OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
Agree.
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
@ SJSU
- Thread starter PorkerPoke
- Start date
LanderPoke
Well-known member
Why not just run it one yard and not even bother with a kick?
We had already been stuffed on the goal line earlier in the game. We’ve also made a number of boneheaded plays in the red zone over the season (interceptions, sacks for huge yardage losses) and fumbles by our RB’s have also been a problem.
Contrast that with Sandvik who has been super solid this year and I think Sandvik was the safer option.
If it’s regulation time, you obviously go for the TD there. With it being OT and needing any number of points to win, you pick the easiest option to get those points. For some teams that might be a run or QB sneak for the TD. For us, it is definitely the FG.
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
Have you seen the offense? Remember what happened on the 1 yard line at NDSU? Remember what happened at the 1 yard line last year against Air Force? Kicking the ball had a much higher percentage of success . It was literally shorter than an extra point.
This is actually the first time I can say that the coaching staff made a wise decision. It took 3 years but we got there.
laxwyo
Well-known member
But it was only 3rd down, right?
laxwyo
Well-known member
I was actually more surprised we got it to the 1. A lot of the time teams barely gain yards after the other teams fails to score. Have we had fumbles on the 1? I know we’ve sucked pounding it into the end zone but but I’d think running ball and then kicking on 4th down technically has the highest odds of winning.
LanderPoke
Well-known member
Exactly. I would think this by far maximizes your chances of winning. Even if you lose 10 yards on 3rd down from the 1, the resulting fg attempt is like statistically the same as from the one yard line or whatever it was.
Last edited:
But then you only have one chance at the kick. If it’s a bad snap/hold, then there is a pretty good chance the game continues into the second overtime period.
If there is a bad/snap hold on third down, the kicking team can simply concentrate on recovering the ball and they get another chance to kick the winning the field goal on 4th down.
I’m certainly not saying every team should kick a FG on third down in that scenario. If you are confident in your offense or have an unreliable kicker, the best bet is to line up and try to score a TD on 2nd or 3rd down. But we are the exact opposite. We have an anemic offense and an offense that is prone to make mistakes. On the other hand, we have had a pretty damn good FG unit this year. For us, it was the right call to put that game into the hands of the FG unit.
East Tennessee Cowboy
Well-known member
how many times a year do teams "have a bad snap/hold" on field goals? its gotta be less than 2%
A bad enough snap/hold that it results in a complete abortion of the kick is <2% of the time in college football. The "unclean operation" rate, which refers to an inaccurate snap or holding error but still allows for a kick to occur, is around 6-8%.
If you look at only "unclean operation" kicks, somewhere between 40-50% of those kicks result in misses. Of course, that rate fluctuates based on the distance of the kick. I'm sure that rate is much lower if you are kicking from inside the 10-year line.
But, once you decide you are going for the field goal, why not give yourself the chance for a do over? Will you need it? Probably not. But imagine what we would all be saying if the snapper sent the ball sailing over our holders head and we went on to lose the game.
There is a legitimate argument that the safer option would have been to run/QB sneak the ball for an attempted TD. For a lot of teams, I do think that would have been the better option. But, for this Wyoming football team specifically, we have been stuffed multiple times at the goal line this season. We had already tried a QB sneak earlier in the game and it looked awful - we got no push on the offensive line at all. There was zero reason for Sawvel to believe that we had a good chance of scoring a TD in that situation.
Wyolie Coyote
Well-known member
We spent 2nd down taking a knee to center it. Why not try to at least punch it in there? IMO there was less risk by going for the TD than kicking the FG. It worked out but not what I would have done.
I think Hughes was looking for a hole as his eyes were looking left side but their LB was sitting in the hole so there was no reason.
My bigger concern is the left side of the line continues to be targeted by teams. They blitz hard. Do they have communication issues and is that why Jenssen rode the pine at LG and we saw Peiteia in?
Wyolie Coyote
Well-known member
I don't think he was trying to find a hole at all, he was centering the ball as he had been instructed to do.
East Tennessee Cowboy
Well-known member
my take exactly. a touchdown 100% wins it.. i mean you can still *miss* the field goal, or it get blocked
Midwest Cowboy
Well-known member
As a Cowboys fan, I've become concerned about our running up the score. So I am good with the field goal.
Bryoming
Well-known member
And a fumble takes you to 2OT. Hughes has fumbled 3 times. Hollman 2 times. Harris 1 time. How about an interception because our play calling is ass? Hughes is tied for 2nd nationally with 7 of those.
The decision to center the ball and take the win isn't a sexy one, but it was the right call.
East Tennessee Cowboy
Well-known member
then every time they get in the red zone they should kick a field goal. harris having 1 fumble in 6 games isn't such a red flag that you can't hand it off to him lol
