can we revisit that fourth down decision?

[NUCat320]

I'm not brash/stupid enough to say that the decision to kick rather than go for it cost the game, but I will say that it was a clear indication that NU was trying to keep it interesting, and not doing everything it could to win the game. It was already 14-0, and NU doesn't exactly light it up, and Michigan does shut teams down. NU was going to need a huge offensive effort, even at that point.

The decision to kick was cowardly. Nu was on what would basically be the only drive of the game, with Thorson hitting a guy in a tight sideline spot on second down, and with Vault popping one, and with NU converting third and long (was it Carr?) even after getting behind the chains on that god-awful option play on the first down of the drive. Honestly, it was among the best drives of the season, especially considering the competition and game situation and atmosphere.

What particularly struck me, though, is that going for it wasn't even in the consideration set. JJ was *close* on third down. It had to be six inches or less, 'request the chains' distance. But when BTN cut to Fitz for the 'coach in consternation' shot, his three fingers were thrust in the air like a victory celebration. It feels like a concession. You've got timeouts. It's the first half. Think about the game situation and be aggressive.

Did you know that NU was 1/1 on fourth down in each of the previous P5 wins? As much as missing a fourth down (or a field goal attempt) is a momentum killer, making it is a boost and a bit of excitement. It was a great opportunity to gain momentum, and NU chose to give michigan a small victory instead.

The missed kick was bad. Not going for it was far worse.

Would a successful fourth down have led to anything more than a kick attempt four plays later? I'm not sure. But I can comfortably say that the game was in the books, if not officially, when Michigan scored about six plays later.

 

[FeralFelidae]

Agreed. I didn't understand it. Half a yard to go, and the field goal at 42 yards wasn't exactly a chip shot, not a guaranteed 3 points.

7 yards or so closer, the FG is easier, so I can understand getting some points on the board, just to get Michigan out of the "shut-out" mentality. But come on. A QB sneak would pick up half a yard. I just don't understand the call, given the location on the field.

 

[Katatonic]

Posters from other boards have also commented on Fitz's inclination to go into his shell.

 

[NJCat83588]

I'm not brash/stupid enough to say that the decision to kick rather than go for it cost the game, but I will say that it was a clear indication that NU was trying to keep it interesting, and not doing everything it could to win the game. It was already 14-0, and NU doesn't exactly light it up, and Michigan does shut teams down. NU was going to need a huge offensive effort, even at that point.

The decision to kick was cowardly. Nu was on what would basically be the only drive of the game, with Thorson hitting a guy in a tight sideline spot on second down, and with Vault popping one, and with NU converting third and long (was it Carr?) even after getting bebind the chains on that god-awful option play on the first down of the drive. Honestly, it was among the best drives of the season, especially considering the competition and game situation and atmosphere.

What particilarly struck me, though, is that going for it wasn't even in the consideration set. JJ was *close* on third down. It had to be six inches or less, 'request the chains' distance. But when BTN cut to Fitz for the 'coach in consternation' shot, his three fingers were thrust in the air like a victory celebration. It feels like a concession. You've got timeouts. It's the first half. Think about the game situation and be aggressive.

Did you know that NU was 1/1 on fourth down in each of the previous P5 wins? As much as missing a fourth down (or a field goal attempt) is a momentum killer, making it is a boost and a bit of excitement. It was a great opportunity to gain momentum, and NU chose to give michigan a small victory instead.

The missed kick was bad. Not going for it was far worse.

Would a successful fourth down have led to anything more than a kick attempt four plays later? I'm not sure. But I can comfortably say that the game was in the books, if not officially, when Michigan scored about six plays later.

In the press conference yesterday, Pat was asked why go for three. His explanation was they needed something positive to shift the momentum. He said get the FG, it's 14-3, then make a stop, get a "score" and it's 14-10 and it's anyones ballgame. Whether or not you agree, that was what he said he was thinking.

 

[FeralFelidae]

In the press conference yesterday, Pat was asked why go for three. His explanation was they needed something positive to shift the momentum. He said get the FG, it's 14-3, then make a stop, get a "score" and it's 14-10 and it's anyones ballgame. Whether or not you agree, that was what he said he was thinking.

But first you have to "get" the 3. A 42-yard FG isn't a chip shot. The odds were better to sneak it for half a yard for a first down.

 

[mybrotha]

I can see both sides of that argument for sure. I think that once Fitz starts thinking like he really has a good team like this year he goes into conservative mode. Early in the year he was more aggressive when our team was more up in the air as to its abilities. Let's see how he plays it this week.

 

[Turk]

In the press conference yesterday, Pat was asked why go for three. His explanation was they needed something positive to shift the momentum. He said get the FG, it's 14-3, then make a stop, get a "score" and it's 14-10 and it's anyones ballgame. Whether or not you agree, that was what he said he was thinking.

The problem was that he made the decision to go for 3 after second down. On 3rd and two....10 michigan defenders were within two yards stacked. And we ran it on a 21 dive. We gave up before the game started.

 

[JournCat]

But first you have to "get" the 3. A 42-yard FG isn't a chip shot. The odds were better to sneak it for half a yard for a first down.

The way our line played, a 4th-down sneak was far from a given in that game. But I otherwise agree: At 35 yards, you kick the FG. At 40 or more with any NU kicker not named Valenzisi or Budzien, you go.

 

[iskaboo]

What would have we been saying if we went for it and Thorson got stuffed? Probably that we should have gone for 3 because Mitchell is such a good kicker (which he is).

 

[NUCat320]

What would have we been saying if we went for it and Thorson got stuffed? Probably that we should have gone for 3 because Mitchell is such a good kicker (which he is).

I promise you I would not. I believe in going for fourth down basically in all situations outside the 40, after a first down has been achieved.

 

[hoosboot]

I promise you I would not. I believe in going for fourth down basically in all situations outside the 40, after a first down has been achieved.

Do you mean inside the 40?

 

[NUCat320]

Do you mean inside the 40?

No. I mean 60 yards from the target end zone or better. Coach Walker called between the 40s 'the alumni zone'. Fourth and 1 should be an easy down. As the Duke game showed, it's also a potential big play because of the potential for 9 in the box sellout defense.

 

[thewildcat2011]

No need to revisit. It was bad, but I think made only so by the decision on 3rd.

 

[Wrestlerneverdiesasacatfan]

Stupid decision! I turned the game off in the third quarter when we ran the ball several times while down 28! Heck,MSU beat us when we were up by thirty. Still,no worries! We need to beat Iowa.

 

[Sheffielder]

What would have we been saying if we went for it and Thorson got stuffed? Probably that we should have gone for 3 because Mitchell is such a good kicker (which he is).

This. Exactly this. I criticize the coaching a lot but I thought this was a very reasonable choice, even though it was unsuccessful. Going into the game, Michigan's run defense was stellar. I like the idea of going for it on 4th and 1, but it would have been just as dehumanizing if not more if we had gone for it, failed, and then Michigan mounted another scoring drive afterwards. It made good sense to try to get points on the board...if only it had worked.

 

[phatcat]

The problem was that he made the decision to go for 3 after second down. On 3rd and two....10 michigan defenders were within two yards stacked. And we ran it on a 21 dive. We gave up before the game started.

Run what on third down then? Not a wide run/option. A pass? To which open receiver? Different play to JJ? He had a 15 yard run and then averaged less than 1 yard per carry after than.

It isn't as if we had plays that were working all day.

I wanted to go for it as well, but to keep up this flagellation of the third down play is unproductive.

God I hope the team is over this game and focusing on Ioa and not all this handwringing. please

 

[NJCat83588]

[QUOTE="phatcat, post: 114938, member: 230"

God I hope the team is over this game and focusing on Ioa and not all this handwringing. please[/QUOTE]

Listen to todays Huddlecast by CJ and TJ. They said one thing the staff is good at (not the only thing!) is focusing on the week ahead. They said after the team watch the video of the previous opponent they immediately turn to game planning for the week ahead. We'll see come Saturday if they were able to "flush it".

http://www.huddlecasts.com/#!northwestern-huddle/cucz

 

[Mr. Stupor]

I'm not brash/stupid enough to say that the decision to kick rather than go for it cost the game, but I will say that it was a clear indication that NU was trying to keep it interesting, and not doing everything it could to win the game. It was already 14-0, and NU doesn't exactly light it up, and Michigan does shut teams down. NU was going to need a huge offensive effort, even at that point.

The decision to kick was cowardly. Nu was on what would basically be the only drive of the game, with Thorson hitting a guy in a tight sideline spot on second down, and with Vault popping one, and with NU converting third and long (was it Carr?) even after getting behind the chains on that god-awful option play on the first down of the drive. Honestly, it was among the best drives of the season, especially considering the competition and game situation and atmosphere.

What particularly struck me, though, is that going for it wasn't even in the consideration set. JJ was *close* on third down. It had to be six inches or less, 'request the chains' distance. But when BTN cut to Fitz for the 'coach in consternation' shot, his three fingers were thrust in the air like a victory celebration. It feels like a concession. You've got timeouts. It's the first half. Think about the game situation and be aggressive.

Did you know that NU was 1/1 on fourth down in each of the previous P5 wins? As much as missing a fourth down (or a field goal attempt) is a momentum killer, making it is a boost and a bit of excitement. It was a great opportunity to gain momentum, and NU chose to give michigan a small victory instead.

The missed kick was bad. Not going for it was far worse.

Would a successful fourth down have led to anything more than a kick attempt four plays later? I'm not sure. But I can comfortably say that the game was in the books, if not officially, when Michigan scored about six plays later.

One of the things that having a great defense that you TRUST is that it lets you go for 4th downs like that on the opponent's 25 without worrying that you're going to give up points.

Fitz obviously had NO confidence in the defense.

And he clearly didn't have any confidence in the offense whe he's running to the middle to set up a FG on 3rd and 2 a and then kicking on 4th and 1.

The only confidence he showed with that decision was in Mitchell. And he was wrong on that, too!!

A lousy and cowardly decision all around. And with that turtle-job by Fitz, the whole team caved in. Sad. And all Fitz's doing - because all his talk about trust and faith, etc. is just a line of crap, to be honest.

He plays the least trusting brand of football I think I've ever seen! And that's the truth!

 

[Just Gary]

[QUOTE="phatcat, post: 114938, member: 230"

God I hope the team is over this game and focusing on Ioa and not all this handwringing. please

Listen to todays Huddlecast by CJ and TJ. They said one thing the staff is good at (not the only thing!) is focusing on the week ahead. They said after the team watch the video of the previous opponent they immediately turn to game planning for the week ahead. We'll see come Saturday if they were able to "flush it".

http://www.huddlecasts.com/#!northwestern-huddle/cucz[/QUOTE]

I thought it was the right decision at the time. Michigan has pitched shutouts and were up 14-0 and stuffed the runner on 3rd and 2. If they would have stuffed us again on 4th and 1 it would be even more demoralizing and they were hot. The kid had plenty of leg but missed it right. I do think that 14-3 would have changed the momentum at the time. Odds were better at making the FG at that time then making the 4 and 1. That is just the plain truth. Could McCall have pulled the most brilliant play out of his book and it would have worked? Maybe. But what are the odds. I would have felt differently if it was 21-0 but at 14-0, the game was still in question and didn't need heroics.

 

[Deeringfish]

One of the things that having a great defense that you TRUST is that it lets you go for 4th downs like that on the opponent's 25 without worrying that you're going to give up points.

Fitz obviously had NO confidence in the defense.

And he clearly didn't have any confidence in the offense whe he's running to the middle to set up a FG on 3rd and 2 a and then kicking on 4th and 1.

The only confidence he showed with that decision was in Mitchell. And he was wrong on that, too!!

A lousy and cowardly decision all around. And with that turtle-job by Fitz, the whole team caved in. Sad. And all Fitz's doing - because all his talk about trust and faith, etc. is just a line of crap, to be honest.

He plays the least trusting brand of football I think I've ever seen! And that's the truth!

"Cowardly?" That is stupid. Lousy decision sure. But don't be a jerk.

 

[Turk]

Run what on third down then? Not a wide run/option. A pass? To which open receiver? Different play to JJ? He had a 15 yard run and then averaged less than 1 yard per carry after than.

It isn't as if we had plays that were working all day.

I wanted to go for it as well, but to keep up this flagellation of the third down play is unproductive.

God I hope the team is over this game and focusing on Ioa and not all this handwringing. please

Something would havd offered better chances. Watch that play. Mich had 3 deep pinned over center and clearly knew it was coming. Predictability killed us. I just hope the team learned and wiped before they flushed it. Im not going to ryan field to see a reoeat this week.

 

[NUCat320]

Listen to todays Huddlecast by CJ and TJ. They said one thing the staff is good at (not the only thing!) is focusing on the week ahead. They said after the team watch the video of the previous opponent they immediately turn to game planning for the week ahead. We'll see come Saturday if they were able to "flush it".

http://www.huddlecasts.com/#!northwestern-huddle/cucz

I thought it was the right decision at the time. Michigan has pitched shutouts and were up 14-0 and stuffed the runner on 3rd and 2. If they would have stuffed us again on 4th and 1 it would be even more demoralizing and they were hot. The kid had plenty of leg but missed it right. I do think that 14-3 would have changed the momentum at the time. Odds were better at making the FG at that time then making the 4 and 1. That is just the plain truth. Could McCall have pulled the most brilliant play out of his book and it would have worked? Maybe. But what are the odds. I would have felt differently if it was 21-0 but at 14-0, the game was still in question and didn't need heroics.[/QUOTE]
For a team that can't score against a team that can't be scored upon, you've got to take reasonable risks when the opportunity is there. There was no guarantee that nu would penetrate that deep again (did they?), so you've got to show confidence and take your shot.

If the tables were turned (oh, if the tables had been turned!), what do you honestly tbink Harbaugh would have done?

I think he would have played with the same attitude that he had when his Stanford team beat USC as a 40 point underdog.

 

[MRCat95]

Listen to todays Huddlecast by CJ and TJ. They said one thing the staff is good at (not the only thing!) is focusing on the week ahead. They said after the team watch the video of the previous opponent they immediately turn to game planning for the week ahead. We'll see come Saturday if they were able to "flush it".

http://www.huddlecasts.com/#!northwestern-huddle/cucz

I thought it was the right decision at the time. Michigan has pitched shutouts and were up 14-0 and stuffed the runner on 3rd and 2. If they would have stuffed us again on 4th and 1 it would be even more demoralizing and they were hot. The kid had plenty of leg but missed it right. I do think that 14-3 would have changed the momentum at the time. Odds were better at making the FG at that time then making the 4 and 1. That is just the plain truth. Could McCall have pulled the most brilliant play out of his book and it would have worked? Maybe. But what are the odds. I would have felt differently if it was 21-0 but at 14-0, the game was still in question and didn't need heroics.

We got some movement up front and gained 1.5 yards on that 3rd and 2. It was 4th and 0.5 yards, and with a big athletic QB and our most physical OL Park at Center, I'd have gone for it there with a QB sneak. Converting a 4th and 0.5 has a higher probability of success than a 42 yard field goal.

With UM up 14-0 with that great defense, opportunities to make up the scoring gap would be few and far between, and it was now or never. 4th and 1.5 or 2 is a different story than 4th and 0.5. If you can't convert a 4th and 0.5, you don't deserve to win anyway IMO.

Again, it's a different story if the score is 0-0 or 7-0 or if you're playing against an opponent with a lesser defense (or perhaps at home). At 14-0 with these set of circumstances, I think the premium had to be to get it back to a 1 score game and gain big momentum (while shutting that big crowd up a bit).

By the way, Christian Jones was knocked out of bounds 1 yard shy of the marker on his 2nd down catch, but the refs spotted it 2 yards shy of the marker. I think the coaches thought it was 3rd and 1 rather than 2 when they called the power play on 3rd down.

 

[Gladeskat]

[QUOTE="phatcat, post: 114938, member: 230"

God I hope the team is over this game and focusing on Ioa and not all this handwringing. please

Listen to todays Huddlecast by CJ and TJ. They said one thing the staff is good at (not the only thing!) is focusing on the week ahead. They said after the team watch the video of the previous opponent they immediately turn to game planning for the week ahead. We'll see come Saturday if they were able to "flush it".

http://www.huddlecasts.com/#!northwestern-huddle/cucz[/QUOTE]

That's what most teams do in their first meeting after a game...watch the game film and then pass out the scouting report and discuss the next opponent.

 

[NUCat320]

We got some movement up front and gained 1.5 yards on that 3rd and 2. It was 4th and 0.5 yards, and with a big athletic QB and our most physical OL Park at Center, I'd have gone for it there with a QB sneak. Converting a 4th and 0.5 has a higher probability of success than a 42 yard field goal.

With UM up 14-0 with that great defense, opportunities to make up the scoring gap would be few and far between, and it was now or never. 4th and 1.5 or 2 is a different story than 4th and 0.5. If you can't convert a 4th and 0.5, you don't deserve to win anyway IMO.

Again, it's a different story if the score is 0-0 or 7-0 or if you're playing against an opponent with a lesser defense (or perhaps at home). At 14-0 with these set of circumstances, I think the premium had to be to get it back to a 1 score game and gain big momentum (while shutting that big crowd up a bit).

By the way, Christian Jones was knocked out of bounds 1 yard shy of the marker on his 2nd down catch, but the refs spotted it 2 yards shy of the marker. I think the coaches thought it was 3rd and 1 rather than 2 when they called the power play on 3rd down.

That's my point, MR. The staff seemed to be so convinced that they needed the kick that they didn't consider that a) they were really, really close to the sticks, and b) Michigan's strength on defense required nu to take a few more risks when they had the chance.

Even if you're generally against aggressive fourth down decisions, this one seemed like a hafta-go situation.

 

[Mr. Stupor]

Yes, cowardly. Just like the rugby punting. Just like kick returners under orders not to return kick offs and lead blockers under orders to turn around and wave frantically and put returners under orders to run away from the ball. Cowardly. Yes.

 

[Turk]

We got some movement up front and gained 1.5 yards on that 3rd and 2. It was 4th and 0.5 yards, and with a big athletic QB and our most physical OL Park at Center, I'd have gone for it there with a QB sneak. Converting a 4th and 0.5 has a higher probability of success than a 42 yard field goal.

With UM up 14-0 with that great defense, opportunities to make up the scoring gap would be few and far between, and it was now or never. 4th and 1.5 or 2 is a different story than 4th and 0.5. If you can't convert a 4th and 0.5, you don't deserve to win anyway IMO.

Again, it's a different story if the score is 0-0 or 7-0 or if you're playing against an opponent with a lesser defense (or perhaps at home). At 14-0 with these set of circumstances, I think the premium had to be to get it back to a 1 score game and gain big momentum (while shutting that big crowd up a bit).

By the way, Christian Jones was knocked out of bounds 1 yard shy of the marker on his 2nd down catch, but the refs spotted it 2 yards shy of the marker. I think the coaches thought it was 3rd and 1 rather than 2 when they called the power play on 3rd down.

That may have explained the 3rd down call, which was disappointing to me. But when it became 4th down i would have done what fitz did. Relying on mitchell at 42 is reasonable and chances are its good.
All week we heard about michigan and shutouts so the points would have tightened the score plus taken a little mental steam away from michigan imo. I can see your point but it looked more than a half yard, but going for the fg wasnt necessarily a bad call either.

 

[Gladeskat]

Yes, cowardly. Just like the rugby punting. Just like kick returners under orders not to return kick offs and lead blockers under orders to turn around and wave frantically and put returners under orders to run away from the ball. Cowardly. Yes.

Wait. How is rugby punting cowardly?