Believe what you want about the onsides kick strategy

[Arangeman]

But we sure could have used that extra 20-25 yards at the end

 

[skurey]

Results oriented.

 

[Cuseman78]

This again? Good lord.

 

[UnknownOrange]

Hey can you give me the lotto numbers?

What if we kick it deep and they get two first downs? Games over either way. Why not take a chance? Easy to criticize when you know the outcome

 

[Chris02M]

the onside kick you can debate or not , both sides have a case and we got the ball back pretty close to where we would have if kickoff is touchback, since there punter was insane

 

[Arangeman]

Hey can you give me the lotto numbers?

What if we kick it deep and they get two first downs? Games over either way. Why not take a chance? Easy to criticize when you know the outcome

I don't need the outcome to be critical of the strategy. It flies in the face of conventional wisdom. Field position matters to most coaches.

 

[UnknownOrange]

I don't need the outcome to be critical of the strategy. It flies in the face of conventional wisdom. Field position matters to most coaches.

So let’s say FSU takes over at mid field. They get 1 first down. Now they get it to 4th and 1 from the SU 35. Will they kick it? Will they go for it? Who knows

Let’s say they get it at the 20. They get a first down. Same situation ... they get to 4th and 1. Now they punt. And we take over on our own 20-30 yard line ... same situation.

Try and get the ball back. Totally fine with the call

 

[Chip]

If they go 3 and out we’re getting the ball 20-25 yards closer than where we started???

Did their punter not have a foot?

 

[Arangeman]

I don't believe the minuscule chance to recover the onside is worth the trade off of potentially losing field position and impacting the approach of the other team's offensive play calling.

 

[Jake]

Bigger issue is our craptacular onside kick plays.

Fine with the decision, though I would kicked deep.

 

[Arangeman]

If they go 3 and out we’re getting the ball 20-25 yards closer than where we started???

Did their punter not have a foot?

Do we not have a returner? I'm making a guy kick a stressful punt from his own 20 rather than a casual pooch from the 50.

 

[Briancuse]

Should have learned from Lsu, but we didn't. 3 mins and 3 timeouts, kick the ball deep.

 

[Arangeman]

Bigger issue is our craptacular onside kick plays.

Fine with the decision, though I would kicked deep.

Again, we can have different philosophies and many factors may go into it. But if you want to talk results, we haven't gotten a finger on one much less recovered one. And NC ST went for it on 4th due to field position from the onside. And there is at least a decent chance better field position on our last drive could have been helpful today.

 

[bpo57]

I don't need the outcome to be critical of the strategy. It flies in the face of conventional wisdom. Field position matters to most coaches.

There is no question that's the case. It's a situation of statistical probabilities. I love DB but he obviously assigns way too high a probability that the on-sides kick will be recovered by SU. He's tried it in these situations three times and he's 0 for 3. The 30 yards + of field position matter. Plus it's not as hard to stop somebody when you know they're going to run the ball plus you've stymied them on third down all day long.

 

[SWC75]

Bigger issue is our craptacular onside kick plays.

Fine with the decision, though I would kicked deep.

It's not the idea. it's the execution.

 

[Chip]

Do we not have a returner? I'm making a guy kick a stressful punt from his own 20 rather than a casual pooch from the 50.

I apologize. Completely missed 2 plays. Pulling up to the house and FSU was going to go for it on 4th down. Got in the house and we had the ball at the same spot. Assumed we stuffed them. Just realized it was a punt and 21 yard run that put us right back there. When I’m wrong I admit it.

Regardless, bigger issue was Dungey taking that sack after about 10 seconds of pass protection.

I don’t love onside when you have 3 timeouts but it was under 3 minutes so that changes things.

The 2 calls I want back is Murphy’s 48 yard attempt (go for it) and the end of the half with the playcall used instead of taking the points.

 

[blizz]

Hey can you give me the lotto numbers?

Yah. After they're drawn.

 

[JoeSU]

In contrast to our previous onsides kick attempts, I thought this one was pretty good. Regardless, I was fine with the call.

 

[Domedog84]

It is times like these that I am so glad that Dino is our coach, because if this guy was still here we would never have threads even discussing these aggressive calls.

 

[cuse309]

Enough with the hindsight posts. If my Aunt had b--ls she'd be my uncle.
Seriously though, when a coach takes a gamble, and it works, he's a cold blooded genius. If it doesn't, he's an idiot. It's easy to sit in your living room, and yell at the Coach after the play doesn't work.

 

[upperdeck]

the sack cost is time out and yardage.. 5 yds makes the fg good.

 

[Domedog84]

the sack cost is time out and yardage.. 5 yds makes the fg good.

The sack really was the killer. Yardage and time.

 

[Millhouse]

But we sure could have used that extra 20-25 yards at the end

This board knows nothing about probabilities. Hopeless.

 

[Arangeman]

This board knows nothing about probabilities. Hopeless.

Enlighten me. I'm new to this discussion.

 

[Arangeman]

Enough with the hindsight posts. If my Aunt had b--ls she'd be my uncle.
Seriously though, when a coach takes a gamble, and it works, he's a cold blooded genius. If it doesn't, he's an idiot. It's easy to sit in your living room, and yell at the Coach after the play doesn't work.

As I've stated, I'm not critical of the strategy due to the result. I'm critical of the strategy because of what you potentially sacrifice for what you potentially gain.