- 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
re: Can someone please justify why Orgeron kicked the FG against ND?
Posted on 1/29/18 at 3:19 pm to Rickdaddy4188
Posted on 1/29/18 at 3:19 pm to Rickdaddy4188
And Dickdaddy4188 is still a fricking moron.
Lets see, I don't like O, Ive told you this before. And Miles I like even less.
But keep going Dickdaddy, keep thinking the Miles haters love O
Dipshit
Lets see, I don't like O, Ive told you this before. And Miles I like even less.
But keep going Dickdaddy, keep thinking the Miles haters love O
Dipshit
1
Posted on 1/29/18 at 3:26 pm to tschla1
quote:
and they take a knee and play for overtime.
You might run a quarterback sneak inside your own one yard line but you're not going to "take a knee" inside your own one.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 3:31 pm to schwartzy
quote:
Reasons to kick the FG: 1. ?
1. 8 out of 10 coaches would have kicked the field goal to go up 3 points and rely on the strongest part of the team - Aranda's Tiger Defense to hold them and win the game.
My personal decision would be to go for it. However, it was a legitimate decision -- not the way you line this up as a madman's decision. I recall a bunch of people on this board criticize Stanford in the Pac 12 conference championship, going for it, not getting it, and USC winning the game as a result. There was risk either way, but a legit decision .
Posted on 1/29/18 at 3:45 pm to Geauxst Writer
quote:
8 out of 10 coaches would have kicked the field goal to go up 3 points and rely on the strongest part of the team - Aranda's Tiger Defense to hold them and win the game.
I don't take what coaches are conditioned to do as evidence that it's the right thing to do.
What Orgeron did was by the book, the traditional method of coaching. I'm saying many coaches haven't caught up to what the numbers have been saying for years now, that the book is wrong. The rate at which teams go for it on 4th and short is ridiculously low, something like 20%, when the odds of converting that is around 65%. That's insane that teams aren't already going for it at that down and distance at a 50% clip, minimum. The fact that the distance of the play in question was inches from the goalline makes the decision even more egregious.
That's not basing a decision on sound evidence. It's assigning an inordinate amount of weight to the negative outcome, which will happen sometimes. But you cannot coach to avoid negative outcomes or you won't ever win anything of significance. Yeah if he loses because he missed the TD he would've been roasted, so what? That's the life of a HC in major CFB.
But to be fair to Orgeron, there's value in going by the book. That's what old people(his bosses) find comfort in. Explaining a loss in which you did things by the book like most other coaches in the past have done is much easier to do than losing when you decided to buck convention. I guess the entire situation confirms what a lot of us already knew about him; he's more concerned with keeping his job than winning.
This post was edited on 1/29/18 at 3:52 pm
Posted on 1/29/18 at 3:49 pm to Goldrush25
quote:All of this is spot on
I don't take what coaches are conditioned to do as evidence that it's the right thing to do.
What Orgeron did was by the book, the traditional method of coaching. I'm saying many coaches haven't caught up to what the numbers have been saying for years now, that the book is wrong. The rate at which teams go for it on 4th and short is ridiculously low, something like 20%, when the odds of converting that is around 65%. That's insane that teams aren't already going for it at that down and distance at a 50% clip, minimum. The fact that the distance of the play in question was inches makes the decision even more egregious.
That's not basing a decision on sound evidence. It's assigning an inordinate amount of weight to the negative outcome, which will happen sometimes. But you cannot coach to avoid negative outcomes or you won't ever win anything of significance.
But to be fair to Orgeron, there's value in going by the book. That's what old people(his bosses) find comfort in. Explaining a loss in which you did things by the book like most other coaches in the past have done is much easier to do than losing when you decided to buck convention.
Years back, Bill belichick went for it on 4th and like 4 from his own 3o yard line when he had the lead late in the 4th against Manning and the colts
They failed to get it, manning led them on the winning drive, and the media hammered belichick
Well, a few days later, someone ran the numbers, and going for it on 4th actually gave them the best % chance of winning.........
Sometimes, making the poular decision is easier, even if it is the wrong one
Posted on 1/29/18 at 3:50 pm to Goldrush25
quote:
That chart you're citing says specifically it doesn't take into consideration down and distance or field position, those are two huge factors that we've discussed extensively.
Granted, there are limitations with the chart. Regardless, the odds of winning are the same whether up by 3 or 7 with 2 minutes left. So, one would have to surmise, if the distance to score would not have a dramatic influence. Otherwise the odds would not be identical.
This assumes the sample is sufficiently large enough to be statistically accurate.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 3:58 pm to Goldrush25
quote:
But to be fair to Orgeron, there's value in going by the book. That's what old people(his bosses) find comfort in. Explaining a loss in which you did things by the book like most other coaches in the past have done is much easier to do than losing when you decided to buck convention.
I think the man is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't-- regardless of the decision or circumstance. I won't get into any specifics, but in hiring, promoting, on field calls-- O gets criticism when he goes by the book and when he does not. Once some people don't like the hire or the hiring process, their minds are difficult to change.
We will see what happens next year. My guess-- some will be happy and some won't. As you said, that's the life of a coach
Posted on 1/29/18 at 4:02 pm to schwartzy
quote:
Reasons to not kick:
You think that path gives you the best chance of winning.
quote:
Reasons to kick the FG:
You think that path gives you the best chance of winning.
It certainly isn't black and white. giving your defense the lead in that situation in a game where the other team only scored 14 points is probably at least 75% chance to win (guestimate).
Our chances of converting on 4th down were probably less than that, but then you still had the chance of stopping Notre Dame, getting the ball back, and kicking a FG to win. I think the chances of that happening were pretty poor given our kickers. But, you also had the chances of Notre Dame sitting on the ball after a first down and then winning in overtime.
I'd bet a statistical analysis would give pretty even odds both ways. I think the only people who are wrong are those who think one path was definitively better than the other.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 4:05 pm to schwartzy
quote:
4. If you don't get it, you will likely force a safety and win the game.
You embarassed yourself with this one.
The truth is that it was about a 50-50 decision. I would not have criticised Orgeron had he gone for it and missed (there is a good chance we would have failed, and I won’t criticise him for kicking. I WILL criticise him for being in a close game with ND in the fourth quarter. They were an inferior team.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 4:13 pm to moneyg
quote:
I'd bet a statistical analysis would give pretty even odds both ways. I think the only people who are wrong are those who think one path was definitively better than the other.
Actually, the odds of winning are identical whether up by 7 or up by 3 with 2 minutes left. See my previous link. So the issue is whether scoring 3 is more likely than scoring 7. In this case, at the distance-- probably equal, considering our kickers' performances that day. Once the kick was made-- it was the right call, if playing the odds. AND--
I say that when, personally, I would have gone for the TD before I saw the statistics.
It's like hitting on 16 when the dealer is showing a 5. You may get lucky every now and then by taking a hit, but odds tell you to stand pat.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 4:39 pm to ReelTiger1
quote:
And Dickdaddy4188 is still a fricking moron.
Lets see, I don't like O, Ive told you this before. And Miles I like even less.
But keep going Dickdaddy, keep thinking the Miles haters love O
Dipshit
if you hate one of the most accomplished coaches in sec history you're a fricking moron. why even bring miles up bitch?
This post was edited on 1/29/18 at 4:42 pm
Posted on 1/29/18 at 4:40 pm to Tiger Ree
quote:
And pouting and crying about it prevents mediocrity? That must be something new.
what? pouting and crying to get what you want was started a long time ago bubba.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 4:43 pm to Goldrush25
quote:
What Orgeron did was by the book, the traditional method of coaching. I'm saying many coaches haven't caught up to what the numbers have been saying for years now, that the book is wrong. The rate at which teams go for it on 4th and short is ridiculously low, something like 20%, when the odds of converting that is around 65%. That's insane that teams aren't already going for it at that down and distance at a 50% clip, minimum. The fact that the distance of the play in question was inches from the goalline makes the decision even more egregious.
That's not basing a decision on sound evidence. It's assigning an inordinate amount of weight to the negative outcome, which will happen sometimes. But you cannot coach to avoid negative outcomes or you won't ever win anything of significance. Yeah if he loses because he missed the TD he would've been roasted, so what? That's the life of a HC in major CFB.
But to be fair to Orgeron, there's value in going by the book. That's what old people(his bosses) find comfort in. Explaining a loss in which you did things by the book like most other coaches in the past have done is much easier to do than losing when you decided to buck convention. I guess the entire situation confirms what a lot of us already knew about him; he's more concerned with keeping his job than winning.
agreed.
coaches that have equity built up would've gone for it IMO.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 4:50 pm to schwartzy
I would have gone for it, but I understand the FG in a tie game.
If the defense does its part, that should have been the game-winning FG.
While I think Orgeron’s days are numbered at LSU, the decision to kick a FG against ND wasn’t a stupid decision... An incredibly conservative decision by a coach that desperately needed a win in that game, but not a stupid one.
If the defense does its part, that should have been the game-winning FG.
While I think Orgeron’s days are numbered at LSU, the decision to kick a FG against ND wasn’t a stupid decision... An incredibly conservative decision by a coach that desperately needed a win in that game, but not a stupid one.
This post was edited on 1/29/18 at 4:55 pm
Posted on 1/29/18 at 5:37 pm to schwartzy
quote:
6. It's a bowl game. What do you have to lose?
Ummm... the bowl game??? If you have nothing to lose according to you then that also means you have nothing to win.
So by your logic it was meaningless.
Buuuuuttt
You are harping on it now, so I guess it wasn't meaningless to you, like you say it was.
Right or wrong decision (personally I would have gone for it), your number 6 reason not to kick it is bogus.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 5:43 pm to schwartzy
quote:
Orgeron said something along the lines of that he kicked it because he was worried they would have another false start.
I never heard this.
I was against the hire but have tried to be fair, but if this is true we really do have the dumbest motherfricker in college football as our coach.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 5:51 pm to schwartzy
No
The game is over
Move along
The game is over
Move along
Posted on 1/29/18 at 6:58 pm to schwartzy
+1. I was pissed that he didn't go for the TD. Hopefully he learns from his mistakes. It was a terrible call all the way around. There was NO reason for the FG. He was playing not to lose and guess what? He lost.
Posted on 1/29/18 at 7:00 pm to schwartzy
While I do agree that going for the TD is a slightly better decision in the long haul, there's a 100% chance that had he gone for the TD and failed every single person on the planet would have been screaming how 'stupid' it was to not kick the FG.
And if ya'lls defense had held, nobody would have ever questioned his FG kick.
People tend to be very results oriented.
And if ya'lls defense had held, nobody would have ever questioned his FG kick.
People tend to be very results oriented.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News