4th and 1

txsting said:
It was simply a bad call, bad decision. I agree we should be able to get 1, but when the cost of not getting 1 is the ballgame, and the alternative is at least a coin flip chance to go to OT, you've gotta punt.

The benefit of getting 1 yard is that, WOW, you've got 1st and 10 on your own 35. It's not as though picking up the first down wins the game. The risk/reward is not there for me at my own 35. Anywhere on their side of the field, fine with me.
Click to expand...

If we punt then they have two minutes to go 40 yards and kick a field goal to win, when we did not stop them all game. Punting would have been quitting.

The only way we were going to win that game, after we gave up the ridiculous 80 yard TD pass, was to grind out the clock and kick our own FG to win. It was the right decision, 1000 times over, because of the clock.
 
It was idiotic. Y'all are acting like we win the game had we got the one yard. We would've had to get another 40-50 yards to be in field goal range.

Not getting the first puts Pitt in field goal range.

Totally stupid.

As for the play call, I'm not gonna second guess PJ on that. It didn't work. But as for actually going for it... Stupid
 
BuzzLaw said:
But as for actually going for it... Stupid
Click to expand...

Nope, it was the right call to go for it. There was NO evidence that we were ever going to stop them if we kicked it to them. And there's a good chance our punt would have netted 20 yards.

We had been moving the ball well most of the day, and we can usually pick up a yard when we need it. The Pitt player said in the post game that he guessed dive and changed the D - he guessed right, too bad for us.

Make the first and we might have scored, or at least burned clock and flipped the field better. But the O was undoubtedly our best D there.

I was more bothered by the WR pass (getting fancy instead of just running the O, which was working) than going for it in that situation.

The missed opportunities, like the drop on 4th and the dropped pick, were frustrating. Like last year, and unlike 2014, we're still not making breaks for ourselves.

JRjr
 
BuzzLaw said:
It was idiotic. Y'all are acting like we win the game had we got the one yard. We would've had to get another 40-50 yards to be in field goal range.
Click to expand...

You're acting like the whole game was a defensive struggle. We only had two stops all game, one 3-and-out punt with time winding down, and a fumble recovery that was a bad exchange on their part. They scored every other time they had the ball, and their kicker nails 50 yarders easily.

Our chances of getting 50 yards on offense were much higher than our chances of holding them to 30 yards on offense.
 
txsting said:
It was simply a bad call, bad decision. I agree we should be able to get 1, but when the cost of not getting 1 is the ballgame, and the alternative is at least a coin flip chance to go to OT, you've gotta punt.
Click to expand...

I would probably agree if I thought there was "at least a coin flip chance to go to OT", but I didn't think there was.

How did you determine that there was at least a 50 percent chance we would have been able to stop them when we hadn't been able to stop them all day and they only would have needed a field goal (and they have a kicker who beat us with a 56 yarder last year)?
 
vapspwi said:
Nope, it was the right call to go for it. There was NO evidence that we were ever going to stop them if we kicked it to them. And there's a good chance our punt would have netted 20 yards.

We had been moving the ball well most of the day, and we can usually pick up a yard when we need it. The Pitt player said in the post game that he guessed dive and changed the D - he guessed right, too bad for us.

Make the first and we might have scored, or at least burned clock and flipped the field better. But the O was undoubtedly our best D there.

I was more bothered by the WR pass (getting fancy instead of just running the O, which was working) than going for it in that situation.

The missed opportunities, like the drop on 4th and the dropped pick, were frustrating. Like last year, and unlike 2014, we're still not making breaks for ourselves.

JRjr
Click to expand...
Small sample size, but I looked for every play in the Pitt game where Tech had 3 or fewer yards to get a first down. Believe there was one on 2nd down, 2 on 3rd down and 3 on 4th down.

Success rate? 3/6

Made 2 of 3 4th down attempts and 1 on 3rd down (after failing on 2nd and 3).
 
In the post-game presser, CPJ himself said he would have made a different playcall. Pitt had difficulty with every kind of run except the dive.

My complete armchair suggestion: mid-line option with Jordan in as QB, optioning the 400lb monster.
 
To make up some arbitrary numbers:

Punting = 20% chance of holding them
Going for it on 4th down = 70% chance of making 4th down

It's not really a close decision. If 5+ minutes are left, then you punt it because you may either stop Pitt or have enough time left after Pitt scores. With 2:30 left and two timeouts, it was very unlikely that Pitt wouldn't at least get a FG with little time remaining.
 
floridajacket said:
To make up some arbitrary numbers:

Punting = 20% chance of holding them
Going for it on 4th down = 70% chance of making 4th down

It's not really a close decision. If 5+ minutes are left, then you punt it because you may either stop Pitt or have enough time left after Pitt scores. With 2:30 left and two timeouts, it was very unlikely that Pitt wouldn't at least get a FG with little time remaining.
Click to expand...

By your numbers there is a 30% chance of not getting the first down. So you think we would stop them from getting a FG 1/3 of the time from our own 34 if we don't get the first down? That would be equivalent to your 20% chance of a FG after a punt.

Wouldn't logic say that with 2:30 and 2 timeouts left that every yard you put them further away from a FG is better?

And what if we convert the 4th? What would you think the win vs. OT vs. lose ratios are then?
 
ee8384 said:
By your numbers there is a 30% chance of not getting the first down. So you think we would stop them from getting a FG 1/3 of the time from our own 34 if we don't get the first down? That would be equivalent to your 20% chance of a FG after a punt.

Wouldn't logic say that with 2:30 and 2 timeouts left that every yard you put them further away from a FG is better?

And what if we convert the 4th? What would you think the win vs. OT vs. lose ratios are then?
Click to expand...

You're reading the 20% number wrong. It's 20% of holding Pitt, meaning 80% chance of FG or TD. And unless Pitt scored in one play, we weren't going to have enough time to respond.

Also you said "2:30 and 2 timeouts." WE had 2 timeouts. Pitt had all 3 timeouts. 2:30 and 3 timeouts was more than enough time to get in FG range. The way the game went, it looked very unlikely Pitt wasn't getting in close FG range (like I said 80% chance of FG or TD).

A full analysis would iteratively look at every possible probability. Pitt's drives went TD, TD, TD, punt, FG, FG, fumble, TD by this point. The one drive with a stop started with 1:48 left in 2nd quarter and, IIRC, 2 TO's from the Pitt 22. So the run game was taken out moreso than 2:30 and 3 TO's from, say, the Pitt 35.
 
Also, one thing I was curious about was comparing our drives with UNC's drives against Pitt's defense. For those who have blamed our offense:

GT drives against Pitt: FG, TD, FG, Downs, Punt, TD. This does NOT include the kickoff return.

UNC drives against Pitt: Safety, Fumble, TD, TD, end of half, punt, TD, missed FG, punt, punt, TD, TD.

4/6 drives for GT ended in points and 2/6 ended in TD's. 5/12 ended in points for UNC and 5/12 ended in TD's. So UNC was slightly better as percentage ending in TD's, but GT got FG's on 33% of drives while UNC got FG's on 0% of drives. Plus UNC's offense started the game with a safety and then a lost fumble.
 
floridajacket said:
In the post-game presser, CPJ himself said he would have made a different playcall. Pitt had difficulty with every kind of run except the dive.

My complete armchair suggestion: mid-line option with Jordan in as QB, optioning the 400lb monster.
Click to expand...

“If I had to do it over again at the end of the game, I probably still would have gone for it, but I’d have called a different play,” he said. “I think the way the game was going, I felt like we could make half a yard and we didn’t do it. So that’s on me. That’s my responsibility and I’ll take the blame for it.”

-CPJ
 
JRJacket said:
“If I had to do it over again at the end of the game, I probably still would have gone for it, but I’d have called a different play,” he said. “I think the way the game was going, I felt like we could make half a yard and we didn’t do it. So that’s on me. That’s my responsibility and I’ll take the blame for it.”

-CPJ
Click to expand...
There he goes blaming his players again. He thought the players could get half a lousy yard but they failed. What a pretentious jackass. *sarcasm.
 
Why isn't the qb following the center in our arsenal anymore? Don't take the ball off the line of scrimmage.
 
GT1992 said:
Why isn't the qb following the center in our arsenal anymore? Don't take the ball off the line of scrimmage.
Click to expand...

The midline option... it's been brought up in a few posts, but yes it's definitely missing from the playbook. The assumption would be that JT is too small to run it, and we need JfN or Byerly type QB to do so. Makes sense in general, but I bet JT could still get a few yards every once and a while with it. We haven't run it consistently in a few years. I bet we could've caught Pitt off guard with it on 4th and inches. Alas.
 
GT1992 said:
Why isn't the qb following the center in our arsenal anymore? Don't take the ball off the line of scrimmage.
Click to expand...

I believe CPJ has spoken to this fact on the radio show. IIRC, it's mostly about size. JT5 obv not as big as Nesbitt, so the staff doesn't want to use that play either as much or at all.
 
I am a little surprised we didn't go with the draw them offsides play first. Especially with the rocket toss working so well.
 
TechRush said:
There he goes blaming his players again. He thought the players could get half a lousy yard but they failed. What a pretentious jackass. *sarcasm.
Click to expand...

Glad he finally put it on him. Maybe he will continue to own the output of his offense going forward.
 
gth874t said:
I believe CPJ has spoken to this fact on the radio show. IIRC, it's mostly about size. JT5 obv not as big as Nesbitt, so the staff doesn't want to use that play either as much or at all.
Click to expand...
Better than running at a guy we don't bother to block.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top