- 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: you can't help feeling that your side is stupid when you go against conventional wisdom an
Posted on 9/6/24 at 9:09 am to TigerKnights
Posted on 9/6/24 at 9:09 am to TigerKnights
quote:quote:
But taking the ball first was not an issue
It's a massive issue. Had he not done so we win the game.
Explain that one to me. I'll hang up and listen.
1
Posted on 9/6/24 at 9:20 am to TigerKnights
quote:
It's a massive issue. Had he not done so we win the game.
What????
Smh.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 9:21 am to stephendomalley
I'm a proponent of deferring in most circumstances. But the argument could be made that if you believe your offense is the strength of your team (and there is reason to think that is the case with this LSU team), then you want your offense to have as many possessions as possible. Receiving the ball first gives you a possession. A basketball analogy is that teams with great offenses generally like to play high possession games. More possession = more opportunities to score = more points. Obviously football and basketball are different games, but that's the general mindset. Or it is entirely possible BK wanted to limit USC's possessions vs a new defense. Taking the ball first gives you a chance to do that.
I didn't have a problem with going for it on 4th down. It was 4th and goal from the 3. So basically the equivalent of a 2 point conversion. I suspect both HCs were thinking before the game it could be a high scoring game. One where settling for FGs wasn't going to cut it. And quite frankly, the playcall was there. If you watch it, LSU ran a little bit of a rub-combo with Lacy & Anderson on the strong side of the field. The DB was off of Lacy and he was open at the goal line for a TD. Nussmeier was looking that way...except the OL allowed a free rusher up the middle immediately which forced Nuss to spin away from it. LSU got exactly what they wanted on the play...an open look to their best WR who had killed USC on the drive. They just didn't execute.
That was the story of the game. In spots where they had to execute USC was better than LSU.
I didn't have a problem with going for it on 4th down. It was 4th and goal from the 3. So basically the equivalent of a 2 point conversion. I suspect both HCs were thinking before the game it could be a high scoring game. One where settling for FGs wasn't going to cut it. And quite frankly, the playcall was there. If you watch it, LSU ran a little bit of a rub-combo with Lacy & Anderson on the strong side of the field. The DB was off of Lacy and he was open at the goal line for a TD. Nussmeier was looking that way...except the OL allowed a free rusher up the middle immediately which forced Nuss to spin away from it. LSU got exactly what they wanted on the play...an open look to their best WR who had killed USC on the drive. They just didn't execute.
That was the story of the game. In spots where they had to execute USC was better than LSU.
This post was edited on 9/6/24 at 9:25 am
Posted on 9/6/24 at 9:24 am to Madking
quote:
Kelly coaches like someone who has no faith in his team.
yeah people who don’t believe in their team always go for it on 4th
Posted on 9/6/24 at 9:51 am to Madking
You're right; I had no reason for such a snarky comment. I apologize for doing so. Bad morning.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 10:29 am to BillF
No worries, happens to all of us
Posted on 9/6/24 at 10:31 am to SammyTiger
Sorry you don’t understand but it’s been explained multiple times by multiple posters since it happened.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:00 am to DBG
quote:
"I'd rather start the game with my best guys against their worst guys, however that turns out to be. That's the best chance to get off to a good start."
OK, so Nick is not an absolutist. I stated that there are good arguments for taking the football first. Nick almost always takes the defense, but when there is good reason to do the opposite he will take it first.
Kelly, however, seems to be an absolutist. And I'm sure he could state an absolutely solid reason why we took the ball. and most of us would shake our head and agree. However, he screwed himself with his own logic by not taking the points. If we had had less than a yard to go, then go for it maybe. but we had 3 yards. How often does a team make the 2 point play? The odds just aren't there.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:03 am to stephendomalley
Yep, Kelly seems to have a structured outline of how he wants the game to go and if it doesn’t well that’s the fault of everyone under him because they didn’t do what he envisioned. Where the championship level coach can adapt quickly and effectively Kelly cannot.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:13 am to stephendomalley
quote:
Nick and Kirby win the toss and they always defer
Nick and Kirby are both defensive coaches and put their defenses on the field first.
I read an article a few years back looking at the actual stats of receiving first or 2nd.
The difference ended up being an average of roughly 1 point.
Meaning teams that defers on average scored 1 more point per game than teams that received first.
the difference really is minuscule and arguing that one or the other is significantly better is not supported by actual stats.
also out of something like 800 games, only around 10% of the time did a team have the ball for last drive of 1st half and again on 1st drive of 2nd half.
so it really boils just down to preference with no clear cut analytical advantage to which half you get ball first.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:17 am to stephendomalley
I’ve always wanted the ball in second half, but I understand why Kelly wants it in the first.
The defense’s clock starts at 15:00 while a long offensive sustained drive of say, 6 minutes keeps your defense off the field and they start 15 actual minutes later.
Is that an advantage? I don’t know.
The defense’s clock starts at 15:00 while a long offensive sustained drive of say, 6 minutes keeps your defense off the field and they start 15 actual minutes later.
Is that an advantage? I don’t know.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 11:56 am to stephendomalley
Melly’s other deficiencies make this a nonissue to me.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:17 pm to Madking
just because you have an explanation for your opinion doesn’t mean you’re right.
why did we go for it on 4 and 3 and not other 4th downs?
Failing in 4-3 on the 3 is a much different situation than 4 and inches on our own 37 or 46.
the reward is not only greater, but if we fail they are still in a bad spot being backed way up on their own goal line.
He through the could convert. settling for a FG after a 7 minute drive is also deflating and they get the ball with room to operate.
why did we go for it on 4 and 3 and not other 4th downs?
Failing in 4-3 on the 3 is a much different situation than 4 and inches on our own 37 or 46.
the reward is not only greater, but if we fail they are still in a bad spot being backed way up on their own goal line.
He through the could convert. settling for a FG after a 7 minute drive is also deflating and they get the ball with room to operate.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:27 pm to Ponchy Tiger
quote:
one decision doesn't mean a absolute outcome.
Unless it's Nuss throwing a bad pass right? No, one decision doesn't lose the game, but that doesn't mean changing it won't win the game.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:27 pm to mdomingue
quote:
I'll hang up and listen.
No, you won't.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:28 pm to SammyTiger
Sure buddy
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:35 pm to SammyTiger
Kelly addressed going for it on 4th down in his press conference.
Basically he plays the percentages in going for it on 4th and short on that side of the field, he says he's believed that way for the majority of his career and will continue to do so.
Basically he plays the percentages in going for it on 4th and short on that side of the field, he says he's believed that way for the majority of his career and will continue to do so.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:37 pm to Madking
you have the IQ of a potato.
It’s just nice to see it is consistent in all things.
It’s just nice to see it is consistent in all things.
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:39 pm to stephendomalley
quote:
OK, so Nick is not an absolutist. I stated that there are good arguments for taking the football first. Nick almost always takes the defense, but when there is good reason to do the opposite he will take it first.
Kelly’s “best guys” have been his offense thus far. And he values scoring first and there is good data that that’s quite important. If the LSU offense and defense has swapped roles, I’d bet Kelly would defer a lot more.
quote:
However, he screwed himself with his own logic by not taking the points
Yes
Posted on 9/6/24 at 12:40 pm to TigerKnights
quote:Up to now I haven't said anything else to you. I'm still waiting for an explanation of how deferring would have meant LSU wins this game.quote:
I'll hang up and listen.
No, you won't.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News