The right decision:

1982cock

Member
Apr 25, 2019
84
72
18
I’ll say again, under the circumstances (fourth and 12) I don’t believe any coach would have gone for it
You take the points. White had kicked well and the defense was making more stops. I don’t think any coach,under the circumstances would have gone for it on fourth and twelve
I personally think Spurrier would have with 3 minutes and needing TD but we ll never know
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscedge21

king ward

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 1999
29,023
20,966
113
69
Lancaster, SC
Like you said, i have hind sight on my side.
Actually you don't. If he had done it your way and won the game doing it, then you would. He could have done it your way and still not won the game. No one can cash in on options not taken unless there is a way to know what the outcome would have been. There isn't.
 

castlesl

Member
Aug 4, 2006
487
526
93
Actually you don't. If he had done it your way and won the game doing it, then you would. He could have done it your way and still not won the game. No one can cash in on options not taken unless there is a way to know what the outcome would have been. There isn't.
I was actually wrong about the yardage, it was the TN 28 not the 39. So only a 3 yd. difference in taking a meaningless 3 pts or going for it and not making it.

Call me crazy but give me two opportunities to stay in a game instead of one.
 

castlesl

Member
Aug 4, 2006
487
526
93
And if he'd gone for it on 4th and 12, and failed, y'all would be bitching about not getting the points there because we could still stop them, we have 3 timeouts, blah-blah-blah.
you need 7 points to continue the game. the 3 points are meaningless. Still has to score a TD.

Look the odds weren't great either way, but not going for it was giving up one opportunity at getting the very thing you were going to have to come right back and try for again after giving TN the ball and stopping them.

The downside to going for it and not making it was likely no worse that giving TN the opportunity to start from the 28 instead of the 25 on their drive. No difference.
 

castlesl

Member
Aug 4, 2006
487
526
93
DING! DING!! DING!!! And we're paying Willie over $4MM PER YEAR???
I guess math was not his strong suit.
I get why posters on this board don't get it, they are not that familiar with the game enough to know the nuances. But how that staff didn't know that they should have gone for it, is beyond me. Look i get it, 4th and 12 is a mile, but there just wasn't a down side to give up not to have that one opportunity to try something.
 

king ward

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 1999
29,023
20,966
113
69
Lancaster, SC
Given Spurriers gunslinger mentality and his superior play calling abilities, I wouldn’t disagree with you
And no one will ever know how that would have turned out, either. And neither can anyone be sure that, given the same set of circumstances, Nick Saban would do the same thing as Spurrier.
 

castlesl

Member
Aug 4, 2006
487
526
93
And no one will ever know how that would have turned out, either. And neither can anyone be sure that, given the same set of circumstances, Nick Saban would do the same thing as Spurrier.
You don't need to know how it turns out to justify the decision.

Here is an analogy: I will give you $1,000 if you can hit a ballon with a dart in one toss and pop it at 10' or i will give you $1,000 if you pop it with two attempts at 10' 3".

Do you need to know the outcome before you know which one of these decision makes more sense? Two chances vs. 1 with very little difference in the penalty for the second attempt.

The difference between going for it and not going for it was 6 seconds off the clock and 3 yards. The 3 points don't factor in.

If it was a 9 point game, then by all means kick the FG and then drive the field, but it was only 7.
 

jthunder

Member
Mar 11, 2005
81
79
18
I get why posters on this board don't get it, they are not that familiar with the game enough to know the nuances. But how that staff didn't know that they should have gone for it, is beyond me. Look i get it, 4th and 12 is a mile, but there just wasn't a down side to give up not to have that one opportunity to try something.
I agree with your posts. I think most coaches would have gone for it on the 4th and 12 from the 28 down by 7 with a little over 3 minutes in the game. You have to get a TD somewhere and that gave you two chances.

Also, I think you have a better chance of converting a 4th and 12 than driving 81 yards with no timeouts in 1:30.
 

1982cock

Member
Apr 25, 2019
84
72
18
You don't need to know how it turns out to justify the decision.

Here is an analogy: I will give you $1,000 if you can hit a ballon with a dart in one toss and pop it at 10' or i will give you $1,000 if you pop it with two attempts at 10' 3".

Do you need to know the outcome before you know which one of these decision makes more sense? Two chances vs. 1 with very little difference in the penalty for the second attempt.

The difference between going for it and not going for it was 6 seconds off the clock and 3 yards. The 3 points don't factor in.

If it was a 9 point game, then by all means kick the FG and then drive the field, but it was only 7.
Like this analogy. Simplifies it
 

king ward

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 1999
29,023
20,966
113
69
Lancaster, SC
You don't need to know how it turns out to justify the decision.

Here is an analogy: I will give you $1,000 if you can hit a ballon with a dart in one toss and pop it at 10' or i will give you $1,000 if you pop it with two attempts at 10' 3".

Do you need to know the outcome before you know which one of these decision makes more sense? Two chances vs. 1 with very little difference in the penalty for the second attempt.

The difference between going for it and not going for it was 6 seconds off the clock and 3 yards. The 3 points don't factor in.

If it was a 9 point game, then by all means kick the FG and then drive the field, but it was only 7.
You can't know anything you don't do. The point of contention is the idea that there was a clearly superior alternative which renders the decision made as unfathomable. That position is fallacious - hokum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USCBatgirl21

castlesl

Member
Aug 4, 2006
487
526
93
You can't know anything you don't do. The point of contention is the idea that there was a clearly superior alternative which renders the decision made as unfathomable. That position is fallacious - hokum.
I don't even need to ask if you have ever played a down a football in your life.
 
Sep 15, 2020
112
130
43
You can't know anything you don't do. The point of contention is the idea that there was a clearly superior alternative which renders the decision made as unfathomable. That position is fallacious - hokum.
Perhaps, I'm missing your point.

We went for the FG and made it. We also stopped TN. So the BEST results occurred under that decision scenario. But, We still needed a TD to continue, another FG would be just as meaningless. AND WE STILL LOST. All that FG did was take time off the clock and give the Vols the ball on the 25 instead of the 28.

If we missed the FG, TN gets the ball on the 28. And we still need a TD.

If we don't go for the FG, we need 12 yards for a 1st down and another 4 downs or a Hail Mary that is answered. If we don't make a 1st down, at best they get the ball on the 28 (unless we are thrown for a loss).

Doug Flutie built an entire career on one Hail Mary against Miami. John Elway built an entire career on using that extra 6 seconds, time after time, after time, in the NFL.

Seriously, I'm not trying to pull your tail. I just think that you're missing our point.
 
Last edited:

hillstosea

Member
Apr 12, 2020
444
402
63
And no one will ever know how that would have turned out, either. And neither can anyone be sure that, given the same set of circumstances, Nick Saban would do the same thing as Spurrier.
Oh, I’m not saying going for it on fourth and 12 was the best thing if it was spurrier. Shouldn’t no matter who the coach was IMO. But, knowing spurrier, I believe he would have tried it
 

king ward

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 1999
29,023
20,966
113
69
Lancaster, SC
Perhaps, I'm missing your point.

We went for the FG and made it. We also stopped TN. So the BEST results occurred under that decision scenario. But, We still needed a TD to continue, another FG would be just as meaningless. AND WE STILL LOST. All that FG did was take time off the clock and give the Vols the ball on the 25 instead of the 28.

If we missed the FG, TN gets the ball on the 28. And we still need a TD.

If we don't go for the FG, we need 12 yards for a 1st down and another 4 downs or a Hail Mary that is answered. If we don't make a 1st down, at best they get the ball on the 28 (unless we are thrown for a loss).

Doug Flutie built an entire career on one Hail Mary against Miami. John Elway built an entire career on using that extra 6 seconds, time after time, after time, in the NFL.

Seriously, I'm not trying to pull your tail. I just think that you're missing our point.
At least that, in disagreeing with me, you are courteous. I appreciate that in a poster, whether we agree or disagree. And I would call you to witness, I never said the other decision would have been incorrect. With both offense and defense doing their jobs, it would have had a chance of success. I think the same could be said for the course that was taken. We needed to stop Tennessee on the first series of downs. That's all I have to say about it.
 

Gamecock Lifer

Well-Known Member
Oct 8, 2008
7,450
3,387
113
On more manageable yardage and/or with less time on the clock, I would agree. It's related to the same doctrine that governs defensive penalties on made field goal attempts, even when a team is near the end zone. Seldom does a coach take three off the board to get another crack at seven. In this case, if you have a reasonable chance of getting the ball back with time to operate and are facing fourth and long yardage, I see nothing wrong with kicking the field goal. I guess I'm fortunate in the fact that being in the minority won't keep me awake tonight;). Also, I watched Holtz and those lose a big game up at Tennessee in OT that we could have won in regulation. We got our first punt blocked, which resulted in going down 7-0 in the first two minutes to a Top 10 team on the road. Then Demetris Summers showed out in the first half but Colquitt kept us on a long field all night long. That was also the loss in whch Strong's defense gave up third and 23 or something. It was a wrenching loss. I guess it stayed with me. It had program-changing potential. But we were done after 60 minutes. We had nothing in OT. Like I said, it stays with you.
I guess I am in the minority with you on this one King. 4th and short- toss up, most people would go for it. 4th and TWLEVE with enough time to get the ball back, you kick it and go for the win! Totally agree... it worked perfectly until the punt! 🤦‍♂️

Regardless, it was a great game and I felt the coaches did a fine job, but poor execution on a handful of plays costs us. UT made one more big play than us so we lost... To the #16 team in the country.
 

Garnet chicken

Well-Known Member
Jan 1, 2004
5,584
3,365
113
I tend to agree with castle. Your first and foremost objective is to score TD. Take the 3 if down by 6 but not 7. You can’t worry about the other factors at this juncture of the game. Which option gives you the best chance of scoring that all important touchdown? Maybe you think it’s going 75 yards with no timeouts. Maybe it is but I don’t. Also what’s wrong w overtime— didn’t have to be winning in regulation ?
4th and 12 and they double Shi Smith, exactly who are you going to throw to get those 12 yards? I would say the possibility of that happening was probably 10% or less.
 

king ward

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 1999
29,023
20,966
113
69
Lancaster, SC
I guess I am in the minority with you on this one King. 4th and short- toss up, most people would go for it. 4th and TWLEVE with enough time to get the ball back, you kick it and go for the win! Totally agree... it worked perfectly until the punt! 🤦‍♂️

Regardless, it was a great game and I felt the coaches did a fine job, but poor execution on a handful of plays costs us. UT made one more big play than us so we lost... To the #16 team in the country.
It was up to the defense not to give up a first down after the kickoff. That way, we would have gotten the ball back with more time, more timeouts, and further up the field We failed there and then we booted the punted ball. Just a disastrous sequence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gamecock Lifer

USCLaw85

Member
Dec 18, 2016
359
316
63
Then the decision to kick the field goal wasn't stupid. It was borderline because of the time remaining, but on the whole, it wasn't stupid.
Not a completely wrong decision to go for the three points, but i figure there are two chances to win the game: right there on fourth down and a second chance if you get the ball back , and the second one is a maybe. If you kick a field goal, then chance number one is given up, which we did and which we gave up. And chance number two maybe turned into a never.
 

Silver_Coconut

Active Member
Feb 12, 2020
1,223
907
113
Kicking the field goal is actually going for the win. If you convert the 4th and 12, you better score quick, or you’ll have to start calling timeouts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: king ward

uscedge21

Member
Mar 5, 2019
402
424
63
Playa del Carmen, Mexico
Kicking the field goal is actually going for the win. If you convert the 4th and 12, you better score quick, or you’ll have to start calling timeouts.
I respectfully disagree. We did not need to score quickly if we pick up the first down. Even better if we don't. That would give TN less time to come back and kick a FG. I get your point. Two scores are needed to win but I would rather try to tie the game with two chances as opposed to trying to win with one chance.
 

Gamecock Lifer

Well-Known Member
Oct 8, 2008
7,450
3,387
113
I respectfully disagree. We did not need to score quickly if we pick up the first down. Even better if we don't. That would give TN less time to come back and kick a FG. I get your point. Two scores are needed to win but I would rather try to tie the game with two chances as opposed to trying to win with one chance.
Well articulated- and I can respect that angle. Though I personally liked the “go for the win” approach, you put it in simple terms that makes more sense than any other person claiming it was the wrong call. It really did come down to whether the coach wanted to go for the win or the tie. 👍
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscedge21

kidrobinski

Active Member
Dec 5, 2015
1,129
1,244
113
If we’re talking statistic probability I’d like to see a stat of the times one of Muschamps CAROLINA teams has driven 75 yards (the most likely distance even without them gaining 8 yards on first down) and scored a TD with less than 3 minutes and no timeouts. Roll the dice Muschamp and go for a win! If you don’t get it you are in Virtually the same position that you were in after the field goal. Would Leach or Spurrier kicked a field goal?
Down 7 on fourth and 12 with a four minute clock? Absolutely they would.
 

SOSUSC

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 5, 2006
6,482
3,973
113
Down 7 with a few minutes to play. Forth down and a few. Decided to kick a field goal. Why not go for it. It you don't make, Tenn. is backed up, you still have your time outs left instead of giving them yardage down the field. If you stop them, you get the ball back. Might have made the first down.
Its Chump. He does not call plays that way.
 

Silver_Coconut

Active Member
Feb 12, 2020
1,223
907
113
I respectfully disagree. We did not need to score quickly if we pick up the first down. Even better if we don't. That would give TN less time to come back and kick a FG. I get your point. Two scores are needed to win but I would rather try to tie the game with two chances as opposed to trying to win with one chance.
That’s why it’s playing for the tie...