Started By
Message
re: Other CFB Games: Bye Week Edition
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:23 pm to jangalang
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:23 pm to jangalang
quote:As did I... and eh it was close. Needed to burn 1:36 in two plays. Without the throw there was zero reason to run the ball.
I actually did watch the game. And yes, they could still run the clock out. Just barely.
I bet you feel dumb.
1
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:28 pm to jangalang
quote:
Thanks for finally catching up. You dont even know what you are talking about half the time
So in summary what’s your argument here?
Cristobal was right calling run plays instead of kneeing the ball? Saban was wrong to run the ball after the incompletion?
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:34 pm to ALhunter
quote:
As did I... and eh it was close. Needed to burn 1:36 in two plays. Without the throw there was zero reason to run the ball.
Either way. they were safely running the ball even before that first down pass as well. He didnt audible from QB Kneel to attempted pass.
They werent in victory formation. All this hand wringing from the vantage point of hindsight is normal from this bunch. Stick around
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:39 pm to Weagle25
quote:
Cristobal was right calling run plays instead of kneeing the ball?
Yeah against Stanford he was right. He is only wrong for GT because it came back to bite him. I dont blame him running the ball out at all. RBs are supposed to kill the clock. If they cant hold onto the ball they need to be off the field.
quote:
Saban was wrong to run the ball after the incompletion?
Nope. See above. But that incompletion isnt why he started running.
This post was edited on 10/8/23 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:41 pm to jangalang
quote:
He is only wrong for GT because it came back to bite him. I dont blame him running the ball out at all. RBs are supposed to kill the clock. If they cant hold onto the ball they need to be off the field.
quote:
Weasel, please tell me you don't actually think he audibled from QB kneel to pass
Go fricking read you moron.
This post was edited on 10/8/23 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:42 pm to Weagle25
Weasel, please dont tell me you actually think he audibled from QB kneel to pass
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:52 pm to Weagle25
quote:
Go fricking read you moron.
So I guess you are a "fricking moron" that thinks Milroe checked out of QB knee (outside of victory formation )to pass
Thus forcing Saban to run the rest of the clock out by run plays. (amirite)
Otherwise, one would think he failed to kneel just like Cristobal.
So gullible
This post was edited on 10/8/23 at 12:54 pm
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:54 pm to jangalang
quote:
So I guess you are a "fricking moron" that thinks Milroe checked out of QB knee (outside of victory formation )to pass Thus forcing Saban to run the rest of the clock out by run plays. (amirite) Otherwise, one would think he failed to kneel just like Cristobal.
Go re-read.
Posted on 10/8/23 at 12:55 pm to Weagle25
quote:
Go re-read.
You should try it.
You are the fricktard that tried to pretend like Bama couldn't run out the clock.
AKA you didnt watch the game and dont know what the hell you are talking about.
This post was edited on 10/8/23 at 12:58 pm
Posted on 10/8/23 at 1:02 pm to jangalang
quote:
You are the fricktard that tried to pretend like Bama couldn't run out the clock.
They couldn’t.
You defended Crisotbal’s decision to run the ball. I’m done here. Job is complete
Posted on 10/8/23 at 1:05 pm to Weagle25
quote:
They couldn’t.
Yet they did.
quote:
You defended Crisotbal’s decision to run the ball. I’m done here. Job is complete
Saban was going to run the ball. Unless you really think Milroe checked from QB kneel to pass
Posted on 10/8/23 at 1:49 pm to jangalang
quote:even though it didn’t work out, this is correct
Yeah against Stanford he was right.
needed the first down to be able to run out the clock, lost the ball reaching for it
quote:this is blatantly wrong even if it didn’t come back to bite him
He is only wrong for GT because it came back to bite him.
3rd down, :42 seconds, no timeouts for GT, absolutely no reason whatsoever for the ball to leave the QBs hands after the snap
completely indefensible playcall, whether by Duckman, his OC, or Van Dyke
Posted on 10/8/23 at 2:00 pm to FearlessFreep
quote:
his is blatantly wrong even if it didn’t come back to bite him 3rd down, :42 seconds, no timeouts for GT, absolutely no reason whatsoever for the ball to leave the QBs hands after the snap completely indefensible playcall, whether by Duckman, his OC, or Van Dyke
I just cant find myself getting upset about it. His back shouldn't have fumbled.
Ive seen Kiffin do shite way more stupid than this. If he has a philosophy that prevents him from kneeling then im all for it.
Cant play scared. If the back never fumbled we would never know about this and Miami would be undefeated. If this is his thing because he is a former OL then Miami has to jump aboard.
This post was edited on 10/8/23 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 10/8/23 at 3:33 pm to jangalang
quote:cant play stupid either
Cant play scared
throwing away a 99.999% chance at victory for absolutely nothing is stupid, and that’s exactly what they did
Posted on 10/8/23 at 3:40 pm to FearlessFreep
quote:
cant play stupid either throwing away a 99.999% chance at victory for absolutely nothing is stupid, and that’s exactly what they did
How about everyone just do their job like they had done for the other 59 minutes? Fumbles can happen in the victory formation as well.
You're welcome:
LINK
This post was edited on 10/8/23 at 3:45 pm
Posted on 10/8/23 at 3:46 pm to jangalang
just went back and rewatched the video Lanier posted - the snap was at :33 seconds
at that point if the QB falls down the game ends with a Miami victory
unless the center hikes it on the hut hut instead of the hut hut hut, there is literally an .00001 % chance that Vand Dyke can’t immediately go to his knees and win the game
fumbles happen at anytime, but the odds increase significantly once the ball changes hands, and they increase even more once contact with the defense is initiated
what possible advantage could they have gained by dramatically increasing the odds of a turnover?
ETA: saw your link, only had to go back 13 years to find an example, good job
at that point if the QB falls down the game ends with a Miami victory
unless the center hikes it on the hut hut instead of the hut hut hut, there is literally an .00001 % chance that Vand Dyke can’t immediately go to his knees and win the game
fumbles happen at anytime, but the odds increase significantly once the ball changes hands, and they increase even more once contact with the defense is initiated
what possible advantage could they have gained by dramatically increasing the odds of a turnover?
ETA: saw your link, only had to go back 13 years to find an example, good job
This post was edited on 10/8/23 at 3:49 pm
Posted on 10/8/23 at 3:54 pm to FearlessFreep
quote:
ETA: saw your link, only had to go back 13 years to find an example, good job
I highly doubt the kneeling shite is anything other than a statistical anomaly. Miami hasn't kneeled once this year. If this was his thing and he kept winning then you just ride with it.
You think its fun riding with Bruce's no-timeout strategy?
Ive also seen Kiffin run a 4th and 3 from his own redzone with JJ Pegues. Coaches have quirks.
Posted on 10/8/23 at 3:59 pm to jangalang
Why are we arguing. Milroe was stupid for throwing the ball.
Whoever was in charge for the play call or whatever in the Miami game was stupid.
Both situations just kneel and run out the clock
Whoever was in charge for the play call or whatever in the Miami game was stupid.
Both situations just kneel and run out the clock
Posted on 10/8/23 at 4:23 pm to CorchJay
You do realize bama had every intention of running all three plays right?
Whats the difference in that and Miami?
One turned it over; one didn't.
Whats the difference in that and Miami?
One turned it over; one didn't.
This post was edited on 10/8/23 at 4:45 pm
Page 4 of 5
Latest Auburn News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News