*** M.W. vs Bama Nation MNC In-Game ***

bee172 said:
Cmon LSU.. go for the kill shot.. deep ball
Click to expand...

Or better yet. They could start milking the shit out of the clock!!!! This game been out of reach for canes since 17-3, they be wise not to do something stupid and get a key player hurt!! When I have the under all a sudden I’m worried about kids health! Lmao
 
33-3 LSU 3Q 3:51

CeHGUUB.png
 
2daBank said:
Or better yet. They could start milking the shit out of the clock!!!! This game been out of reach for canes since 17-3, they be wise not to do something stupid and get a key player hurt!! When I have the under all a sudden I’m worried about kids health! Lmao
Click to expand...

Yeah I have LSU TT Over 10, need that touchdown lol
 
M.O.T said:
Kill shot was delivered in the second quarter.
Click to expand...

I thought it was in the tunnel before kickoff cause canes been outclasses from the jump!!! Good call by you guys who had LSU!!! Just glad I hedged and got myself a little profit out that parlay I didn’t even expect to make it to canes ml!!! Lol
 
Miami sucks. Totally reliant on opportune turnovers and big plays in a super inefficient offense. I doubt LSU is really that good
 
LSU with lackadaisical efforts in 2H on both sides of the ball, I figured they would keep playing since its game 1 and they wouldn’t let up.. think long thing wrong
 
Mistake not going for 2 after that TD. Won’t matter anyway it still indicative of poor in-game strategy from Richt.
 
raems said:
Mistake not going for 2 after that TD. Won’t matter anyway it still indicative of poor in-game strategy from Richt.
Click to expand...
You have to kick the xpt to get it within 2 scores (16 points). You miss a two point conversion and the lead is 17, 3 scores. They did the right thing.
 
cogenman said:
You have to kick the xpt to get it within 2 scores (16 points). You miss a two point conversion and the lead is 17, 3 scores. They did the right thing.
Click to expand...

All you’re doing is deferring the point at which you find out whether or not you need more possessions.
 
Maybe psychologically it's smarter raems to defer that point because with a missed conversion maybe Miami believes less in itself and doesn't end up making it as close as it would have
 
raems said:
All you’re doing is deferring the point at which you find out whether or not you need more possessions.
Click to expand...
No. You're giving yourself a shot to win knowing you only need two possessions. Three possessions there's not enough time.

What's the difference if they did go for two and make it, they're still down 15.
 
cogenman said:
No. You're giving yourself a shot to win knowing you only need two possessions. Three possessions there's not enough time.

What's the difference if they did go for two and make it, they're still down 15.
Click to expand...

Their win probability is <1% either way but it’s suboptimal decision making. You find out sooner to know sooner whether or not you need an extra possession.

You’d rather know that you need 3 possessions with 9 mins left than finding out you need 2 possessions with 4 mins left when you don’t get the conversion and find yourself down 10.
 
Fwiw I prefer raems route as well but coaches typically worry about psyche of knowing the 3 possessions will deflate the team sooner than later

I'd much rather know whether we're gonna need 3 possessions now than to find out later
 
Now when I need a strip sack fumble TD or pick 6 won’t get it, 1st H didn’t want or need it it happens lol
 
Sweet job snapping the ball at 9 seconds and throwing a 9 yard out Rozier. God these teams and bad quarterbacks can be so stupid sometimes.
 
raems said:
All you’re doing is deferring the point at which you find out whether or not you need more possessions.
Click to expand...

I know you’re in the minority with this opinion, but I 100% agree with you and am shocked this stance is so against our line of thinking.

You play the game differently strategy wise knowing whether you’ll need to score 2 vs. 3 times. That is enormously evaluated.

The other situational spot that is absolutely fucked up by coaches so often is when a team scores late to cut the deficit to one score and there’s very little time left (let’s say 2/3 minutes) but the trailing team has 2 or 3 timeouts.

3 scenarios:

1. You kickoff, hope your defense stops the opponent to go 3 and out. If you’re wrong, you never see the ball again. If you’re right, then you still have to drive the field to score with no TO remaining.

2. You kickoff, you give up a first down and essentially never see the ball again.

3. You onside kick, give yourself a chance to recover it and if you don’t, YOU STILL CAN STOP THEM ON DEFENSE TO GET THE BALL BACK.

Only in example 3 do you allow yourself 2 chances to get the ball as opposed to 1 in examples #1 and #2.

Yet teams consistently, in a sport where offense now dominates EVERYTHING...elect to kick and pray they stop them on D.

Makes zero sense to me why this is the accepted norm.

Another one...again very outside the box thinking here...Pete Carroll did this when he was playing at New England on a Sunday Night Football game a few years back.

You’re up 1, you’re on the road in the 4th quarter and you score a TD. Now you’re up 7. In that exact scenario, Petey went for 2 with 4:30 left on the clock.

If you miss (which Seattle did), you’re still up 7.

IF YOU MAKE IT...You’re up 9...the other team now needs 2 possessions to beat you and they have to alter their strategy significantly because they know they have to score twice in 4:30.

2 point conversion success rate is like 45%...you mean to tell me you trust your defense playing prevent more then hopefully get the win in OT, than getting 2 yards for 2 extra points that essentially salts the game away?

Very outside the box thinking, but football coaches are some of the most senseless blockheads in the world so the mere concept of these kind of scenarios might explode their brains.
 
Another is allowing the opponent to score when up by one with little clock, so you can get the ball back. The opponent needs to be in gimme FG range.
 
Maybe if FSU leads then VT at half. Cause FSU will run tempo with guys used to snails pace maybe they show fatigue. That‘s assuming that they come out executing totally foreign new scheme really well. Turnover in VT secondary scaring me from pick
 
scarf31 said:
I know you’re in the minority with this opinion, but I 100% agree with you and am shocked this stance is so against our line of thinking.

You play the game differently strategy wise knowing whether you’ll need to score 2 vs. 3 times. That is enormously evaluated.

The other situational spot that is absolutely fucked up by coaches so often is when a team scores late to cut the deficit to one score and there’s very little time left (let’s say 2/3 minutes) but the trailing team has 2 or 3 timeouts.

3 scenarios:

1. You kickoff, hope your defense stops the opponent to go 3 and out. If you’re wrong, you never see the ball again. If you’re right, then you still have to drive the field to score with no TO remaining.

2. You kickoff, you give up a first down and essentially never see the ball again.

3. You onside kick, give yourself a chance to recover it and if you don’t, YOU STILL CAN STOP THEM ON DEFENSE TO GET THE BALL BACK.

Only in example 3 do you allow yourself 2 chances to get the ball as opposed to 1 in examples #1 and #2.

Yet teams consistently, in a sport where offense now dominates EVERYTHING...elect to kick and pray they stop them on D.

Makes zero sense to me why this is the accepted norm.

Another one...again very outside the box thinking here...Pete Carroll did this when he was playing at New England on a Sunday Night Football game a few years back.

You’re up 1, you’re on the road in the 4th quarter and you score a TD. Now you’re up 7. In that exact scenario, Petey went for 2 with 4:30 left on the clock.

If you miss (which Seattle did), you’re still up 7.

IF YOU MAKE IT...You’re up 9...the other team now needs 2 possessions to beat you and they have to alter their strategy significantly because they know they have to score twice in 4:30.

2 point conversion success rate is like 45%...you mean to tell me you trust your defense playing prevent more then hopefully get the win in OT, than getting 2 yards for 2 extra points that essentially salts the game away?

Very outside the box thinking, but football coaches are some of the most senseless blockheads in the world so the mere concept of these kind of scenarios might explode their brains.
Click to expand...

Another one is if you will go for 2 for the win and you're down 14, you should actually go for 2 when you cut it to 8. If you miss, then you at least get another 2 pt try to tie.
 
cubsker said:
Another one is if you will go for 2 for the win and you're down 14, you should actually go for 2 when you cut it to 8. If you miss, then you at least get another 2 pt try to tie.
Click to expand...

Exactly, Cub. Always give yourself MORE TIME to strategize how you play the rest of the game based on the result of the 2 pt conversion. Not less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top