Fourth down call - Could they have run a play call worse than that?

Doberman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2015
Messages
2,304
Likes
5,321
I see no reason why the data wouldn't translate to college, do you?

eta: I can think of one reason. I'll share after your reply.
I think the data would be even more in favor of the college game. More QB's of the dual threat variety than the typical pro pocket passer, but that is changing rapidly as well.

In most instances.....football is football, IMO. The line of scrimmage usually tells the tale. (and I have a feeling this is where you are going with your 'one reason')
 

McDad

I can't brain today; I has the dumb.
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
39,760
Likes
64,047
I think the data would be even more in favor of the college game. More QB's of the dual threat variety than the typical pro pocket passer, but that is changing rapidly as well.

In most instances.....football is football, IMO. The line of scrimmage usually tells the tale. (and I have a feeling this is where you are going with your 'one reason')
I can see that. I thought after my initial reply, I thought maybe favorable to NFL due to NFL prejudicial in favor of QBs.
 
Likes: Doberman

A.J.

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
257
Likes
901
We have to have a “ heavy” package somewhere that puts the ball into a player like Beckwith’s hands and let’s him pound it for a yard.
I kept thinking the same thing like they used to use Crouch for. Beckwith came to mind, or give the the ball to somebody like Simmons. I bet he could have got the yardage we needed. Like the Fridge back in the day for the Bears.
 
Likes: JK Vol

Doberman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2015
Messages
2,304
Likes
5,321
I can see that. I thought after my initial reply, I thought maybe favorable to NFL due to NFL prejudicial in favor of QBs.
I thought your 'one thing' would be ......disparities in team "level". Say.....UT has a better chance to convert a QB sneak vs BG, than vice versa due to caliber of athlete. Because of that fact, BG may feel like they have a better chance at passing, or something else, for a first down on 4th and short, due to not matching up physically at the LOS.

Which would have been a fine argument, and impossible to disagree with.

But for our purposes UT/Pitt is even steven, and I think you'd agree.
 
Likes: McDad

Doberman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2015
Messages
2,304
Likes
5,321
I kept thinking the same thing like they used to use Crouch for. Beckwith came to mind, or give the the ball to somebody like Simmons. I bet he could have got the yardage we needed. Like the Fridge back in the day for the Bears.
These gimmicks usually end up in a fumble. Big guys have no hands, and don't get the reps for that. I realize it has been done successfully on some occasions, however.
 

McDad

I can't brain today; I has the dumb.
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
39,760
Likes
64,047
I thought your 'one thing' would be ......disparities in team "level". Say.....UT has a better chance to convert a QB sneak vs BG, than vice versa due to caliber of athlete. Because of that fact, BG may feel like they have a better chance at passing, or something else, for a first down on 4th and short, due to not matching up physically at the LOS.

Which would have been a fine argument, and impossible to disagree with.

But for our purposes UT/Pitt is even steven, and I think you'd agree.
I would agree it is even steven. Unfortunately, Pitt dominated our center and guards on that play. Hard for me to say it wouldn't be the same with a sneak. I've heard others make a case why it could be different but I am not sure it would, assuming the same personnel are used and we didn't have a 'jumbo' package.
 

Doberman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2015
Messages
2,304
Likes
5,321
I would agree it is even steven. Unfortunately, Pitt dominated our center and guards on that play. Hard for me to say it wouldn't be the same with a sneak. I've heard others make a case why it could be different but I am not sure it would, assuming the same personnel are used and we didn't have a 'jumbo' package.
We'll never know.

But if my middle is going to collapse, I'd rather be under center with a 7 yard head start. Maybe I could fall in a gap, or slither in the pile.

Getting blown up 3 yards in the backfield will never happen on a QB sneak.
 
Likes: Delmar

McDad

I can't brain today; I has the dumb.
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
39,760
Likes
64,047
We'll never know.

But if my middle is going to collapse, I'd rather be under center with a 7 yard head start. Maybe I could fall in a gap, or slither in the pile.

Getting blown up 3 yards in the backfield will never happen on a QB sneak.
Another poster, Berry4Heisman, watched UCF games. CJH has a jumbo alignment. Surely, he didn't leave it in Orlando. I hope we can have a sneak or power run option on the table in the future (if it wasn't available for Pitt).
 

Doberman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2015
Messages
2,304
Likes
5,321
Another poster, Berry4Heisman, watched UCF games. CJH has a jumbo alignment. Surely, he didn't leave it in Orlando. I hope we can have a sneak or power run option on the table in the future (if it wasn't available for Pitt).
Scary if that play was unavailable. Mano e Mano. Hat on hat. Drive forward. I think I could draw that one up.
 

VolArmy74

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
4,927
Likes
6,966
It wouldn't have mattered what we called there because the OL got completely smashed. They were pushed back a full yard as soon as the ball was snapped. We ran from the shotgun successfully there earlier in the game and scored. Sometimes your players just have to beat their man and they didn't on that play. I watched a high school back rush off tackle for 3 tds from the shotgun from inside the 5 Friday night. His OL took care of business.
 

sjt18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
44,089
Likes
31,592
The fourth down call was horrible.. Snap the ball five yards deep then slowly had the ball off to 175 pound running back up the middle. Why do our coaches do this ?. What is the success rate for a quarterback sneak with six inches to make. Heupel must have got trained under the Butch Jones school of quarterback play... A touchdown ties the game !!!!!!!
Can you tell us what the play call was? If it was a straight dive then Pitt anticipated it and stuffed it. If there was a pull option for Hooker then he simply blew it. This has nothing to do with Butch Jones. You are just looking for reasons to tag Heupel with a failure. Let Heupel prove himself. Jones isn't his baggage to carry.
 
Likes: HalfullVol

hUTch2002

Wait til next year!
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Messages
8,904
Likes
8,877
I saw 4 passes in the Swamp from 4th and goal by Butch Jones

This was a Butch Jones type move
Not just 4th and goal but 4th and goal from inside the 2 yard line. It might have even been on the 1 but it’s hard to remember. 4 passes though I was so pissed. I was Saturday too. I though Heupel had a decent game plan. That was a dud of a play at a critical time though.
 

McDad

I can't brain today; I has the dumb.
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
39,760
Likes
64,047
Can you tell us what the play call was? If it was a straight dive then Pitt anticipated it and stuffed it. If there was a pull option for Hooker then he simply blew it. This has nothing to do with Butch Jones. You are just looking for reasons to tag Heupel with a failure. Let Heupel prove himself. Jones isn't his baggage to carry.
Heupel mentioned in the post game presser, Hooker didn't have an option on that play. Not knowing how they call the play or if they give the QB a second option after he looks of the defense's alignment, I don't know if the "didn't have and option" is referencing the option to keep or a pre-snap change of play.
 
Likes: sjt18

TC 83

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2018
Messages
411
Likes
727
My point being there are several attempted sneaks each year that fail. There are several snaps from the gun each year that succeed. Vice versa to both. If Hooker keeps it we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Okay but I still don’t agree with going shotgun there and I never will on any 4th and inches. I would rather get stuffed on the sneak than dropped for a loss 2-3 yards in the backfield.
 

Delmar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2011
Messages
1,236
Likes
1,547
U are a very smart football fan. All of it is on Hooker. These are the quick decisions that you hear the coaches talking about. Hooker saw the Saftey come down and a edge rusher squeeze, but at the snap it looked like they were both coming for him. He had his mind made up to give it to Wright. IMHO, Hooker was supposed to ride the back then pull. Had he done that he would have easily gotten the 1st down and may have scored if he could beat the Saftey 1 on 1. If the 1st option was to run right at the defense they would have put a bigger back in the game.
If “if’s and but’s” were candy and nuts, we’d all have a big freaking party wouldn’t we? You simply call a QB sneak and get the 6 inches and then call whatever you like for the next 4 plays to get in the end zone. Too much can and did go wrong on a shotgun snap in that situation. You just don’t do it.
 

Delmar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2011
Messages
1,236
Likes
1,547
None of what I said matters? So you don’t have the luxury of hindsight being 20/20? What would you be saying if the exact play had worked?
But it didn’t work, now did it? The result of that is you get second guessed all day, every day when you don’t call the obvious QB sneak.
 

VN Store


Sponsors
 

Top