-
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
Midwest Cowboy
Well-known member
I don't know the number of coaches but to me it was a sign of weakness and uncertainty. And I am embarrassed for Harris and Holman. And honestly, I am tired of UW's baseball scores. Get some points on the board.
I heard something last week that sticks with me. No one expects Wyoming (or any Group team) to challenge for a national title. The best we can hope for from here onward is to be...relevant. Just be relevant and try to put a decent, disciplined squad on the field.
I actually think that is exactly what Bohl did. He brought back relevancy if not superiority or dominance. Being afraid to run the ball from the 1 yard line in OT is submission to the fact...UW is inferior and largely irrelevant.
An earlier sneak was stuffed for no gain at all. You want to at least get the ball centered as kicking a field goal from either hash on 4th down means a greater angle for the kick as you get closer. In any case, it was nice to win one even if it increases the chances we are stuck with Sawvel for an another season.
WyomingAgJ
Well-known member
Except it was 2nd down when we centered it. There was another down to center it after that.
It was clear sawvel had no faith in the offense to get a td. He used 2nd down to center and 3rd down to kick it in case there was a bad snap to still have 4th down to kick it.
I would have done a handoff to holman going to the left side of the line on 2nd down. If he scores game is over. If he doesn't it is probably pretty well centered then and you still kick it on 3rd in case of a bad snap where then you still have 4th down.
No complaints from me on the win, I have just never seen a coach prefer his chances on a kick over going for a td as usually going for a td is a "safer" option. It told me sawvel has zero faith in this offense or their ability to score as he decided his best chance to score was to kick once we had 2nd and 1 from the 1
Midwest Cowboy
Well-known member
And expect (i.e. demand) that your kicker can kick from either hash mark...like every other team in the FBS.
You guys are acting like we are an average team with an average offense. We are a bad team with a historically anemic offense. I'm not sure why any of you have confidence in our offense to get into the endzone without fucking something up.
In reality, Sawvel's decision speaks to just how bad our offense is. 1st and goal at the 2-yard line and we cannot even trust our offense to punch it in. I mean, we were in that exact scenario earlier in the game and came away empty handed while turning the ball over on downs. Not even the head coach, who is fighting for his job, trusts our offense.
LanderPoke
Well-known member
Why even bother to get any yards then. Why not kick the fg on the very first play of OT? By this logic sawvel did the wrong thing by trying to score a TD at all
East Tennessee Cowboy
Well-known member
the offense is horrid but his decision to do that shows just how bad he is too
East Tennessee Cowboy
Well-known member
I said the exact same thing a few posts earlier. exactly
The answer to this is pretty obvious. If you kick a field goal on the first play of OT, it is going to be roughly a 42-43 yard field goal. Obviously, for every yard you gain, the FG attempt becomes shorter. There is a pretty linear improvement in successful FG rate as you get closer and closer to the end zone.
That's why you try to gain yards.
East Tennessee Cowboy
Well-known member
no shit. and when you get to the 1 you try and score a touchdown. you don't play it safe to line up for a field goal. let your nuts hang (talking to jay) and miss me with the "well we didn't score at the 1 earlier" so what? RB dives, screens, etc don't work 100% of the time, do you stop calling those too?
Down 3 sure but only needing a fg get the win.
You guys must not be stats guys.
Let me put it this way. On average, college teams in first and goal at the opponents 2-yard line will come away with no points about 6.5% of the time. I would argue that our chance of coming away with no points is actually higher than that given our offense is much worse than average. On average, a field goal inside the 5-yard line is made about 98.6% of the time in college football. We also have a kicker who has not missed a single FG or extra point the entire season.
So, which do you take if you are Sawvel? The 6.5% chance of coming away with no points and heading to 2OT on the road or the 1.4% chance of missing the field goal?
East Tennessee Cowboy
Well-known member
If I have the ball at the 2, first and goal, my mind is to get in the end zone and end it and not leave it in the hands of a college kicker. jesus christ this program has really broke your brain
Then you are choosing the greater chance of losing the game. The stats are pretty clear on that.
I'm not sure what else I can say. To each their own, I guess.
WyomingAgJ
Well-known member
Where can you look up stats like this? I would be interested in some other ones too.
It seems like if this is the case then many more coaches should be calling those plays the same way as sawvel did in overtime and even during regulation, but at least for me that's the first time I've seen a coach center the ball on 2nd and 1 from the 1 rather than going for a td. Kicking it on 3rd down happens all the time at end of games and in ot, I've just never seen a coach burn 2nd down in favor of leaving the pressure on the kicker. Again I agree it just shows that sawvel has zero trust in the offense at all.
I mainly use CollegeFootballData.com and cfbstats.com
Pretty comprehensive data in there. If you have any stats background, it isn't too difficult to calculate more advanced stats if you have a little time.
laxwyo
Well-known member
If he shanks it or gets blocked, i guarantee everyone who says the kick was the correct call would be screaming to high heaven. I'd be curious to know the math. I have a hard time believing that trying to punch it into the endzone, failing and then kicking the fg is worse statistically. It's literally two chances, one being the same thing that we ended up doing.
laxwyo
Well-known member
that 6.5% would include missed fgs too unless theres 100% go for it rate on 4th down. it also doesn't include going for it on 3rd down and then kicking the fg. I still say that it's impossible for a fg on 3rd down to have a higher percentage than taking an extra play going for it on 3rd down and then kicking the fg from the same place on 4th. You don't need to be a statistics man if you have common sense. I think if our Long Snapper had poor snapping %, that would change it a bit and perhaps having two snaps would be warranted, but then again poor snapping usually pushes team to go for it. I can't recall a bad snap yet this year but I may be wrong. That being said, it worked out for Sawvel and I'm happy it did, but we're having fun debating what's actually the right call. Our shitty offense probably shifted this calculation a lot in his mind.
Last edited:
