- 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: How do you feel about passing up Field Goals
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:20 am to NewBeginnings
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:20 am to NewBeginnings
When you have the 4th down playbook that Kiffin has, the odds go up tremendously on your conversion rate and analytics.
Remember this past year when we played them: 4th and 3 with 2 minutes left. Would have been a 52 yard FG. Lane goes for it, and they get their tight end butt naked wide arse open to seal it. Lane's ability to convert in short yardage is 2nd to none.
Remember this past year when we played them: 4th and 3 with 2 minutes left. Would have been a 52 yard FG. Lane goes for it, and they get their tight end butt naked wide arse open to seal it. Lane's ability to convert in short yardage is 2nd to none.
0
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:22 am to NewBeginnings
quote:What is the excessive use of analytics?
Lane is known for following analytics excessively for in game decisions
Some say that a coach's experience is the coach's experience while analytics is all experience.
quote:There's two results for every decision. How many games have been lost by not being aggressive? Rather than focusing on the results, focus on the process.
Two years ago, Lane and the Rebels lost to Florida. They had 4 possessions in the red zone where they chose not to kick. It was the difference in the game. If Lane loses some games for us in a similar manner, I could see some criticism from the fan base.
I think a coach should be more aggressive when on another team's field, but I defer to the analytics.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:24 am to NewBeginnings
You are comparing apples to oranges. Analytics deals with the specifics of that particular team, in that particular game, and that team in other games, as well as that particular opponent in that and prior games and play calling of opponents as well as personnel match ups. That’s why you are an amateur and Lane and his staff are professionals. They know what they’re doing and you don’t. Go tigers
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:26 am to NewBeginnings
If there is a 50/50 chance to get the 1st down or score the TD, I’m for it with this caveat:
- time left on the clock ( 1st half)
- the FG closes the door / secures a Win
- time left on the clock ( 1st half)
- the FG closes the door / secures a Win
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:31 am to NewBeginnings
So you heard the guy on AFR yesterday discuss this very topic.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 9:39 am to NewBeginnings
Based on this - it looks like it only happened twice, so they still would've lost by 1 even if they had kicked the FGs.
Looks like the K missed a short one from the 17, so maybe he didn't have much faith in him...
LINK
Looks like the K missed a short one from the 17, so maybe he didn't have much faith in him...
LINK
Posted on 7/22/26 at 10:15 am to NewBeginnings
points is points.... Based on my analytics .... 90% of the time it comes back to bite you late in 70% of the games when you're 2 points behind.
Take the points early.
Take the points early.
This post was edited on 7/22/26 at 10:17 am
Posted on 7/22/26 at 10:16 am to NewBeginnings
Don't like it much unless your defense is complete crap.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 10:19 am to NewBeginnings
I am usually the one yelling Go for it.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 10:22 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Lane tends to use it as a decision maker. He is pretty extreme when it comes to using analytics to make decisions
I think the issue is that most people equate analytics as "automatically go for it".
If analytics tell you to go for it, the other team also has a pretty good idea you're going to go for it. So do you? And so on and so on.
The announcers just throw that word out there.
Most of the time, take the fricking points.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 11:07 am to NewBeginnings
Kelly played for only FGs. So I’m so happy will be playing to score TDs now.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 11:11 am to La Place Mike
He went for it 4th and 2 at Oklahoma this past season late in the 3rd quarter if I recall. They don’t make it and OU scored a TD. Ole Miss still won, but that’s the kind of decisions that will have Tiger fans fuming. He also went for it several times in Tiger Stadium 2 years ago when in FG range and didn’t make it.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 11:12 am to NewBeginnings
quote:
I tend to be old school in the sense that I think you should almost always kick in the first half (exception being when you are within the 5 yard line). You never know how valuable those free points maybe later in the game. Second half- going for it doesn’t bother me as much.
Analytics serve to give a reality check to those old school concepts.
AI should make analytics in sports better by accounting for additional variables such as formations, positional strength, and so on.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 11:33 am to hashtag
Agree, but I lean heavily to taking the points. I can count so many games where if LSU would have taken the early points rather than coming out of a long drive empty, and LSU loses a close game in the end where a FG would have won or tied the game. I say take the points and move on, everytime, especially in the first half.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 11:48 am to NewBeginnings
Lane is indeed known for going for it in stupid situations, and I expect that's going to be my biggest complaint about him in year 1.
If we have a rock solid defense, then I say go for it every time if we can rely on the defense to help us when we don't make it.
I do recall Brian Kelly going for it when he shouldn't have multiple times and it turned out to be the difference in the game. That pissed me off.
If we have a rock solid defense, then I say go for it every time if we can rely on the defense to help us when we don't make it.
I do recall Brian Kelly going for it when he shouldn't have multiple times and it turned out to be the difference in the game. That pissed me off.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 11:49 am to LSUcajun77
quote:
Kelly played for only FGs.
Nah uh, baw. I distinctly remember losing a few big games because we didn't kick when we should have.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 11:53 am to NewBeginnings
If you can score a TD fifty percent of the time it’s certainly worth it.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 11:54 am to paulb52
quote:
If you can score a TD fifty percent of the time it’s certainly worth it.
What if you can score 3 points 90% of the time?
Posted on 7/22/26 at 12:09 pm to TDsngumbo
When trading a bunch of TDs for those attempted FGs, I think everyone will be happy. You just have to convert on 4th down about 50% of the FG attempts passed upon to make it worth your while. I think LK can figure out how to 3 yards or so more than 50% of the time.
Posted on 7/22/26 at 12:45 pm to NewBeginnings
I will say it was genius when it works, and say it was idiotic when it doesn’t. Then I will pour another bourbon.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News