forums
Coaching Final UM Fourth Down Play Fourth Quarter
- Thread starter rsa coral gables
- Start date
Advertisement
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2015
- Messages
- 7,889
It could be that Mario wanted the timeout but the QB and OC wanted to go for it, so he leaned on them.
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2014
- Messages
- 14,331
Zone coverage. I'm thinking we had that play in our bag but didn't rep it enough with that personnel set or something. Also guessing we didn't block it up or call the protection correctly because Bell was at "TE" on the right side of the line and should have probably picked up adn chipped the guy that ended up getting to Beck, instead he blocks down into the left and Cici blocks no one and is looking to get out on the screen but isn't anywhere close to the play.
I would assume they didn't expect Fletcher to motion across and would be there to pick up the block or that Bell should have at least made contact/chipped on the free rusher to slow him up and then work up to set the screen and Mauigoa should have blocked the guy Bell ended up blocking.
Last edited:
Cookie917
Recruit
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2017
- Messages
- 3,915
My guess is Mario wanted to call the T.O. (miss me with Mario was trying to catch them off guard and fake snap it like the longest yard or what Castellano did talking to the sideline then a quick clap on 4th down before he threw the INT to Fitz that 1. is too much thinking for mario and 2. too much fluff for his style) Dawson said hold up, we got this play, and based on the defensive alignment I think we go for it. Mario made a real time call to say F it, let em play. If they had out flanked us on the right side and had it covered I think Dawson is saying abort and he is calling T.O. but they knew they had that play and if they got the alignment they wanted let it ride.
Why Bell was on the right side?? That I have no specific idea BUT he was not RT, he was TE. so on the right side of the line you have Coop, FM, and Bell, in that order essentially supposed to seal off that entire side for Toney. Love the play design. Bauman I think was lined up as a LT. So you have your 3 best blockers blocking for your shiftiest WR love the design and trying to put it away. I just wish he had that urgency earlier in the fourth quarter to not let it get to that point. However cant say I disagree, in the NFL, yes kick the FG, but a missed FG lights fire into that place, Yes Davis has been $ but historically he has been bad, a block return is worst case, and why not trust your defense that shut them down for 3 quarters and hoping with a minute left your D can stop them. The penalty on Blount didnt help or there would be even less time.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
- Messages
- 9,280
this is exactly what i thought.
but that's another issue. i want to know what the f@ck happened to NOT USING the timeout when Mario clearly wanted to use it?
Cookie917
Recruit
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2017
- Messages
- 3,915
IDK I feel like Fletch motion was part of the play, Beck specifically calls for him to start his motion and he faked a handoff/jet sweep type look, then just kinda jogs to finish out the play looking back at Toney knowing where the play was supposed to go.
I also dont think Bell was supposed to take that edge rusher. I guess the theory is that DE is left free and hopefully the sweep causes him to crash down or hesitate a second, and even if not we are basically throwing a screen to Toney so should be out before that DE gets home. Toney either started his motion to close to the line (have him back up 1/2 a yard and then start he likely doesnt get bumped to throw off the timing) or just a ***** up by Bell getting blown backward when he is supposed to collapse that side of the line down. FM I agree looked lost but just didnt have anyone to block with that defensive alignment. I could also be completely wrong but the Fletch motion looked intentional and Bell didnt even try to help or look at the DE.
TerragonSix
Itsa Me, 1Gapio!
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2015
- Messages
- 4,396
Personally, I would've kicked the field goal, but I don't hate going for it on 4th and 2. But if there were personnel questions, you have a timeout. Use it.
Get your two yards and knee the ******* ball.
Get your two yards and knee the ******* ball.
blasphemy
Advertisement
Well then we should have run the Bell TE reverse. No way they'd see that coming.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
- Messages
- 9,280
good explanation
EudocimusAlbus
Junior
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2021
- Messages
- 2,184
I noticed that as well, and was curious what Mirabel's impact was on that play. I was imagining Mirabel was dictating the run call he wanted, def not the play that transpired.
Empirical Cane
We are what we repeatedly do.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2018
- Messages
- 45,969
It seems to me "they" don't have a scripted chart. I'm saying it half joking, but half serious.
"They" give the appearance, at very high pressure time constrained moments, that "training" doesn't take over and the fall into muscle memory of tried and true "best percentage" TTPs to produce the best high reliability outcome.
Odd.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Messages
- 9,689
More I watch the more confused I get. Bauman is eligible as the LT because he's not wearing an OL # and he isn't covered up right? #31 on FSU definitely held him. Everyone else on the OL + Giant TE Bell steps to the left on the snap. Makes sense for McCoy because he has to get out wide enough to block the end. Coop and Brockermeyer double team #6. Ok. Cici blocks air, looks perplexed, and definitely doesn't think it's his job to get out in front of Toney and block for him. Maybe his job was to block the LBer #28 if he blitzed? Best I can tell is that the end was left unblocked by design, but if the plan was to get him to crash down on Fletcher, then he would have run right into Toney too. (see pic)
Toney runs into Bell because he had to get closer to the 25 yard line to avoid running into #8, who didn't crash down. Checked again am wrong here, the end is clear of Toney before Toney runs into Bell.
He runs into Bell cause Bell is pushed back as others pointed out. But Bell gets pushed back because the block he's asked to make is really tough (assuming he did what he was supposed to do) he steps to his left then engages with the DT and has to reach back to do so, but the DT has leverage to Bell's right shoulder and he gets pushed back. I think the ball was supposed to be thrown behind the LOS. Not sure why the plan wasn't for Bell to engage the DT and try to drive him towards the goal line. Something seems off. If #28 didn't follow Fletcher for no reason (they had #11 in zone near the sideline) he would have had a great chance to pick off the moon ball and there was no one to stop him.
It's a really neat play design, as both Toney and Bauman are open, but the way we sent Toney across the formation after the snap I don't see how heeither doesn't get run over by the end (if #8 crashes) or has to avoid the end like he did when he didn't crash. Timing had to be off in some way or Bell was supposed to block the end and Cici the DT. Think former more likely.
edited: to correct my wrong impression
He runs into Bell cause Bell is pushed back as others pointed out. But Bell gets pushed back because the block he's asked to make is really tough (assuming he did what he was supposed to do) he steps to his left then engages with the DT and has to reach back to do so, but the DT has leverage to Bell's right shoulder and he gets pushed back. I think the ball was supposed to be thrown behind the LOS. Not sure why the plan wasn't for Bell to engage the DT and try to drive him towards the goal line. Something seems off. If #28 didn't follow Fletcher for no reason (they had #11 in zone near the sideline) he would have had a great chance to pick off the moon ball and there was no one to stop him.
It's a really neat play design, as both Toney and Bauman are open, but the way we sent Toney across the formation after the snap I don't see how he
edited: to correct my wrong impression
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2012
- Messages
- 45,060
This is my gripe . We should’ve kicked the fg making it 31-19. I was already annoyed by the fourth quarter and this play made me loco.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
- Messages
- 9,280
Advertisement
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2014
- Messages
- 22,280
Going for it was the better decision.
Converting wins the game outright.
Not converting, it’s still a 2 score game. Kicking the FG is still a 2 score game.
I posted the win prob in the original discussion about it, but it’s a toss up call with slight edge favoring go for it.
I’m just gunna put it like this. When it’s close and/or when it slightly leans as a go situation and we go for it, I’m crediting Mario. The very last thing I want is for him to play conservatively with the decisions of going for it AND all the play calls to severely slow the game and remove any/all momentum..
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2012
- Messages
- 45,060
By the chart it would be fg making it 31-19 . If they score and go for two it’s now 31-27. They still need a TD to win. Not kicking it and not converting makes it 28-19 . A TD and XP wins it with a fg. if converting onside. On top of that we played it real close with the onside’s. The coaches chart should’ve been kick the fg. Lastly they have a kicker with a big leg.
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2014
- Messages
- 22,280
No it isn’t.
Account ring for the situation with time, down and distance, timeouts, and spread&overunder, it’s a toss up leaned towards go for it. It’s because the win% for failing to convert and making a FG is 99% either way. But converting makes it 100% win%. Obviously a little better win prob to kick FG than fail obvious, but the win prob gain from converting is worth the marginal risk. Especially because making a FG especially college isn’t a guarantee. You’re not even actually choosing between not converting and making a FG. You’re choosing sacrificing potentially ending the game outright with just opportunity to make a FG to make it ever so slightly more difficult to lose
OrangeBowlMagic
CEO
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2014
- Messages
- 19,754
Imagine this board had Mario kicked a FG to make a 2 score game…wait for it…a 2 score game, and it got blocked. DMoney would own an island by now.