Spike the &#$^* Ball!

[BostonOrange]

Not that complicated. And the sideline told him not to. So dumb.

 

[Orangepace]

Not that complicated. And the sideline told him not to. So dumb.

Yeah. Just didn't make sense.

 

[Chip]

Made

No

Sense


There's just no good explanation for that finish.

 

[Jake]

Mark richt should be embarrassed.

 

[OttoMets]

Underrated aspect of the USC and Georgia games the past two weekends: being able to honestly think "Syracuse has a coach who would do a better job than that."

 

[RF2044]

Shockingly bad. There is no downside to spiking the ball there. Stops the clock. Maximizes the amount of time left on the clock, which in turn enables you to run two plays instead of just one. Gives you a chance to huddle up and call a play. Also gives the offense a chance to regroup and make sure that the throw goes to the end zone.

 

[Cuseman78]

Mark Richt should get absolutely skewered for that. As bad as Sabans clock management was to end the first half, he figured out a way to trump it. Brutally bad job.

 

[CarolinaCuse]

Only reason I could think of for not spiking the ball was to hurry up and get a quick shot to the end zone. But then I noticed that they spent too damn long actually getting the play off...and the throw was short of the end zone! Richt will be rethinking that decision for the rest of his career.

 

[Scooch]

I am convinced that there isn't a single college coach in America that has the slightest clue how to manage the clock.

 

[Moontan]

...and the throw was short of the end zone! Richt will be rethinking that decision for the rest of his career.

The defensive lineman getting a hand on the ball may have had something to do with that.

Richt was hoping to have 2 chances at the TD.

 

[mountaincuse]

The defensive lineman getting a hand on the ball may have had something to do with that.

Richt was hoping to have 2 chances at the TD.

Clock the ball and you still have two chances...

 

[JKinPhilly]

Murray was initially signaling like he was going to clock it, then they inexplicably ran a play. That call had to come from the sideline...

 

[cuse522]

Clock the ball and you still have two chances...

I think you'd have had three! There were :15 on the clock, if they spike it and two seconds come off, you've got :13. That means if you can run two plays in six or fewer seconds each, you've got a third as well. From roughly the 10-yardline, that's pretty feasible. You should be able to run one in 4-5 seconds.

 

[bnoro]

Bama was on their heels. I liked the move to attack. The WR has to be aware that he should knock that ball down, though.

 

[SmilinBob]

Bama was on their heels. I liked the move to attack. The WR has to be aware that he should knock that ball down, though.

Yeah I'm torn...I agree with you and Bama was reeling and if the ball isn't tipped plus as you pointed out, the wr just hits the ball to the ground the bull dogs get another shot. I think the guy that tipped the ball should get more credit for the win than Richt for the loss. That said, if Georgia had a special 8 yard pass play they haven't shown that much of, spiking the ball would have been the thing to do.

 

[kingottoiii]

He should be fired over that. He cost UGA a national championship with utter stupidity. Not only do you spike it there, you DO NOT call an Fing fade.

 

[rrlbees]

He should be fired over that. He cost UGA a national championship with utter stupidity. Not only do you spike it there, you DO NOT call an Fing fade.

Even with a spike there's no guarantee they score. He didn't cost them a NC but he may have cost them a chance at one. The play wasn't a fade either. He was trying to hit a guy right at the goal line cone, which was a bad play too.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Chip]

Even with a spike there's no guarantee they score. He didn't cost them a NC but he may have cost them a chance at one. The play wasn't a fade either. He was trying to hit a guy right at the goal line cone, which was a bad play too.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Yeah, looked like it was going to be a back shoulder throw to the outside WR. But the inside WR running a pattern that way just caused traffic.

He would have been a genius if it worked. But obviously the higher % play is to clock it and give yourself the most time for multiple plays.

 

[CusefanATL]

Shockingly bad. There is no downside to spiking the ball there. Stops the clock. Maximizes the amount of time left on the clock, which in turn enables you to run two plays instead of just one. Gives you a chance to huddle up and call a play. Also gives the offense a chance to regroup and make sure that the throw goes to the end zone.

Actually enables u to run 3 plays instead of 2... There was 15 seconds left. Stop the clock with 14 seconds left, regroup and have 3 plays.

 

[kuethstheman]

The spike wouldn't have saved any time or given them more plays. The only case for a spike is if you think they would have run a better play. On the other hand, it might have given the defense more time to get organized. The defense wasn't disorganized but you don't know that when you're deciding whether to spike or not.

What cost them time and plays was the batted ball being caught. That could have happened, spike or not.

 

[JD]

It was just bad luck the ball got tipped it was intended for the WR's back shoulder as he crossed the goal line.

 

[BostonOrange]

The spike wouldn't have saved any time or given them more plays. The only case for a spike is if you think they would have run a better play. On the other hand, it might have given the defense more time to get organized. The defense wasn't disorganized but you don't know that when you're deciding whether to spike or not.

What cost them time and plays was the batted ball being caught. That could have happened, spike or not.

They didnt even snap the ball until there were 10 seconds left because they were so disorganized With a spike they would have had 13-14 seconds. That is likely the difference between 3 plays and 2. I do get that they are hoping the d is disorganized as well, but i think in college it is a far better option to spike it and reiterate to your offense that everything has to be in the end zone, get into the best play, make sure ou are lined up correctly, etc. Pretty easy call imo.

 

[CusefanATL]

The spike wouldn't have saved any time or given them more plays. The only case for a spike is if you think they would have run a better play. On the other hand, it might have given the defense more time to get organized. The defense wasn't disorganized but you don't know that when you're deciding whether to spike or not.

What cost them time and plays was the batted ball being caught. That could have happened, spike or not.

It would have saved them 4 or 5 seconds.

Even if he caught the ball (although I doubt it, because if they called a play I doubt there would have been 2 guys so close to each other) they would have had an outside shot at spiking the ball before time ran out.