away instead of back shoulder the outcome could have been very different and the argument moot. If it was Ruffin instead of Mills I also think the outcome is different. I'm glad Toledo is gone as well, but not because of his play calling on this series & DEFINITELY not because of how his offense performed during this game overall. I think we'd take 500+ yards, including 300 in the air ANY day against almost anyone. I would have ran,even Dakota Gordon I would have run at them. |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 4, 2015 16:17:05 GMT -8
I'm with Bill. I had no issue with the play calling at all. If we're forced to pass once, I'd rather see it on 1st down than 2nd. The problem wasn't the call it was the execution - QK got impatient & tried to make a play that wasn't there. Plus, Mills didn't run the best route. You can definitely argue either way - run or pass; there isn't a right answer. In hindsight it's easy, but in real time and the knowledge you could use 4 plays easier with a 1st down pass it makes sense. We'll never know if a run would have been successful or not. We'd run the ball a total 6 times all game inside their 20 (5 good; 1 bad), and running inside the 20 (& even more so inside the 10) is a different animal than running between the 20's. We could have lost 3 yards, like we did early in the game, or we could have run for a TD like we also did. On the last drive we ran for 0, 20 & 4 yards, but only the latter was against a goal line D'. QK was 4-8 for 48 yards. Again, no idea as to which would have prevailed successfully. All we do know is it wasn't executed properly. QK throws over the top or simply throws it away instead of back shoulder the outcome could have been very different and the argument moot. If it was Ruffin instead of Mills I also think the outcome is different. I'm glad Toledo is gone as well, but not because of his play calling on this series & DEFINITELY not because of how his offense performed during this game overall. I think we'd take 500+ yards, including 300 in the air ANY day against almost anyone. I would have ran,even Dakota Gordon I would have run at them. Yep, easy to say in hindsight. Maybe it's successful, maybe not. Gordon had zero carries up to that point, so who knows? Does it catch them off guard, or does he end up getting tripped up? He had a lot of carries of 2 yards or less all year... If he gets stuffed at the line, then what? Call TO & run the same pass play we did?
Personally, I'd have run it with Pumphrey & if unsuccessful call TO. But I'd throw on 2nd, and I realize that doing that could have the same outcome as on 1st, so nothing's guaranteed...
So although I (& you) would have done something different I know I can't say it was the wrong thing to do (except in hindsight).
|
|
|
|
Post by originalshow00 on Aug 4, 2015 16:21:36 GMT -8
I would have ran,even Dakota Gordon I would have run at them. Yep, easy to say in hindsight. Maybe it's successful, maybe not. Gordon had zero carries up to that point, so who knows? Does it catch them off guard, or does he end up getting tripped up? He had a lot of carries of 2 yards or less all year... If he gets stuffed at the line, then what? Call TO & run the same pass play we did?
Personally, I'd have run it with Pumphrey & if unsuccessful call TO. But I'd throw on 2nd, and I realize that doing that could have the same outcome as on 1st, so nothing's guaranteed...
So although I (& you) would have done something different I know I can't say it was the wrong thing to do (except in hindsight).
Then I run Pumphrey and Price at them and possibly Penny.Four plays instead of one stupid one!Lol |
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 4, 2015 16:37:58 GMT -8
Yep, easy to say in hindsight. Maybe it's successful, maybe not. Gordon had zero carries up to that point, so who knows? Does it catch them off guard, or does he end up getting tripped up? He had a lot of carries of 2 yards or less all year... If he gets stuffed at the line, then what? Call TO & run the same pass play we did?
Personally, I'd have run it with Pumphrey & if unsuccessful call TO. But I'd throw on 2nd, and I realize that doing that could have the same outcome as on 1st, so nothing's guaranteed...
So although I (& you) would have done something different I know I can't say it was the wrong thing to do (except in hindsight).
Then I run Pumphrey and Price at them and possibly Penny.Four plays instead of one stupid one!Lol Yea, maybe. But you mean THREE (3) running plays instead of ONE "stupid" passing play? You wouldn't have time for 4 if you run 3 times.
Maybe, but again, MAYBE. You could get stuffed on all 3 & people would be calling for your head for not being smart enough to get a 4th play out of that situation.
Or your QB could have been smart enough to throw it away on play #1 & not make you look "stupid".
I know Rocky defended Toledo on this & said he agreed with him 100% over & over, as he should. But knowing the type of smash-mouth type of coach Rocky is I'm guessing he would have preferred your play calling... : )
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Aug 4, 2015 17:05:42 GMT -8
If the pass play was incomplete, run or pass is of no consequence. Otherwise, it is a TD or an interception. The actual percentage question concerns the ratio of those two eventualities versus the percentage chance for a TD on one of the three run plays. There could also be a sack or a fumble during a run play, so it isn't exact. But basically if the ratio of TD to interception is higher than the percentage chance of running TD, then the pass on first down is correct. Consider the the QB was under orders to not take a chance but rather throw the ball away if in question.
If something happens or not, is a bad way to determine in retrospect whether a correct decision was made. In blackjack, hitting an eighteen doesn't become correct when a 3 flops onto the table.
|
|
|
|
Post by originalshow00 on Aug 4, 2015 17:08:39 GMT -8
Then I run Pumphrey and Price at them and possibly Penny.Four plays instead of one stupid one!Lol Yea, maybe. But you mean THREE (3) running plays instead of ONE "stupid" passing play? You wouldn't have time for 4 if you run 3 times.
Maybe, but again, MAYBE. You could get stuffed on all 3 & people would be calling for your head for not being smart enough to get a 4th play out of that situation.
Or your QB could have been smart enough to throw it away on play #1 & not make you look "stupid".
I know Rocky defended Toledo on this & said he agreed with him 100% over & over, as he should. But knowing the type of smash-mouth type of coach Rocky is I'm guessing he would have preferred your play calling... : )
On one of the plays would be a sweep so the runner can get out of bounds if no td available. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Aug 4, 2015 17:09:08 GMT -8
Then I run Pumphrey and Price at them and possibly Penny.Four plays instead of one stupid one!Lol Yea, maybe. But you mean THREE (3) running plays instead of ONE "stupid" passing play? You wouldn't have time for 4 if you run 3 times.
Maybe, but again, MAYBE. You could get stuffed on all 3 & people would be calling for your head for not being smart enough to get a 4th play out of that situation.
Or your QB could have been smart enough to throw it away on play #1 & not make you look "stupid".
I know Rocky defended Toledo on this & said he agreed with him 100% over & over, as he should. But knowing the type of smash-mouth type of coach Rocky is I'm guessing he would have preferred your play calling... : )
If the pass was incomplete, there would be 14 seconds left with 2 timeouts in hand. Plenty of time to run 3 times. The only way to get an extra stoppage of time because running to the sidelines would take too long. |
|
|
|
Post by originalshow00 on Aug 4, 2015 17:39:13 GMT -8
Then answer question above. 2nd down, 2 yard line, 14 seconds, and 1 timeout left, down 4 points. Your call. Run it in with Chad Young and a TE blocking for DJ. He's a tougher inside runner than given credit for. Even if didn't make it in, we would have had time to immediately call the last time out. A 2 yd run attempt off tackle doesn't use up 14 seconds. If he lost yards, then I guess a pass is picking the better poison I suppose. The point is Toledo didn't use the clock properly and relying on a floating pass by QK was the wrong play. Chad Young was on the Jets last year. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Aug 4, 2015 19:16:49 GMT -8
Run it in with Chad Young and a TE blocking for DJ. He's a tougher inside runner than given credit for. Even if didn't make it in, we would have had time to immediately call the last time out. A 2 yd run attempt off tackle doesn't use up 14 seconds. If he lost yards, then I guess a pass is picking the better poison I suppose. The point is Toledo didn't use the clock properly and relying on a floating pass by QK was the wrong play. Chad Young was on the Jets last year. We let him play OC and gets us a major violation  |
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Aug 4, 2015 21:55:32 GMT -8
Run it in with Chad Young and a TE blocking for DJ. He's a tougher inside runner than given credit for. Even if didn't make it in, we would have had time to immediately call the last time out. A 2 yd run attempt off tackle doesn't use up 14 seconds. If he lost yards, then I guess a pass is picking the better poison I suppose. The point is Toledo didn't use the clock properly and relying on a floating pass by QK was the wrong play. Chad Young was on the Jets last year. My bad, I guess it was Adam Roberts, but the point is a blocking back for DJ. |
|
