CFB World Thinks Oregon Took Strategic 12th Player Penalty to Aid Upset Victory

#3
#3
I love creative thinking in football. Doesn’t happen very much. When Kansas City did the 13 second two play drive to send the AFC championship game to overtime against Buffalo, I was screaming at the TV to just tackle every eligible receiver and let Mahones eat up clock. Worst case would be a 5 yard penalty from way behind midfield. Would have forced a long low percentage Hail Mary.

But the coach didn’t hear me…
 
#5
#5
I don't think it's very believable at all.

Step 1: Get a penalty
Step 2: ??????
Step 3: Profit.

The 12th guy had no effect on the field, and that's about what you'd expect. If he was a spy on the quarterback, or they blitzed him, then maybe you could argue having the 12th guy meant something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KoachKrab127
#6
#6
Firebirdparts said:
I don't think it's very believable at all.

Step 1: Get a penalty
Step 2: ??????
Step 3: Profit.

The 12th guy had no effect on the field, and that's about what you'd expect. If he was a spy on the quarterback, or they blitzed him, then maybe you could argue having the 12th guy meant something.
Click to expand...
You're only thinking about playing the ball, not the clock lol
 
#7
#7
There is a famous NFL coach who had a next-to-last play goal line defense that called for 13 players on defense. He wanted to make sure the offense only got one shot at the end zone, and the 2-yard (or whatever) penalty wasn’t a big deal. I’m not naming him because he named the playcall something offensive.
 
#8
#8
I don't buy the argument. Yes it burned 4 seconds, but it also granted tOSU a free timeout. What if tOSU had completed the pass inbounds? The penalty grants them a free timeout on top of the one they had left. It would have been a total disaster for Oregon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DiderotsGhost and TrueOrange
#9
#9
bamawriter said:
I don't buy the argument. Yes it burned 4 seconds, but it also granted tOSU a free timeout. What if tOSU had completed the pass inbounds? The penalty grants them a free timeout on top of the one they had left. It would have been a total disaster for Oregon.
Click to expand...
Ohio State had 1 timeout for the entire final drive...
 
#10
#10
bamawriter said:
I don't buy the argument. Yes it burned 4 seconds, but it also granted tOSU a free timeout. What if tOSU had completed the pass inbounds? The penalty grants them a free timeout on top of the one they had left. It would have been a total disaster for Oregon.
Click to expand...

Dan Lanning hints 12-men penalty in waning moments of win over Ohio State was intentional: ​


www.cbssports.com

Oregon's Dan Lanning hints 12-men penalty in waning moments of win over Ohio State was intentional

The penalty allowed 4 seconds to run off the clock in a crucial late-game situation
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: will5 and Voltopia
#11
#11
I think they might change it so that the clock resets to the time when the infraction occurred (at the snap). I think it should be a dead ball foul. Line up 12 or more on defense should be like 12 men in the huddle, Instant dead ball foul.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HalfullVol and marcusluvsvols
#12
#12
This makes zero sense.

It wasn't the 12th man on the field who prevented the play from being a big gain: it was the Oregon DB on the exact opposite side of the field with good coverage who swatted the ball away from the receiver. Everuything else being equal, he would have done that whether or not the 12th player trotted out from the far sideline.

In other words, Ohio State were going to be left too far out from a FG and with only 6 seconds left on the clock with or without the penalty. Adding the 12th player only helped the Buckeyes (slightly) by moving them 5 yards closer to FG range. It didn't help Oregon in any way.

And if it that pass hadn't been deflected, if it had been a huge OSU gain on the play that started at 0:10 on the clock, Ohio State would simply have declined the penalty and kicked a FG to win.

In other words, there is zero tactical advantage in putting a 12th man out there on purpose. Zero.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DiderotsGhost
#13
#13
VFL-82-JP said:
This makes zero sense.

It wasn't the 12th man on the field who prevented the play from being a big gain: it was the Oregon DB on the exact opposite side of the field with good coverage who swatted the ball away from the receiver. Everuything else being equal, he would have done that whether or not the 12th player trotted out from the far sideline.

In other words, Ohio State were going to be left too far out from a FG and with only 6 seconds left on the clock with or without the penalty. Adding the 12th player only helped the Buckeyes (slightly) by moving them 5 yards closer to FG range. It didn't help Oregon in any way.

And if it that pass hadn't been deflected, if it had been a huge OSU gain on the play that started at 0:10 on the clock, Ohio State would simply have declined the penalty and kicked a FG to win.

In other words, there is zero tactical advantage in putting a 12th man out there on purpose. Zero.
Click to expand...
...unless the 12th man stops the play, which the coach has no way of predicting.

The issue is that Oregon gained an advantage by having an extra dude on the play. In this case the extra dude didn't make the play, but Ohio State still had to run a play (and clock) at a disadvantage. If it was a dead ball foul as it really should be, then this isn't even a discussion. What's stopping a team from running 50 dudes out there and making the offense run a play in that disadvantage?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol in Buckeye Land
#16
#16
ButchPlz said:
...unless the 12th man stops the play, which the coach has no way of predicting.

The issue is that Oregon gained an advantage by having an extra dude on the play. In this case the extra dude didn't make the play, but Ohio State still had to run a play (and clock) at a disadvantage. If it was a dead ball foul as it really should be, then this isn't even a discussion. What's stopping a team from running 50 dudes out there and making the offense run a play in that disadvantage?
Click to expand...

Unlike in the pros, in college, too many defensive players on the field at the start of play is a LIVE ball foul. The play is allowed and the penalty assessed after. NCAA rule book: rule 3, section 5, article 3.

So no, there is zero advantage to Oregon to intentionally put a 12th man out there. The folks who came up with this idea are simply trying too hard to give Oregon's coach credit. It was an error.
 
#17
#17
VFL-82-JP said:
Unlike in the pros, in college, too many defensive players on the field at the start of play is a LIVE ball foul. The play is allowed and the penalty assessed after. NCAA rule book: rule 3, section 5, article 3.

So no, there is zero advantage to Oregon to intentionally put a 12th man out there. The folks who came up with this idea are simply trying too hard to give Oregon's coach credit. It was an error.
Click to expand...
There is a clear advantage to playing defense with 12 players compared to 11. The fact that it is a live-ball foul is exactly why it was a good idea. Ohio State was going to run the play regardless, so why not play defense with 12 instead of 11? The penalty is only five yards, which, in this case, wasn't nearly enough to put Ohio State in field goal range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ButchPlz and hog88
#18
#18
Boston Vol said:
There is a clear advantage to playing defense with 12 players compared to 11. The fact that it is a live-ball foul is exactly why it was a good idea. Ohio State was going to run the play regardless, so why not play defense with 12 instead of 11? The penalty is only five yards, which, in this case, wasn't nearly enough to put Ohio State in field goal range.
Click to expand...
Watch the play. The extra guy had zeo iimpact on the far side coverage, which was where Ohio State was stopped.

There was zero advantage to Oregon. It simply cost them 5 yards. The 4 seconds off the clock would have happened with or without the penalty.
 
#19
#19
VFL-82-JP said:
Watch the play. The extra guy had zeo iimpact on the far side coverage, which was where Ohio State was stopped.

There was zero advantage to Oregon. It simply cost them 5 yards. The 4 seconds off the clock would have happened with or without the penalty.
Click to expand...
How do you know it didn’t affect the play pre-snap? Maybe Howard intended to go somewhere else with the ball coming out of the huddle, but after seeing the defensive alignment when Manning ran onto the field, he decided to change his mind. This is pretty simple in my opinion, would you rather play a critical down with 11 or 12 defenders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HalfullVol and LouderVol
#20
#20
Boston Vol said:
How do you know it didn’t affect the play pre-snap? Maybe Howard intended to go somewhere else with the ball coming out of the huddle, but after seeing the defensive alignment when Manning ran onto the field, he decided to change his mind. This is pretty simple in my opinion, would you rather play a critical down with 11 or 12 defenders.
Click to expand...

But where Howard threw it would have put tOSU into field goal range. If the DB (who was 1-on-1 and had zero help from the 12th man) hadn't made a great play, tOSU is in FG range with the clock stopped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFL-82-JP
#21
#21
VFL-82-JP said:
This makes zero sense.

It wasn't the 12th man on the field who prevented the play from being a big gain: it was the Oregon DB on the exact opposite side of the field with good coverage who swatted the ball away from the receiver. Everuything else being equal, he would have done that whether or not the 12th player trotted out from the far sideline.

In other words, Ohio State were going to be left too far out from a FG and with only 6 seconds left on the clock with or without the penalty. Adding the 12th player only helped the Buckeyes (slightly) by moving them 5 yards closer to FG range. It didn't help Oregon in any way.

And if it that pass hadn't been deflected, if it had been a huge OSU gain on the play that started at 0:10 on the clock, Ohio State would simply have declined the penalty and kicked a FG to win.

In other words, there is zero tactical advantage in putting a 12th man out there on purpose. Zero.
Click to expand...
I mostly agree, but I would say, there is an advantage to having the extra guy but it's pretty marginal.

If Lanning 'pretended to make a defensive switch' right as Ohio State was about to snap the ball, and he left 22 defenders on the field, then that would actually make more sense as a way to exploit the rule. Tough to complete a pass with 22 defenders. Wastes a few seconds off the clock; Ohio State gains a mere 5 yards off the penalty, but they lose 4 seconds off the clock (which is more valuable in the situation). In fact, they might lose more than 4 seconds, because the QB might be so confused about what to do, he just panics.

But just 1 extra guy only marginally improves the odds of getting a defensive stop and would bail out Ohio State if they screwed up (e.g. completes a pass in-bounds but not for a 1st down - the 12 men penalty then stops the clock that would've run out).

To me, it feels like this was unintentional, but worked out brilliantly for Lanning, and he'd rather spin it as a 'brilliant move' than a Derek Dooley 'oopsie I have 13 guys on the field' moment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: feathersax, LouderVol and VFL-82-JP
#22
#22
DiderotsGhost said:
I mostly agree, but I would say, there is an advantage to having the extra guy but it's pretty marginal.

If Lanning 'pretended to make a defensive switch' right as Ohio State was about to snap the ball, and he left 22 defenders on the field, then that would actually make more sense as a way to exploit the rule. Tough to complete a pass with 22 defenders. Wastes a few seconds off the clock; Ohio State gains a mere 5 yards off the penalty, but they lose 4 seconds off the clock (which is more valuable in the situation). In fact, they might lose more than 4 seconds, because the QB might be so confused about what to do, he just panics.

But just 1 extra guy only marginally improves the odds of getting a defensive stop and would bail out Ohio State if they screwed up (e.g. completes a pass in-bounds but not for a 1st down - the 12 men penalty then stops the clock that would've run out).

To me, it feels like this was unintentional, but worked out brilliantly for Lanning, and he'd rather spin it as a 'brilliant move' than a Derek Dooley 'oopsie I have 13 guys on the field' moment.
Click to expand...
It literally happened directly after an Oregon timeout, You still think they were unintentionally confused?
 
#24
#24
will5 said:
It literally happened directly after an Oregon timeout, You still think they were unintentionally confused?
Click to expand...
happens more than people want to admit. I think we had 10 guys on the field coming out of timeout once under Heupel, and still made the stop somehow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DiderotsGhost
#25
#25
Nooga said:
Click to expand...

after the fact, its easy to change the narrative to make yourself look better. as they say, winning cures a lot of problems. if this had blown up in their face, no way they are claiming it was intentional.

proof would be some game audio, or even their reaction in real time. if they are over there celebrating the penalty then yeah, they probably did it on purpose. otherwise? It wasn't intentional and this is just to save face.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bearkat_Vol and DiderotsGhost
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top