Online Now 1541

MSU Red Cedar Message Board

The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web

Online now 1627
Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)

Boards ▾

MSU Red Cedar Message Board

The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web

The Press Box

The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts

Duffy Daugherty Forum

"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion

Jack Breslin Forum

"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion

Wells Hall Off Topic Board

This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion

Marketplace & Ticket Exchange

The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets

Fantasy Sports Forum

For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion

Test/Feedback Forum

Reply

When we punted - Agree or Disagree?

  • RBW Spartan said... (original post)

    Agree. You're not going to convert 4th and 17

    Against this same team, Haygood got 63 yards on a 4th and 10. From his own end of the field, not out near the 50.

    You would think someone might have reminded us about that play this week?

  • mark_v said... (original post)

    Good god. So what THIS poster is saying is that it's better not to know you have no chance until it's too late. fingergun

    It is the same strategy that is used when a team is down by 10 or 11 late and finds itself with a 4th and long in FG range. They kick the 3 pointer and hope to recover the onside kick and score the TD to stay alive, rather than risk the game being over by failing to convert on the 4th down.

    You also see the same strategy in hoops where a team down by 4 or 5 will go for 2 and save the trey attempt for a later possession.

    Extend the game. Keep the pressure on the other team and don't eliminate yourself prematurely.

  • Vince of 231 said... (original post)

    It is the same strategy that is used when a team is down by 10 or 11 late and finds itself with a 4th and long in FG range. They kick the 3 pointer and hope to recover the onside kick and score the TD to stay alive, rather than risk the game being over by failing to convert on the 4th down.

    You also see the same strategy in hoops where a team down by 4 or 5 will go for 2 and save the trey attempt for a later possession.

    Extend the game. Keep the pressure on the other team and don't eliminate yourself prematurely.

    It's nothing similar to any of those situations. If you need a FG and a TD and you have 4th and long, you go for the FG because you have better odds of making it than making the first down. In basketball, down 5 you go for two either because the defense is conceding it or because with a couple seconds left you'll end up heaving a 3 on the last play regardless.

    However, if you're down 15 in football and get a TD you DEFINITELY go for 2. In the event you miss it, it's better to know that so you can adjust your strategy accordingly. (E.g. onside kick attempts, more desperate long-range offensive plays, etc.) It's like choosing to go on D first in OT. You always want your offense to know how many points it needs to get.

    This of course is all off topic, but i just couldn't believe some of the "logic" i was reading, including that down 15 you never go for 2 on the first TD, which is ludicrous beyond belief.

  • mark_v said... (original post)

    It's nothing similar to any of those situations. If you need a FG and a TD and you have 4th and long, you go for the FG because you have better odds of making it than making the first down. In basketball, down 5 you go for two either because the defense is conceding it or because with a couple seconds left you'll end up heaving a 3 on the last play regardless.

    However, if you're down 15 in football and get a TD you DEFINITELY go for 2. In the event you miss it, it's better to know that so you can adjust your strategy accordingly. (E.g. onside kick attempts, more desperate long-range offensive plays, etc.) It's like choosing to go on D first in OT. You always want your offense to know how many points it needs to get.

    This of course is all off topic, but i just couldn't believe some of the "logic" i was reading, including that down 15 you never go for 2 on the first TD, which is ludicrous beyond belief.

    Adjust your strategy so that you can plan on executing not just one, but two onside kicks? Kicking the PAT on TD1 and going for the conversion on TD2 is absolutely the right way to play it. You're insane if your strategy is "we might be able to tie this thing up with two OR three scores." You screwed the pooch for 55 minutes and you're down 15. At that point your strategy is to execute everything correctly or lose. There's no alternate three-score plan. Score a TD, kick the PAT, onside kick, score a TD, go for two.

    This can't be so ludicrous when this very strategy is discussed all the time on television broadcasts by extremely-well qualified former coaches. You don't chase points until you absolutely have to.

    signature image
  • mark_v said... (original post)


    This of course is all off topic, but i just couldn't believe some of the "logic" i was reading, including that down 15 you never go for 2 on the first TD, which is ludicrous beyond belief.

    Better take your argument up with the coaches who use the standard 2-point conversion chart:

    http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/crawford/2009/10/clip-and-save-2-point-conversion-chart.html

    If you look at it, you will see that it has "Trail by 9" as a 1-point attempt situation. If you are down by 15 and have just scored 6 on a TD to make it down by 9, you are supposed to go for 1-- thus assuring that you are within a single score.

    So just about every football coach in the U.S. follows the logic that you call ludicrous.

  • Vince of 231 said... (original post)

    Better take your argument up with the coaches who use the standard 2-point conversion chart:

    http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/crawford/2009/10/clip-and-save-2-point-conversion-chart.html

    If you look at it, you will see that it has "Trail by 9" as a 1-point attempt situation. If you are down by 15 and have just scored 6 on a TD to make it down by 9, you are supposed to go for 1-- thus assuring that you are within a single score.

    So just about every football coach in the U.S. follows the logic that you call ludicrous.

    If I'm the opposing coach, and a team fails on a two-point conversion that would've cut it to seven, I think "game's over." It's virtually impossible that they're going to execute an onside kick, drive for a touchdown, execute another onside kick, and drive for a winning field goal, all with limited clock and timeouts. My opponent is an idiot. Thank you.

    If I'm the opposing coach, and a team cuts it to eight, the game is still on and my players' sphincters are tightening up.

    This post was edited by Omar Comin19758 3 years ago

    signature image
  • Pylon St8ofmind

    What in the hell mods? Come on.

    Marriage is like flying with kids, if the flight had 500 connections, never ended, Ted Striker were your pilot and you ate the fish.

  • IZZOBall said... (original post)

    If I'm the opposing coach, and a team fails on a two-point conversion that would've cut it to seven, I think "game's over." It's virtually impossible that they're going to execute an onside kick, drive for a touchdown, execute another onside kick, and drive for a winning field goal, all with limited clock and timeouts. My opponent is an idiot. Thank you.

    If I'm the opposing coach, and a team cuts it to eight, the game is still on and my players' sphincters are tightening up.

    This!

    You are an idiot to go for 2 on the first TD.

    signature image signature image signature image

    There's a time and a place for everything and it's called college.