- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Would you rather be aggressive and lose or play not to lose and lose
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:46 am
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:46 am
After last night Super Bowl, it got me thinking as to which way I would want my team to lose a close game. Take these two scenarios:
LSU vs. BAMA 2012
About 2 minutes left in the game, LSU driving in BAMA territory with Mett, Odell, Landry. After picking up a 1st down, LSU goes conservative and plays not to lose. They try to run out the clock with 3 runs up the middle and off tackle. Not one pass attempted even though just 1 more 1st down seals the game.
Last night, Seattle was playing aggressive to win and threw the interception and lost the game.
My preference is to be aggressive. I would have rather LSU try to keep the ball away from BAMA by being aggressive than playing conservative and not to lose. Also, I hate prevent defense at the end of games. If LSU had been aggressive and threw an interception, I could have lived with that much better than the way that game had ended.
LSU vs. BAMA 2012
About 2 minutes left in the game, LSU driving in BAMA territory with Mett, Odell, Landry. After picking up a 1st down, LSU goes conservative and plays not to lose. They try to run out the clock with 3 runs up the middle and off tackle. Not one pass attempted even though just 1 more 1st down seals the game.
Last night, Seattle was playing aggressive to win and threw the interception and lost the game.
My preference is to be aggressive. I would have rather LSU try to keep the ball away from BAMA by being aggressive than playing conservative and not to lose. Also, I hate prevent defense at the end of games. If LSU had been aggressive and threw an interception, I could have lived with that much better than the way that game had ended.
23
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:47 am to GarlandTiger
If you ain't first you're last.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:50 am to Placebeaux
Run Beast Mode, no other option...
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:51 am to GarlandTiger
How about something in between? Be aggressive but don't throw in the middle of a crowded short field with only one yard to go with multiple downs, plenty of time left and the best RB in football.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:52 am to GarlandTiger
i would rather kick an extra point being one point down to take it to OT, over going for 2 and the win.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:54 am to GarlandTiger
quote:
Last night, Seattle was playing aggressive to win and threw the interception and lost the game.
That wasn't playing aggressive, that was playing stupid. They give the ball to their best player, they win the game.
There is a balance between playing aggressive and playing smart. See Saints-SF in 2011. If we play prevent defense, we can't lose that game in regulation. We blitzed, and gave up the big play.
quote:
About 2 minutes left in the game, LSU driving in BAMA territory with Mett, Odell, Landry. After picking up a 1st down, LSU goes conservative and plays not to lose. They try to run out the clock with 3 runs up the middle and off tackle. Not one pass attempted even though just 1 more 1st down seals the game.
We should have thrown the ball on 3rd down.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:55 am to GarlandTiger
quote:
LSU goes conservative and plays not to lose. They try to run out the clock with 3 runs up the middle and off tackle. Not one pass attempted even though just 1 more 1st down seals the game.
so how many threads would be started with "why is Miles passing the ball!!!!!?????"
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:57 am to GarlandTiger
quote:
After last night Super Bowl, it got me thinking as to which way I would want my team to lose a close game. Take these two scenarios:
LSU vs. BAMA 2012
About 2 minutes left in the game, LSU driving in BAMA territory with Mett, Odell, Landry. After picking up a 1st down, LSU goes conservative and plays not to lose. They try to run out the clock with 3 runs up the middle and off tackle. Not one pass attempted even though just 1 more 1st down seals the game.
Last night, Seattle was playing aggressive to win and threw the interception and lost the game.
My preference is to be aggressive. I would have rather LSU try to keep the ball away from BAMA by being aggressive than playing conservative and not to lose. Also, I hate prevent defense at the end of games. If LSU had been aggressive and threw an interception, I could have lived with that much better than the way that game had ended.
I think the worst thing you could do is pre-determine anything. These decisions should be made with full knowledge of what has been going on during the game.
Are we confident in throwing the ball? Have we been successful. Are we confident in stopping the other team? Have we been successful stopping them throughout the game. What is the timeout situation of the other team. What is the field position? etc., etc., etc.
Both decisions have a path to victory and a path to defeat. The best decision is the one that gives you the best probability to winning. But, there is no guarantee of success.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:58 am to GarlandTiger
see aggressive play 1987 Ohio St.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:59 am to GarlandTiger
quote:
Last night, Seattle was playing aggressive to win and threw the interception and lost the game.
If you look at Pete's post game interview, the decision to throw still seems to be the right call. It was supposed to be a throw-away play to waste a little bit more off the clock. Either he has a clear touchdown pass for the go-ahead score, or he throws the ball out of the end zone and bestrode gets the next two carries with the benefit of the timeout. Wilson just made a poor decision, and Butler made an incredible, once in a lifetime play.
Percentage wise- the Patriots had less than a 1% chance of intercepting that ball if using just this years stats, as that was the 109th pass from the 1yd line that a qb has attempted, and the first time it was intercepted.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:59 am to GarlandTiger
How many first downs did LSU get on that last drive?
Your premise is wrong, just wrong. Miles did it right on that last drive on offense. It was the defense again with Alabama that didnt hold, even with them out of timeouts that night.
Your premise is wrong, just wrong. Miles did it right on that last drive on offense. It was the defense again with Alabama that didnt hold, even with them out of timeouts that night.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 9:59 am to Placebeaux
Aggressive. That's why I was happy with the Flynn-to-Byrd TD that beat Auburn--and just as pleased with the onside KO against Ole Miss a few years back that didn't work out. I like aggressive thinking in football, even if it seems like a crazy, low-percentage move at the time.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 10:00 am to GarlandTiger
quote:
Seattle was playing aggressive to win and threw the interception and lost the game.
There would have been nothing unagressive about running one of the most aggressive backs into the endzone form the 1 yard line.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 10:00 am to LSUANDY25
quote:
Miles did it right on that last drive on offense. It was the defense again with Alabama that didnt hold, even with them out of timeouts that night.
3, all via passing. Then we ran the ball 3x, including on 3rd and long, settling for a FG that we missed giving Bama plenty of time. Our offense had a chance to end the game with 1 more 1st down, and we sat on the ball despite domination through the air.
CFB is different from the NFL too with the clock stopping on the first down. It makes 2 minute drives that much easier
This post was edited on 2/2/15 at 10:03 am
Posted on 2/2/15 at 10:04 am to GarlandTiger
I'd rather run the strongest rb in the league and WIN
Posted on 2/2/15 at 10:08 am to GarlandTiger
Tend to agree, but those were 2 diff scenarios. LSU was trying to preserve their lead, and Seatle had to score to regain the lead.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 11:06 am to GarlandTiger
It's simple You run Lynch three times, if N. E. stops him, then more power to them.... but you run Lynch.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 11:16 am to GarlandTiger
If you are in field goal range with under 2 minutes in the 4th, and your defense has held the other team to 14 points and 259 total yards thus far, you milk the clock and take the points.
Every time.
Every time.
Posted on 2/2/15 at 11:20 am to TigerBait1127
quote:
CFB is different from the NFL too with the clock stopping on the first down. It makes 2 minute drives that much easier
No shite sherlock. Thats why the 3 first downs were critical.
At crunch time Saban sends his D out there to get the ball back ASAP and preserve the timouts. LSU needs to convert at least 1 first down and/or make sure Bama uses 2 of the 3 timeouts left.
Game on the line both groups digging in. LSU converts 3, thats right THREE straight first downs and gets all the timeouts. But lets blame Miles he isnt any good, Saban and the Gumps always give up multiple first downs in crunch time.
Even on 3rd down at the end with the field position u have to run the ball and make them use the last timeout not throw on 3rd down there.U have a NFL D with a team that cant get a first down at that point.
This post was edited on 2/2/15 at 11:25 am
Posted on 2/2/15 at 11:21 am to GarlandTiger
quote:
Last night, Seattle was playing aggressive to win and threw the interception and lost the game.
They were playing aggressive but that didn't cost them the game. A boneheaded play call did. Letting Lynch plow in from the 1/2 yard line is aggressive enough.
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News