re: Why Didn't Bama Tackle Clemson's Recievers on the Last Play?

quote:

---

I understand it just fine, frickface. Look at my edit above. If the ball is moved to the 4 and 1/2 yard line after the penalty, Clemson would probably have gone for it instead of a FG. Capiche?

---

Your post heavily implies you did not understand what he was talking about, but whatever buddy. Otherwise, why even post that they would get to run a play. The OP specifically talked about that in his post. Moron.

Too many Germans.

quote:

---

Pretty clear that initially I just responded to his first sentence.

---

And who does that? When in his own first post, he discusses more than just his first sentence. Which also showed that he understood there would be another play. That's dumb.

quote:

---

Maybe YOU should read a bit closer before cursing and questioning other people. But guys like you are bad arse on the internet, I get it.

---

You bitter because I cursed? I said no shite. I don't think that's the same level as calling someone frickface, but what do I know.

ETA: and actually this

quote:

---

Why didn't Saban just take the penalty and force overtime instead of giving Clemson a free shot at a TD in addition to Overtime insurance instead of making them choose between them?

---

was his whole first sentence, so tell me... Where in your original post does it imply that you even understood what he was saying. Because your post was trying to be a smartass about how he didn't even realize Clemson would get to run another play, when he clearly did.

quote:

---

If they would have defended the play and won the game would you be saying the same thing?

---

Process vs results, yes I would.

quote:

---

Maybe they thought they were good enough to stop the play. Given the chance do you play for the win or play not to lose? Most competitors given the choice, would play to win.

---

It's about giving yourself the best chance to win the game. They gave Clemson 2 chances at it, when they could have just given them one.

quote:

---

Clemson's offense in a college overtime situation was better than Bama's offense without Bo. So IMO you play that last play to win the game, not tie and chance OT

---

1. Bama doesn't have that choice, Clemson does

2. It wasn't going to be the last play, Clemson had 2 plays.

quote:

---

The ball would have been placed at the 1 yard line. I bet 50% of coaches would go for the win from the 1 yard line.

---

I'd take that bet real quick.



Now Dabo may have gone for it with Watson as his QB, but I think that number is well below 50%. Saban wouldn't IMO.

quote:

---

Yea how often do you actually see a coach go for two after scoring a TD to pull within 1 point at the end of a game? That is way less than 50%.

---

Exactly, and it's a similar situation but the stakes are magnified times a thousand, so I think they'd be even less likely to do it then.

The real question is why didn't the cowboys take a cheap shot on the Packers kicker last weekend during the ice the kicker situation


You give up 15 yards but it's still a 41 yard FG they have to make without a kicker


Might not go over well with the league but you'd prolly win

quote:

---

With no outside help, now it's a footrace to the edge. You trust your LBs and D linemen to make that play?

---

Well, you'd still have an extra guy or 2 that you normally wouldn't so yea I do still think your chances increase.


And sure fair point, they can break off and attempt the tackle on Watson, but he can also still throw the pass if they do break off.

Pretty much, the outside CB engaged the outside WR, which helped Renfrow and #2 never had a chance