Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2012 7:04:51 GMT -6
Ok, those that watched (if you didn't watch the game get your head checked...jk)the game saw the last play of the game. We all know Conley should've just batted that ball down (hindsight is 20-20 remember). There were seveal coaches bashing Richt about not practicing situational football. I'm sure, to get where Mark Richt is, he's practiced situational football. What I think has happened is that play was so far down the list of things that COULD happen, it got overlooked, which, by far and away is a completely human thing to do. My question, after reviewing the game, the commentator's analysis, and seeing the tweets about the game, how many have a situational analysis set up for just such a thing? I have a list of things we go over the day before the game and in pregame, but this situation was not on there. Which promted me to wonder, what else am I missing? I mean, how is it possible to prepare for EVERY situation that could happen in a ball game in just 5 days or less? If you do have a list of these situations and the proper reactions, please share!
Duece
|
|
|
Post by coachbuck on Dec 2, 2012 7:08:01 GMT -6
I think we can't say. I'm sure hours of film went into that decision. I would bet they felt they could get that thru formation advantage. On the surface I say kick but if I have scouted them and felt 90% sure we could out formation them and take advantage of them then I probably go for it.
|
|
|
Post by coachbuck on Dec 2, 2012 7:23:29 GMT -6
This should be on situation one.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 2, 2012 7:31:24 GMT -6
Not sure what you're asking Duece but if they're out of time outs they have to spike the ball.
It was a 1st Down so clock was stopped until chains are set.
The average pass play takes six seconds.
If they spike ball on the RFP, they would've had at least two shots at end zone - unless they get tackled in bounds, which can't happen.
If you're asking have we ever been omniscient enough to tell Receiver to bat ball down in that situation - answer is no. We tell BCs-Receivers get all you can but MAKE SURE YOU GET OUT OF BOUNDS.
Conley appeared to slip or stumble after the catch and was unable to get to sideline even if he thought to rather than try to score.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 2, 2012 8:44:11 GMT -6
I haven't seen any of the interviews post game..but to me, watching it one or two times (once live, once replay) I thought the throw MIGHT have been going to the WR in the endzone, and was tipped at the line, changing the trajectory a bit and having the ball go to the out route.
Impossible to cover that situation in a game, because generally the WR's are trusting the QB's. WR makes break, sees ball coming to him... he has to trust that there is a reason for it.
Something interesting to think about though, is that a very similar situation JUST HAPPENED two days ago IN THAT VERY BUILDING. Drew Brees made a poor decision, through an under route that didn't allow the Saints to attempt a FG or another shot at the endzone on Thursday.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 2, 2012 9:37:16 GMT -6
It would be tough to tell them to bat that down, but not impossible. Kids need to understand at some point yardage and catches don't matter more than the clock. Again, tough, but not impossible.
The better question is why did they not clock it? I absolutely do not understand that. No way, no how. And this is from a person that can't stand a clock play in most situations. Georgia Tech clocked one (tried to anyways) on first down with plenty of time left. They just lost a play! Bad choice.
But here with 15 seconds you will get 3 plays max, probably 2. You will not get 4 plays no matter what. Clocking does not cost you a down.
If they threw a fade to the corner on that play, I have no problem.
This also helps answer your orginal question here, Duece.
If they clock it, they can first make sure they have a play that goes into the endzone. Second, they can explain or say, if you are going to catch it and come up short, drop it!
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 2, 2012 9:42:09 GMT -6
I mean, how is it possible to prepare for EVERY situation that could happen in a ball game in just 5 days or less? Duece First it is not possible to go over every situation possible. I mean what do you do when aliens land on the 2 with 12 seconds left and down by 4? Now what if they land with with 3 seconds left? Just kidding, but I am making your point that you can't account for EVERYTHING possible. But, you are missing 360 days here. You don't do that stuff in 5 days or less. You have all year to do that. And really you have 4 years with your seniors.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 2, 2012 9:52:31 GMT -6
Here is another situation. Arkansas a few years ago blocked a punt against Ohio State. If they scoop and score they win. Instead, they fell on it and then threw a pick. That is TERRIBLE! My 7th graders know to never fall on that. How does a college team not know that?
I am serious. How do they not know that???
|
|
|
Post by hturner3280 on Dec 2, 2012 10:44:09 GMT -6
I'm not sure if anyone else thought of this...but for those of you who have read the great Homer Smith's book on clock management, you will remember that the man who wrote the foreword for that book was none other than Mark Richt. In the book, Homer Smith points out that it is almost always a losing play to spike the ball. I just wonder if Richt believes in that philosophy and therefore, refuses to spike it.
However, in this situation, I think spiking the ball was the thing to do. Anytime you get below 16-18 seconds, I think you spike the ball on first down because, most likely, you cannot get four plays off anyways. Therefore, you spike it and make sure you get the right play called on second down.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Dec 2, 2012 11:23:27 GMT -6
They just seemed very rushed, unnecessarily so.
Spiking the ball would have given them a new play clock and chance to catch their collective breaths and think about what they wanted to do. Would have had at least two plays (again assuming they don't get tackled in bounds including sack).
Possible they have a series of plays they practice-run in that situation without having a timeout or to clock it.
We call that "Clutch Series."
|
|
|
Post by jgordon1 on Dec 2, 2012 11:56:33 GMT -6
They just seemed very rushed, unnecessarily so. Spiking the ball would have given them a new play clock and chance to catch their collective breaths and think about what they wanted to do. Would have had at least two plays (again assuming they don't get tackled in bounds including sack). Possible they have a series of plays they practice-run in that situation without having a timeout or to clock it. We call that "Clutch Series." Yes, they did seemed rushed..that was the most perplexing part to me....I can't tell you how many times i've seen teams (BCS) or otherwise can't get the right people on the field...when Bama lost to A&M they were having trouble all day on defense getting the personel on the field
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 2, 2012 12:10:55 GMT -6
In the book, Homer Smith points out that it is almost always a losing play to spike the ball. I just wonder if Richt believes in that philosophy and therefore, refuses to spike it. That would be unfortunate. Because like you said, it was the right thing to do in this situation and it cost him a shot at the national title. You might not can practice the kids for every situation. You might not can even get the coaches ready for every situation. But this was a situation that could be completely forseen and prepared for.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 2, 2012 12:16:17 GMT -6
It would be tough to tell them to bat that down, but not impossible. Kids need to understand at some point yardage and catches don't matter more than the clock. Again, tough, but not impossible. Have to disagree here. The coaching point wouldn't be to the WR to bat the ball down, but rather to the QB to throw it away (at his feet or something). The WR needs to operate under the assumption that the QB is making the correct decision in throwing HIM the ball. He has his back to the play after the cut.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 2, 2012 12:19:13 GMT -6
It would be tough to tell them to bat that down, but not impossible. Kids need to understand at some point yardage and catches don't matter more than the clock. Again, tough, but not impossible. Have to disagree here. The coaching point wouldn't be to the WR to bat the ball down, but rather to the QB to throw it away (at his feet or something). The WR needs to operate under the assumption that the QB is making the correct decision in throwing HIM the ball. He has his back to the play after the cut. Ummmmmm..... the ball was tipped and the WR made a diving catch. I understand your point and it is valid. But not in this exact situation.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 2, 2012 12:42:12 GMT -6
Have to disagree here. The coaching point wouldn't be to the WR to bat the ball down, but rather to the QB to throw it away (at his feet or something). The WR needs to operate under the assumption that the QB is making the correct decision in throwing HIM the ball. He has his back to the play after the cut. Ummmmmm..... the ball was tipped and the WR made a diving catch. I understand your point and it is valid. But not in this exact situation. Ummmmm.... the ball was tipped prior to the WR break (didn't see) and the WR didn't dive for the ball..he caught the ball and slipped attempting to make a cut. So from the WR's point of view, the ball was being thrown to him. Murray wanted to clock the ball, but was told not too (you can see him showing the spike signal to the sidelines..then stopping and reading the sideline play signal. I think one BIG thing to glean from this is HOW MUCH TIME runs off between ready for play and snapping the ball. The clock was stopped after the 1st down at 15 seconds, the ball was snapped at 9 seconds. Had they clocked the ball, it probably would have been closer to 12 seconds. I am betting that GA felt they had better odds hitting Bama while they were "reeling" than letting bama get set up and organized, however, they executed poorly (not throwing a jump ball FADE, but what appeared to be more a back shoulder throw that got tipped) That said, I would have also clocked the ball.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2012 14:58:14 GMT -6
Ummmmmm..... the ball was tipped and the WR made a diving catch. I understand your point and it is valid. But not in this exact situation. Ummmmm.... the ball was tipped prior to the WR break (didn't see) and the WR didn't dive for the ball..he caught the ball and slipped attempting to make a cut. So from the WR's point of view, the ball was being thrown to him. Murray wanted to clock the ball, but was told not too (you can see him showing the spike signal to the sidelines..then stopping and reading the sideline play signal. I think one BIG thing to glean from this is HOW MUCH TIME runs off between ready for play and snapping the ball. The clock was stopped after the 1st down at 15 seconds, the ball was snapped at 9 seconds. Had they clocked the ball, it probably would have been closer to 12 seconds. I am betting that GA felt they had better odds hitting Bama while they were "reeling" than letting bama get set up and organized, however, they executed poorly (not throwing a jump ball FADE, but what appeared to be more a back shoulder throw that got tipped) That said, I would have also clocked the ball. This is my point exactly. I think this is dammed if you do dammed if you don't. You spike you get 2 plays vs a Bama d that is settled & ready. You don't spike you may only still get 2 plays (not sure how long a 1 step fade to endzone takes but can't be much), but you catch Bama reeling after a big game. Like smiths book states the spike is almost always a bad play. Wonder what Oregon would've done? Duece
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 2, 2012 15:52:50 GMT -6
Ummmmm.... the ball was tipped prior to the WR break (didn't see) and the WR didn't dive for the ball..he caught the ball and slipped attempting to make a cut. So from the WR's point of view, the ball was being thrown to him. Murray wanted to clock the ball, but was told not too (you can see him showing the spike signal to the sidelines..then stopping and reading the sideline play signal. I think one BIG thing to glean from this is HOW MUCH TIME runs off between ready for play and snapping the ball. The clock was stopped after the 1st down at 15 seconds, the ball was snapped at 9 seconds. Had they clocked the ball, it probably would have been closer to 12 seconds. I am betting that GA felt they had better odds hitting Bama while they were "reeling" than letting bama get set up and organized, however, they executed poorly (not throwing a jump ball FADE, but what appeared to be more a back shoulder throw that got tipped) That said, I would have also clocked the ball. This is my point exactly. I think this is dammed if you do dammed if you don't. You spike you get 2 plays vs a Bama d that is settled & ready. You don't spike you may only still get 2 plays (not sure how long a 1 step fade to endzone takes but can't be much), but you catch Bama reeling after a big game. Like smiths book states the spike is almost always a bad play. Wonder what Oregon would've done? Duece The problem is Bama reeling is just a feeling, not the case. Bama covered the fade stop and the out fine. Think about this another way. Let's say there is a minute left instead of 15 seconds. Do you think Georgia is going to rush up there because Bama is reeling and run that play or set up? Homer Smith argues correctly that the spike is ALMOST always the incorrect play call. He is right. Of course there are situations when it is absolutely the correct call. Let's say they were down 2 instead of down 4. Anybody here want to say the spike is the wrong call then? The spike was the correct call and this is not hindsight. I knew it at the time and could NOT believe they didn't.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 2, 2012 16:19:18 GMT -6
This is my point exactly. I think this is dammed if you do dammed if you don't. You spike you get 2 plays vs a Bama d that is settled & ready. You don't spike you may only still get 2 plays (not sure how long a 1 step fade to endzone takes but can't be much), but you catch Bama reeling after a big game. Like smiths book states the spike is almost always a bad play. Wonder what Oregon would've done? Duece The problem is Bama reeling is just a feeling, not the case. Bama covered the fade stop and the out fine. Think about this another way. Let's say there is a minute left instead of 15 seconds. Do you think Georgia is going to rush up there because Bama is reeling and run that play or set up? Homer Smith argues correctly that the spike is ALMOST always the incorrect play call. He is right. Of course there are situations when it is absolutely the correct call. Let's say they were down 2 instead of down 4. Anybody here want to say the spike is the wrong call then? The spike was the correct call and this is not hindsight. I knew it at the time and could NOT believe they didn't. As you have said: Think about this ANOTHER way.. GA goes up to the line, clocks the ball and their are 12 seconds left on the clock. The next play they run a fade/stop..the ball gets tipped, it goes to the out route who slips down after he catches the ball..... they still lose right? or Think about this ANOTHER way GA goes up to the line, decides to run a play, and when the ball is snapped their are 9 seconds on the clock. They throw a fade/stop and the ball is batted down incomplete in the endzone. There are now 5 seconds left to play. Ga has one last play, giving them two plays total to try and score. Coach, it wasn't the decision to not clock the play that prevented GA from having two attempts at the endzone, it was the execution of the play and what transpired during the play that prevented GA from having two attempts. Again, I think the FAR bigger event to analyze is how long it took to snap the ball. After the first big completion, the clock stopped at 30 seconds, and the ball was snapped back to the qb at 23 seconds. After the second big completion, the clock stopped at 15 seconds, and snapped to the QB at 9 seconds. I have seen that in many MANY games lately where that hidden time leakage has come into account. I know at one school I coached at, we were practicing the two minute offense on a Thursday for the first time, and I as a defensive coach was shocked that our QB was using full cadence. Even though I was a D guy, and generally never made suggestions to the O..i brought that up to the OC/HC after practice. Lastly, regarding "reeling"---the bama defense had given up about 50 yards in 2 plays with a shot at the NC on the line.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 2, 2012 16:20:10 GMT -6
Ummmmmm..... the ball was tipped and the WR made a diving catch. I understand your point and it is valid. But not in this exact situation. Ummmmm.... WR didn't dive for the ball..he caught the ball and slipped attempting to make a cut. After re-watching, I stand corrected. He didn't dive.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 2, 2012 16:36:38 GMT -6
The problem is Bama reeling is just a feeling, not the case. Bama covered the fade stop and the out fine. Think about this another way. Let's say there is a minute left instead of 15 seconds. Do you think Georgia is going to rush up there because Bama is reeling and run that play or set up? Homer Smith argues correctly that the spike is ALMOST always the incorrect play call. He is right. Of course there are situations when it is absolutely the correct call. Let's say they were down 2 instead of down 4. Anybody here want to say the spike is the wrong call then? The spike was the correct call and this is not hindsight. I knew it at the time and could NOT believe they didn't. As you have said: Think about this ANOTHER way.. GA goes up to the line, clocks the ball and their are 12 seconds left on the clock. The next play they run a fade/stop..the ball gets tipped, it goes to the out route who slips down after he catches the ball..... they still lose right? or Think about this ANOTHER way GA goes up to the line, decides to run a play, and when the ball is snapped their are 9 seconds on the clock. They throw a fade/stop and the ball is batted down incomplete in the endzone. There are now 5 seconds left to play. Ga has one last play, giving them two plays total to try and score. Coach, it wasn't the decision to not clock the play that prevented GA from having two attempts at the endzone, it was the execution of the play and what transpired during the play that prevented GA from having two attempts. Again, I think the FAR bigger event to analyze is how long it took to snap the ball. I have seen that in many MANY games lately where that hidden time leakage has come into account. I know at one school I coached at, we were practicing the two minute offense on a Thursday for the first time, and I as a defensive coach was shocked that our QB was using full cadence. Even though I was a D guy, and generally never made suggestions to the O..i brought that up to the OC/HC after practice. After re-watching and reading your post, you make some excellent points. The time leakage is terrible. We are high high school wing t team and we have a play ready for the exact reason in the two-minute drill. I can go over that at another time, but I see super high speed spread offenses that are TERRIBLE at this in the 2-minute drill. The fade-stop was completely covered also, but that is not your point. I do disagree a little about the play result being the same. Of course it could be, but I think becasue everything was rushed including the protection, it hurt Georgia. I of course do not know this. Also, who runs a fade-stop with a flat route? Not only is that a bad play call, it is a bad route combination PERIOD. I still say spike without a doubt and I think you agree. But i wouldn't have minded a fade to the pylon there. That is about the only play that wouldn't have been bad in mind. Then come back to the fade-stop. With a seam or slant by the slot. LOL
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 2, 2012 16:45:00 GMT -6
The fade-stop was completely covered also, but that is not your point. I do disagree a little about the play result being the same. Of course it could be, but I think becasue everything was rushed including the protection, it hurt Georgia. I of course do not know this. Also, who runs a fade-stop with a flat route? Not only is that a bad play call, it is a bad route combination PERIOD. I still say spike without a doubt and I think you agree. But i wouldn't have minded a fade to the pylon there. That is about the only play that wouldn't have been bad in mind. Then come back to the fade-stop. With a seam or slant by the slot. LOL The protection was fine..the player who tipped the ball was an inside LB scraping around the line and being picked up by the back. The back blocked him, but he jumped, braced against the back, got his hand up and deflected. Also, after another look, I think it was not a fade-stop, but just a fade...and once the ball was tipped the WR came back to it. Again, just execution. Now, as a total Sunday Morning Armchair QB, I do think an argument could be made that the time pressure may have contributed to the poor execution. It doesn't appear that GA has a generally accepted practice to NOT clock the ball, but rather run the play (evidenced by Murray running down the field asking the sideline if he should spike). I don't like the alignments of the WR's..who may have been anticipating killing the clock. The WR to the top seems to be very close to the boundary, not leaving himself much room to run the fade. Because of the time pressure, you are locked into formations and no motion possibilities. But I wouldn't say it was WRONG, as the flip side was that bama was definitely "reeling". Now they recovered, and thats why they are playing for the NC for the 3rd time in 4 years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2012 22:51:47 GMT -6
Again, what would've a team built around the speed tempo of Tony Franklin, Kevin Sumlin etc. do? They have this built in, no need to spike...right?
Duece
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 2, 2012 22:58:54 GMT -6
Again, what would've a team built around the speed tempo of Tony Franklin, Kevin Sumlin etc. do? They have this built in, no need to spike...right? Duece I don't know not a tempo coach...BUT again, I do think it might be important to consider that "leakage" time (for lack of a better term) that occurs with trying to run an actual play as opposed to clocking, specifically formation alignment and pre snap reads. The clock is running while these things are happening if you don't clock the ball.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2012 4:54:38 GMT -6
See I disagree a bit on this, here's why. Clocking absorbs as much time as running a play b/c you still have to line up, make sure everybody's on the line properly and snap the ball. If you use code words or "hot" words for certain plays, then it's no different if the coach is yelling "clock" vs. <<insert code word here>>. Now I could see if you had this long word or a card the players had to read etc. I don't think the time diff. is all that much, AND, spiking it is ALWAYS a wasted play, which I'm not for...
What I am for is this:
Duece
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Dec 3, 2012 7:34:21 GMT -6
See I disagree a bit on this, here's why. Clocking absorbs as much time as running a play b/c you still have to line up, make sure everybody's on the line properly and snap the ball. If you use code words or "hot" words for certain plays, then it's no different if the coach is yelling "clock" vs. <<insert code word here>>. Now I could see if you had this long word or a card the players had to read etc. I don't think the time diff. is all that much All that much...when we are talking 15 seconds left..could be 3 or 4 seconds..which is 20%-30% of the time remaining. Plus there is a difference between having to be aligned LEGALLY...and having to line up properly for the play. That difference might only take 2 seconds...but again, we are talking more than 10% of the remaining time. Then since you are running an actual play, the QB is going to scan the defensee pre snap (but in all likelyhood post ready for play clock start) Again, may only be 2 seconds...but now we have run 4-5 seconds off total.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Dec 3, 2012 8:27:46 GMT -6
I don't think spiking is the "right" call here. It doesn't matter much because there's so little time left that they probably wouldn't get all four downs out of the situation, but the spike costs you a down and a couple of seconds and who knows what might happen. You should have one-word plays tat you can call and run, and you still have to get in a proper formation just to spike it, so why not run a play?
The problems I see are
1. The quick out wasn't in the end zone or at the sideline
2. The pass was tipped, it looked like it was headed for the fade and got batted, then randomly landed in the other receiver's hands
3. The receiver caught the ball. Tough to blame him under the circumstances, but it was the last nail in Georgia's coffin.\
If that doesn't happen and the pass goes incomplete, it only costs them maybe 4 more seconds than the spike, maybe 3, and they probably still have two more chances at it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2012 9:21:41 GMT -6
I don't think spiking is the "right" call here. It doesn't matter much because there's so little time left that they probably wouldn't get all four downs out of the situation, but the spike costs you a down and a couple of seconds and who knows what might happen. You should have one-word plays tat you can call and run, and you still have to get in a proper formation just to spike it, so why not run a play? The problems I see are 1. The quick out wasn't in the end zone or at the sideline 2. The pass was tipped, it looked like it was headed for the fade and got batted, then randomly landed in the other receiver's hands 3. The receiver caught the ball. Tough to blame him under the circumstances, but it was the last nail in Georgia's coffin.\ If that doesn't happen and the pass goes incomplete, it only costs them maybe 4 more seconds than the spike, maybe 3, and they probably still have two more chances at it. Couldn't agree more coach! Duece
|
|
|
Post by mholst40 on Dec 3, 2012 12:08:27 GMT -6
I am not a big believer in spiking the ball to kill the clock, but would have in this situation.
A lot of people are referencing Homer Smith and point out that he ALMOST always chooses not to spike. So, there are instances where spiking is favorable.
Georgia is not a no-huddle team in the fashion of Kelly, Franklin, Sumlin, etc., so they didn't look nearly as crisp getting to the line and getting a play call in. The play looked rushed. This may have resulted in the poor route combo and poor spacing. This is another reason I believe in being no-huddle from the get-go.
Getting the play call in, getting lined up and snapping the ball took about 6 seconds off the clock once the refs signaled the ball ready to play. If Murray gets the signal to spike the ball from the sideline, he goes under center right away, I would bet they snap the ball with 14 seconds left and about two seconds would go off with a spike.
This leaves 12 seconds. You might be able to squeeze in three plays in this scenario. Definitely two and maybe a third. But, all of your plays are planned and you are not rushed to the line.
So, in this scenario, I would have spiked the ball. That's not to say Georgia would have won had they spiked the ball, but I think it would have given them a better opportunity to do so.
On another note, Georgia is basically one play away from the National Championship game. Now, they aren't even in an "elite" bowl! Doesn't make sense to me, but the BCS never has!
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 3, 2012 12:16:10 GMT -6
Again, what would've a team built around the speed tempo of Tony Franklin, Kevin Sumlin etc. do? They have this built in, no need to spike...right? Duece I hate to be the disagree man in this thread, but this isn't true. One of the absolute worst 2 minute drills I have ever seen was Auburn vs Alabama in 2009. The OC was Malzahn. It was embarassing. They took forever to get plays in, ran the ball when inapproprate, and play-actioned faked. Are you serious? There is a huge difference in warp speed tempo and 2 minute drill. 2 minute drill is about wasting no clock. Warp speed is about getting as many plays as you can during the course of a normal game. I know this sounds crazy, but the warp speed teams aren't any better and I believe worse in 2 minute drill. The reason they are worse? Becasue they think that since they can go warp speed that that is fast enough for 2 minute drill. It is not in crucial time situations. If you are in warp speed mode and get a first down, you can just call a run or whatever play you want it doesn't matter. If it messes up it just 2nd and 10. And then if you mess up there you can have 3rd and 10. And if you mess up there, you can punt. And hopefully you put enough together during the course of the game that the defense gets tired by the fourth quarter. But more realistically, you get ready on third and 10 quickly and then check and then snap the ball with 3 seconds left on the play clock becasue you have time and you want to get a good play in. That does not work in 2 minute drill. It is a completely different thing to go as fast as possible becasue you can and want to tempo and to go fast as possible becasue you HAVE to. If they spike the ball, they have at worst 13 seconds left. Time for 2 play calls. Your best play calls! And maybe a third. Spiking the ball takes as little time as possible if you do it right and my guess is that you will sometimes also get the ref to "add" a little time back when you spike. Also, about catching Bama reeling again, Bama covered the fade, covered the out, and rushed well enough to deflect the pass. Reeling is an emotion or feeling, not reality. Georgia also had Bama reeling after the blocked FG. Bama also had Georgia reeling after scoring and then making Georgia punt. Momentum doesn't matter!
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Dec 3, 2012 12:41:23 GMT -6
the beginning and end of the decision-making comes down to personnel. Look what personnel groupings did to Alabama - Texas A&M. This is essentially what Richt said after the game, anyway. They had the right matchups on the field and rather than stop the tempo, they had the right scenario in play and had everything they needed for the situation. It came down to Alabama executing better on that given play.
|
|