UT/Bama game discussion (split)

#27
#27
hatvol96 said:
Every kicker has missed kicks. By your brilliant deduction, that means the smart play is to never kick field goals. A competent kicker will make a 45 yard field goal more often than not. That's the point.
Click to expand...

Yes you are correct but this is the same kicker that was already 1of 3 on the day. So logic says lets get this guy a little coser. Yes?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#30
#30
BIGBUM said:
Yes you are correct but this is the same kicker that was already 1of 3 on the day. So logic says lets get this guy a little coser. Yes?
Click to expand...
I probably would have, but wasn't bothered by the decision to go ahead and kick.
 
#31
#31
hatvol96 said:
The amount of time left has an effect on the probability the kicker will make the kick?
Click to expand...

No, but the distance does. I'm pretty sure if you asked 100 kickers, at least 99 of them would tell you that it is easier to kick a 27 yard field goal than a 37 yeard field goal.
 
#32
#32
BIGBUM said:
Yes you are correct but this is the same kicker that was already 1of 3 on the day. So logic says lets get this guy a little coser. Yes?
Click to expand...

I don't know that getting any closer would have made that much difference. Had Cody not bulldozed the Sullins bros. and blocked the kick, it probably would have hit one of them in the back of the head it was so low. Maybe that's because it was too far away, or maybe it was just because Lincoln sucked pretty hard all last season, and particularly that game, so I'm not sure it would have matter one way or another. He wasn't making that kick.
 
#33
#33
Volfan8282 said:
I know what you said. You're saying it's all relative. And, I'm saying that if people want to get all moral and up on their high horse and dismiss Kiffin b/c he's a weasel and all that, then a principle is a principle is a principle. No? I just don't get the double standard being set here.
Click to expand...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
I think what angers most people is not that he wanted to go to USC or even that the timing was bad. I think it was that his true motives were exposed. He misrepresented himself the whole time.He made everyone think he was interested in building a championship program while he didn't respect our traditions or our school. He made a mockery of the program by running his mouth to the media instead of representing the school with class.he tried to change the program to be like USC instead of appreciating our identity.as fans we defended him wholeheartedly but his actions showed he couldn't wait to leave us in his wake. Its the feeling of being used and deceived that has caused all the anger. Its not that he is gone but what he did while he was here that people are upset about. Yes, its a business but its also a public institution.he was not a team player and used everyone for his own purposes. Not cool!
 
Last edited:
#35
#35
britlee4ut said:
No, but the distance does. I'm pretty sure if you asked 100 kickers, at least 99 of them would tell you that it is easier to kick a 27 yard field goal than a 37 yeard field goal.
Click to expand...

Not always true. Sometimes the angles on closer kicks from the side hash can be more difficult than ones from farther away. And unless the kicker is half a**ing his kick, there should be no difference between 27 and 37 yards for a college level kicker, both are easily in range.
 
#36
#36
BigHerm3000 said:
When was Lincoln a competent kicker this year?
Click to expand...
He missed from in close early in the game. What difference does getting closer make? The fact of the matter was that UT had an awful kicker. From 55 or 25 yards, he's getting that kick blocked or missing it. That's what losers do. However, as a coach, you have to assume guys on scholarship can perform at a moderate level of competence. The alternative was to have an offensive line with two walkons blocking for a quarterback who threw more than his fair share of interceptions in an attempt to get 10 more yards. Why bother? The 10 yards wasn't the problem. The fact our kicker was awful was.
 
#37
#37
hatvol96 said:
He missed from in close early in the game. What difference does getting closer make? The fact of the matter was that UT had an awful kicker. From 55 or 25 yards, he's getting that kick blocked or missing it. That's what losers do. However, as a coach, you have to assume guys on scholarship can perform at a moderate level of competence. The alternative was to have an offensive line with two walkons blocking for a quarterback who threw more than his fair share of interceptions in an attempt to get 10 more yards. Why bother? The 10 yards wasn't the problem. The fact our kicker was awful was.
Click to expand...

So even though everyone knew Lincoln wasn't going to make it, because in your words "he was awful" , you're still ok with it?

Did you want Alabama to win (wouldn't surprise me at all) or am I missing something?
 
#38
#38
Tenacious D said:
Say what you will about Hat, but its clear from this statement that he takes an objective approach in the careful process of formulating his opinions of others. This is further evidenced in his awarding Coach Dooley with the endearing nickname of, "Coach Doofus".

If Coach Dooley has proven one thing thus far, it's that he's a "doofus" - on that much, I am certain that we can all agree.

I do like the fallacious nature of your argument....if it's reasonable to assume that Kiffin would be in public with a woman who was neither his wife or mother, clearly, these other allegations must be untrue.

I would expect a far more substantive argument from a criminal defense attorney, Hat, and not the caricature you've seemed to become.
Click to expand...
Speak in layman's terms...I mean this is a Tennessee forum. LOL....just kidding . The shorter the kick...the better the odds. Pure and simple....
 
#39
#39
BigHerm3000 said:
So even though everyone knew Lincoln wasn't going to make it, because in your words "he was awful" , you're still ok with it?

Did you want Alabama to win (wouldn't surprise me at all) or am I missing something?
Click to expand...
What was the alternative to having him kick it? Simply eschew the field goal completely and try to score a touchdown?
 
#40
#40
BigHerm3000 said:
So even though everyone knew Lincoln wasn't going to make it, because in your words "he was awful" , you're still ok with it?

Did you want Alabama to win (wouldn't surprise me at all) or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

It was a lose lose situation. The only purpose for running another offensive play would have been to take a shot at the endzone and keep Lincoln off the field altogether.. On that day, Lincoln was as likely to hit from 52 as he was from 42 or 22 for that matter. An additional 10 yards served no purpose at that time, so why risk an INT, fumble, or sack?
 
#41
#41
hatvol96 said:
What was the alternative to having him kick it? Simply eschew the field goal completely and try to score a touchdown?
Click to expand...

Might as well take a few shots, I mean, we had the time right? And we knew the kicker was going to miss, right?

So yeah, trying to score a touchdown would have been ideal.
 
#42
#42
volhammer said:
why are you even on this board? dooley is our new coach.
kiffin screwed the program, it really is that simply. go to the usc boards and praise him or something. but go no one here cares.
Click to expand...

If you had the reading comprehension level higher than a 3 year old, you would know that I'm not bashing our new coach. I completely understand why he left LA Tech.
 
#44
#44
bleedorange0037 said:
It was a lose lose situation. The only purpose for running another offensive play would have been to take a shot at the endzone and keep Lincoln off the field altogether.. On that day, Lincoln was as likely to hit from 52 as he was from 42 or 22 for that matter. An additional 10 yards served no purpose at that time, so why risk an INT, fumble, or sack?
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
#45
#45
I had more of a problem with the UCLA ending than the bama kick or don't kick debate...
 
#47
#47
bleedorange0037 said:
It was a lose lose situation. The only purpose for running another offensive play would have been to take a shot at the endzone and keep Lincoln off the field altogether.. On that day, Lincoln was as likely to hit from 52 as he was from 42 or 22 for that matter. An additional 10 yards served no purpose at that time, so why risk an INT, fumble, or sack?
Click to expand...

He did make one kick that day....why not get closer and in the middle of the field? Give him the best possible chance to win.
 
#49
#49
britlee4ut said:
He did make one kick that day....why not get closer and in the middle of the field? Give him the best possible chance to win.
Click to expand...

I suppose that would have been an option, but hindsight being 20/20, I am confident in saying that Daniel Lincoln wasn't making that kick from any distance or any part of the field on that day. However, at the time, running another offensive play involved risking a turnover or a sack, both of which would have completely eliminated any opportunity to even take a shot at the win. I didn't have a problem with the call at the time, and I still don't. It just wasn't our day.
 
#50
#50
Also, given his recent performance, some might forget that at a point in his career, that distance was actually a makeable kick for Lincoln. The coaching staff at least had reason to think it was a possibility for him to make the kick.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top