Selfish plays

[2727Gopher]

In the last two games, the teams playing the Gophers were trying to run the clock out and ended up having breakaways for TDs. In both cases, if the player had simply gone to the ground once he had the 1st down, their team could have run the clock out and won the game. Instead, by scoring, they kept the Gophers alive and against Iowa, it really could have cost them the game. Is that a lack of coaching with the coaches not telling the players to go down in bounds once they got the first down? Or are players today too selfish to give up a TD for the sake of closing the game out?

 

[GophersInIowa]

My guess is it isn't something that is talked about very often. Certainly don't blame their player for just running it in last night. The coaches probably didn't even think about it themselves since they were 50+ yards away from the end zone. If they were close to the goaline, they may have mentioned it.

Either way, I won't blame a player for just scoring. That is what they are taught to do their whole lives, hard to make a quick decision like that in the heat of the moment.

 

[MaxyJR1]

No right answer. He goes down and then they fumble a snap or something. We still needed two touchdowns to win.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[2727Gopher]

My guess is it isn't something that is talked about very often. Certainly don't blame their player for just running it in last night. The coaches probably didn't even think about it themselves since they were 50+ yards away from the end zone. If they were close to the goaline, they may have mentioned it.

Either way, I won't blame a player for just scoring. That is what they are taught to do their whole lives, hard to make a quick decision like that in the heat of the moment.

But in a desperate 3rd and short situation, the Gophers are going to be selling out to try to stop the play. In that situation, if you find a hole, you're very often going to have a clear path to the end zone. As a coach, I would have made sure my player knew he should go down if he gets the first down. I wouldn't say I "blame" a player for doing that, but it does mean that he's either selfish or is not paying attention to the game situation. A guaranteed win is more important than adding a TD to your personal stats.

I also get bothered when there's a 4th down and the ball is thrown 30 yards downfield and the DBs intercept the ball. Bat it down!

 

[gopher7]

In the last two games, the teams playing the Gophers were trying to run the clock out and ended up having breakaways for TDs. In both cases, if the player had simply gone to the ground once he had the 1st down, their team could have run the clock out and won the game. Instead, by scoring, they kept the Gophers alive and against Iowa, it really could have cost them the game. Is that a lack of coaching with the coaches not telling the players to go down in bounds once they got the first down? Or are players today too selfish to give up a TD for the sake of closing the game out?

I joked about this after the TD. "Iowa is trying to keep us in the game". Short of a turnover, the ONLY way we could have won that game the play before the TD, was for Iowa to score a TD, then for us to score a quick TD and recover the onsides kick. Otherwise they could have run out the clock.

On the flip side, I wonder if Claeys was savvy enough to tell the team to let him score on that play?

 

[Some guy]

If Indiana guy had gone down they would have beaten Michigan by 3 in regulation.
Instead. Score a touchdown, give up a touchdown, overtime. You know the rest

 

[RodentRampage]

I don't object to a player scoring if they break through the line. If you sell out to get the stop, there's no one to stop them if they get past you. That's the risk you have to take.

Sent from my XT1031 using Tapatalk

 

[short ornery norwegian]

I have a friend who's a HS FB coach. during the past season, he was in a game where they were trying to come from behind, so in order to get the ball back, they deliberately let the other team score twice. he thought if they could stop the 2-pt conversion, they had a chance to come back and win by essentially trading 6 points for 8. It didn't work that night, but it does happen.

 

[Sparlimb]

In the last two games, the teams playing the Gophers were trying to run the clock out and ended up having breakaways for TDs. In both cases, if the player had simply gone to the ground once he had the 1st down, their team could have run the clock out and won the game. Instead, by scoring, they kept the Gophers alive and against Iowa, it really could have cost them the game. Is that a lack of coaching with the coaches not telling the players to go down in bounds once they got the first down? Or are players today too selfish to give up a TD for the sake of closing the game out?

Happened in Vikes game yesterday. They were up 9 and had the ball 1st and 10 with 2 minutes left. Make a first down and you win. AP breaks through the line and goes 80 yards to make it a 16 point game which is still 2 scores. All that said, take the points.

 

[Gophers7NatTitlesBadgers0]

You guys are aware that if Iowa didn't score there and Minn. proceeds to drive down field and score like they did, we go into the lead and likely win the game right?
I don't think at that point Iowa was guaranteed to run out the clock either.

 

[2727Gopher]

Happened in Vikes game yesterday. They were up 9 and had the ball 1st and 10 with 2 minutes left. Make a first down and you win. AP breaks through the line and goes 80 yards to make it a 16 point game which is still 2 scores. All that said, take the points.

No, in the Vikings game it was different because Oakland still had all 3 time outs. Scoring the TD was the right move because if he had gone down, the Vikings would still have needed another first down. You only go down intentionally when you know you can run out the clock without needing to advance the ball.

 

[2727Gopher]

You guys are aware that if Iowa didn't score there and Minn. proceeds to drive down field and score like they did, we go into the lead and likely win the game right?
I don't think at that point Iowa was guaranteed to run out the clock either.

If the Iowa back had gone down after getting the first down, the Gophers were out of time outs and the Hawkeyes would have been able to run out the entire clock by taking a knee based on the amount of time remaining. By scoring, they went from a 100% chance of winning down to something like a 95% chance. Yes, they were still extremely likely to win, but by going down rather than scoring, they would have been certain to win.

 

[tjgopher]

nm

 

[Gophers7NatTitlesBadgers0]

nm

 

['13Gopher]

In the last two games, the teams playing the Gophers were trying to run the clock out and ended up having breakaways for TDs. In both cases, if the player had simply gone to the ground once he had the 1st down, their team could have run the clock out and won the game. Instead, by scoring, they kept the Gophers alive and against Iowa, it really could have cost them the game. Is that a lack of coaching with the coaches not telling the players to go down in bounds once they got the first down? Or are players today too selfish to give up a TD for the sake of closing the game out?

In the Iowa game, I think the RB saw the clear, flagrant holds and figured the refs may not help them out on the coming plays. Have to take advantage of the horrible referees while you can, and I don't blame him for that.

 

[MNfootballfan]

99 out of 100 times scoring a touchdown is the right thing to do. Yes, by allowing us to get the ball back technically gave us a chance, but the chance was down two scores and recover an onside kick with hardly any time left.

If I am an Iowa fan, I am pleased with a 50 yard dagger. Would I have been nervous with their defense thinking the game was over and let us walk right down and score... probably.

 

[2727Gopher]

99 out of 100 times scoring a touchdown is the right thing to do. Yes, by allowing us to get the ball back technically gave us a chance, but the chance was down two scores and recover an onside kick with hardly any time left.

If I am an Iowa fan, I am pleased with a 50 yard dagger. Would I have been nervous with their defense thinking the game was over and let us walk right down and score... probably.

But this IS the one time in 100 where scoring was the wrong thing to do. I know exactly how I would have reacted if it had been the Gophers with a 5 point lead trying to run out the clock - I would have leaped in the air in excitement as he broke through the line, getting the first down which clinches the win, and then I would have been yelling at him to go down.

I would guess that the Gopher defense had been coached to let him score if he got a 1st down.

 

[Ope3]

Point Spread

The RB was looking for a cover.

 

[GoUgophers]

If Iowa would've just played defense at a level above a bad middle school JV team on the last Minnesota drive, it would be completely irrelevant.

Threads like this are so stupid. No, players should not intentionally go to the ground to give up easy TDs. Especially for a team like Iowa that is fighting national perceptions and needs the style points for Playoff consideration. 40-28 looks a hell of a lot better in the national conversation than 33-28 or 40-35. The key is playing acceptable defense at the end of the game (or really at any point during the evening).

Only a loser with no confidence in their team says something like "let's waste points so the other team can't run it down our throats" and score again. You play to win the game, not act like a pussy and roll over and play dead in key moments.

 

[2727Gopher]

If Iowa would've just played defense at a level above a bad middle school JV team on the last Minnesota drive, it would be completely irrelevant.

Threads like this are so stupid. No, players should not intentionally go to the ground to give up easy TDs. Especially for a team like Iowa that is fighting national perceptions and needs the style points for Playoff consideration. 40-28 looks a hell of a lot better in the national conversation than 33-28 or 40-35. The key is playing acceptable defense at the end of the game (or really at any point during the evening).

Only a loser with no confidence in their team says something like "let's waste points so the other team can't run it down our throats" and score again. You play to win the game, not act like a pussy and roll over and play dead in key moments.

Playing to win the game means you make decisions that are most likely to win you the game. Going down after getting the first down is more likely to win them the game than scoring the TD. It's not a debatable point. A discussion of whether they're better off with a certain victory or an almost certain victory combined with some "style points" is certainly a valid discussion, but it's not black and white. Personally, I'd rather be sure of the win than tack on a few meaningless points.