Why did we punt with 6 minutes to go?

[El Amin Fan]

Why did we concede/throw in the white towel? We were on our 45 or 50 and down two TDs at the time, and we punted?! Made no sense to me. What am I missing?

 

[RailBaronYarr]

Great question. Not to mention on the road, favored to lose, and struggling to stop a Michigan offense that bleeds the clock. We punt, give up a 5 yard return, how different is that than a turnover on downs at the 50 yard line?

I know, armchair QBs/coaches are so great.. BUT. I understand kicking the first FG in the second half. But after that, why not go for it on 4th down the second time? You're down 21-10 on the road against an offense that is picking up momentum. So get the TD and you're within 4, you shut the crowd up a bit. Don't? Mich scores on their next possession? Then big deal, we lose anyway. Just really doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[SickAndTiredOfLosingToWI]

That is a good question. I've got another one. Why did we huddle in the 2-minute situation at the end of the 1st half? If we were trying to kill the clock, why not knee it instead of risking an injury? Michigan had no timeouts if I recall.

 

[John Galt]

We were at our own 40 yard line, and it was 4th and 10. What are the odds we convert that? 10%?

After we punted, we had them in 3rd and long. Get a stop and we get the ball back with 3-4 minutes.

 

[SickAndTiredOfLosingToWI]

We were at our own 40 yard line, and it was 4th and 10. What are the odds we convert that? 10%?

After we punted, we had them in 3rd and long. Get a stop and we get the ball back with 3-4 minutes.

What good is having the ball back with 3-4 minutes left, down 2 scores, when this offense takes 8 minutes to drive for a single score?

 

[goldengophers]

We were at our own 40 yard line, and it was 4th and 10. What are the odds we convert that? 10%?

After we punted, we had them in 3rd and long. Get a stop and we get the ball back with 3-4 minutes.

10% is better than the odds of pulling out a win if you punt.

 

[John Galt]

What good is having the ball back with 3-4 minutes left, down 2 scores, when this offense takes 8 minutes to drive for a single score?

If it takes 8 minutes as you say, we couldn't have scored regardless.

 

[John Galt]

10% is better than the odds of pulling out a win if you punt.

Michigan could have fumbled the punt or had a TO on offense. Both of those scenarios are about as likely as us converting a 4th and 10, plus either of those would have given us better field position.

Anyone who thinks this team is going to win by opening up the playbook and throwing the ball 20 yards downfield 10-15x per game and converting 4th and 10s doesn't understand our limitations.

 

[GopherNation]

I agree with John. I liked the punt there. We weren't able to convert 2nd or 3rd, and our odds were slim to get 4th. Plus, if you dont get it there, the game is over. By punting, you at least give your D a chance to make a stop and use some timeouts and get the ball back. In hind site I would have gone for it, but at the time I thought it was the best move to extend the game. At the end of the day we lost by 30 points. There are bigger issues than the decision to punt.

 

[RailBaronYarr]

Tell me how many turnovers Michigan gave up in the previous 52 minutes of gameplay? How long it takes to get a 3 and out? What % of their drives we had forced said 3 and out?

Now, what % of out pass plays were completed for 10 yards or more?

The reality is that we completely conceded defeat in an effort to not give Mich a short field. Same reason we took both FGs instead of going for the TD when Mich's lead was getting wider by the drive.

 

[goldengophers]

I agree with John. I liked the punt there. We weren't able to convert 2nd or 3rd, and our odds were slim to get 4th. Plus, if you dont get it there, the game is over. By punting, you at least give your D a chance to make a stop and use some timeouts and get the ball back. In hind site I would have gone for it, but at the time I thought it was the best move to extend the game. At the end of the day we lost by 30 points. There are bigger issues than the decision to punt.

It doesn't require hindsight, merely statistical odds. You don't punt there. This is a window into the bigger issues of the conservative philosophy holding this team back.

 

[GopherNation]

How many 4th and longs have we converted this year? The answer is 0%. Gardner, however, leads all of college football in turnovers. And the D forced Michigan into a three and out on the previous drive. It's easy to second guess a decision after the fact.

Tell me how many turnovers Michigan gave up in the previous 52 minutes of gameplay? How long it takes to get a 3 and out? What % of their drives we had forced said 3 and out?

Now, what % of out pass plays were completed for 10 yards or more?

The reality is that we completely conceded defeat in an effort to not give Mich a short field. Same reason we took both FGs instead of going for the TD when Mich's lead was getting wider by the drive.

 

[RailBaronYarr]

How many 4th and longs have we converted this year? The answer is 0%. Gardner, however, leads all of college football in turnovers. And the D forced Michigan into a three and out on the previous drive. It's easy to second guess a decision after the fact.

We didn't force anything. A perfect pass for what would be an easy first down was dropped. There was no sign that we'd stop them in one set of downs, let alone at all. And lo and behold, we didn't.

We're down by 15 at this point, on the road. You take the chance, because at worst they get the ball on your 40, only 20-30 yards closer to the end zone than they would have anyway, with your offense being 2-3 minutes further away from getting the ball back in a 2 possession game. With an offense that takes its sweet time every play (did we ever snap it with more than 10 seconds on the play clock, even in the 4th quarter?).

 

[mnsportsgeek]

The answer is simple. We gave up.

 

[AEmerson40]

I understand the decision to punt, even though I disagree with it. What I won't accept is the complete lack of urgency this offense shows in situations where they need to hurry. There was one play in the 4th where we ran the clock down to 1 and then had a false start! It happened against Iowa, and it happened several times this week. For that, I call the coaches stupid. Or maybe wimps, depending on their motivation for that strategy.

 

[John Galt]

It doesn't require hindsight, merely statistical odds. You don't punt there. This is a window into the bigger issues of the conservative philosophy holding this team back.

I've about had it with the notion that the team is waiting to explode on offense if it wasn't for Limegrover's conservative playcalling. We started a freshman at QB, making the first road start of his career, at Michigan. Our WRs are a JC walk-on that just received a scholarship (Engel), a guy that was at Rochester Community College 2 years ago (Fruechte), and 3 freshman who have about 5 career catches between them (Jones, Wolitarsky, Harbison). Plus a sophomore who has about 5 career catches (Maye). What would your gameplan have been? Use Leidner in the shotgun, throw the ball 30 times, and run deep posts?

Has Limegrover's playcalling been conservative? Absolutely. Does he have the personnel to "open things up?" The answer should be obvious to anyone.

 

[goldengophers]

I've about had it with the notion that the team is waiting to explode on offense if it wasn't for Limegrover's conservative playcalling. We started a freshman at QB, making the first road start of his career, at Michigan. Our WRs are a JC walk-on that just received a scholarship (Engel), a guy that was at Rochester Community College 2 years ago (Fruechte), and 3 freshman who have about 5 career catches between them (Jones, Wolitarsky, Harbison). Plus a sophomore who has about 5 career catches (Maye). What would your gameplan have been? Use Leidner in the shotgun, throw the ball 30 times, and run deep posts?

Has Limegrover's playcalling been conservative? Absolutely. Does he have the personnel to "open things up?" The answer should be obvious to anyone.

Based on this post I'd fire Kill tomorrow.

 

[Triple D]

I had no problem with the punt there, we were too deep in our own territory had we not converted. Gotta trust the defense there.

 

[Seany]

Why did we concede/throw in the white towel? We were on our 45 or 50 and down two TDs at the time, and we punted?! Made no sense to me. What am I missing?

Gregg Easterbrook at Espn.com does a great job dissecting these highly questionable punting decisions every week, primarily when it comes to the NFL, but obviously the same principles stand whether it's Pee-Wee league, high school, college, or pro, as football is football wherever you go, and you are absolutely correct in the fact that is exactly a concession move, because punting in that scenario is an utter statistical failure, as it does virtually nothing to enhance your chances at winning, but rather almost exclusively just serves to cement the hole you're in, and nearly always equates to a loss.

And Easterbrook does a great job illustrating these situations week by week along with providing an overall (and ongoing) statistical breakdown regarding such scenarios, and the implication is clear, that is a give-up move, and to play it 'safe' and punt in such a situation as that, it's as good as saying game over, and the weight of evidence backs that up over, and over, and over again, such as soon as we decided to punt, I knew that meant 'game over'.

So why not just say what the f*ck and go for it, in the fourth quarter, on the road in front of a hostile homecoming crowd and down by two scores with under six minutes on the clock? What does it serve to punt in that situation? Is it simply to make it look like a 'respectable loss'? Well hey, if that's the case, we still managed to lose by 29 points, so that's out the window.

Screw that, and in that situation, go for it, because what else exactly is there to lose?

I cannot stand that particular variety of conservative and gutless coaching. You fail in going for it? So what? If nothing else, it gives the offensive team a valuable lesson on the art of going for it on a desperation fourth and long, and also shows faith and confidence in them and the fact they might actually be able to pull that off if only allowed to try and do so. But instead, let's cut our balls off at the base, give the punter more work, and just concede the game, and honestly, that decision was just pathetic.

 

[drinks at Northpoint]

Based on this post I'd fire Kill tomorrow.

This reminds me of someone complaining during Brewsters third year, "if he's such a great recruiter, why don't we have any decent seniors?"

 

[go4ergold]

The answer is simple. We gave up.

This. I really don't think it is complicated. There was no drive to win and the gophers just wanted to get out of there so they gave up.

 

[John Galt]

Based on this post I'd fire Kill tomorrow.

You'd fire him because in two recruiting classes he doesn't yet have guys that are great receiving threats? Beautiful...

 

[John Galt]

Tell me how many turnovers Michigan gave up in the previous 52 minutes of gameplay? How long it takes to get a 3 and out? What % of their drives we had forced said 3 and out?

Now, what % of out pass plays were completed for 10 yards or more?

The reality is that we completely conceded defeat in an effort to not give Mich a short field. Same reason we took both FGs instead of going for the TD when Mich's lead was getting wider by the drive.

Unless the defense could get a stop on 3rd down, we were never going to win regardless.

 

[GophersInIowa]

Based on this post I'd fire Kill tomorrow.

No kidding. I don't know why Kill wasn't recruiting for the Gophers two years before he became coach. Then we would have more and better seniors this season.

 

[Dr.Don]

No kidding. I don't know why Kill wasn't recruiting for the Gophers two years before he became coach. Then we would have more and better seniors this season.

Oh, wait, it's almost noon.

 

[goldengophers]

No kidding. I don't know why Kill wasn't recruiting for the Gophers two years before he became coach. Then we would have more and better seniors this season.

It's unfortunate Junior Colleges don't play Wide Receivers. It's also unfotunate that at the U a WR must be in his fourth year before production is expected.

 

[GophersInIowa]

It's unfortunate Junior Colleges don't play Wide Receivers. It's also unfotunate that at the U a WR must be in his fourth year before production is expected.

1. Fruechte is a JUCO transfer.
2. We've recruited other WR JUCO's in the past and it hasn't worked out very well.
3. I never said they had to be seniors to be effective. You responded to a post talking about how young and inexperienced our QB and WR's are. You said Kill should then be fired because of this. Just pointing out that it isn't his fault we are so young at those positions.

 

[John Galt]

It's unfortunate Junior Colleges don't play Wide Receivers. It's also unfotunate that at the U a WR must be in his fourth year before production is expected.

Yep. Because the [Fill in the blank team] has done really well recruiting JC wide receivers. There are dozens, if not hundreds of them out there. All biding their time at Blinn Community College before the NFL calls for them...

 

[upnorthkid]

punting there was, imho, a bad call given the status of the game, the time left on the clock, and the score. We were down 15 at that point with about 7 minutes left with 2 timeouts at that point. so, given you punt, even if you force a 3 and out and expend your 2 TO's, you're looking at 6 minutes left, down 15, starting from your own 20 with a team that isn't going to blow anyone away with their outstanding pass attack. to be honest, there would not have been enough time for it all to happen. we aren't going to chunk a team like we're oregon. its not our style. then given you give up 1 first down at least, which mich did on 75% of their drives, you are looking at having less than 4 minutes, needing 2 scores.
we had started to get the pass game going and i'd rather see us take a chance with a young team, on the road, that just made a stop and could've really put some pressure on mich had we scored there. just my 2 cents

 

[atsgopher]

Gregg Easterbrook at Espn.com does a great job dissecting these highly questionable punting decisions every week, primarily when it comes to the NFL, but obviously the same principles stand whether it's Pee-Wee league, high school, college, or pro, as football is football wherever you go, and you are absolutely correct in the fact that is exactly a concession move, because punting in that scenario is an utter statistical failure, as it does virtually nothing to enhance your chances at winning, but rather almost exclusively just serves to cement the hole you're in, and nearly always equates to a loss.

And Easterbrook does a great job illustrating these situations week by week along with providing an overall (and ongoing) statistical breakdown regarding such scenarios, and the implication is clear, that is a give-up move, and to play it 'safe' and punt in such a situation as that, it's as good as saying game over, and the weight of evidence backs that up over, and over, and over again, such as soon as we decided to punt, I knew that meant 'game over'.

So why not just say what the f*ck and go for it, in the fourth quarter, on the road in front of a hostile homecoming crowd and down by two scores with under six minutes on the clock? What does it serve to punt in that situation? Is it simply to make it look like a 'respectable loss'? Well hey, if that's the case, we still managed to lose by 29 points, so that's out the window.

Screw that, and in that situation, go for it, because what else exactly is there to lose?

I cannot stand that particular variety of conservative and gutless coaching. You fail in going for it? So what? If nothing else, it gives the offensive team a valuable lesson on the art of going for it on a desperation fourth and long, and also shows faith and confidence in them and the fact they might actually be able to pull that off if only allowed to try and do so. But instead, let's cut our balls off at the base, give the punter more work, and just concede the game, and honestly, that decision was just pathetic.

Appreciate the reference to Mr Easterbrook as he as some compelling arguments. They are good read. However, judging by his statistical observations and rules based on those observations, we should have punted in that Situation.

Situation:
4 and 10 from our own 40

Rules
• Inside your own 20, punt.
• From your 21 to 35, go for it on fourth-and-2 or less.

• From your 36 to midfield, go for it on fourth-and-3 or less.

• From the opposition 49 to opposition 30, go for it on fourth-and-4 or less.

• From the opposition 29 to opposition 3, go for it on fourth-and-3 or less.

• From the opposition 2 or 1, go for it.

• Exception: inside the opponent's 25, attempt a field goal if it's the fourth quarter and a field goal causes a tie or gives you the lead.

Conclusion
Easterbrook would say punt. These rules of course are built for a high powered passing attack. This changes the consideration as he probaility for completing a pass play enhances the chances of success in the above situations. Mr Easterbrook even notes a great team where a defense is the stronger unit would lose more games by employing the above rules. His example is 2006 Baltimore Ravens who were 13-3, would have been worse off.

I would argue that the while there is room to examine when to punt and when not to punt, the Gophers and their bevy of young ball players should not take a far more aggressive stance punting this season. Maybe down the road, and it should be reevaluated annually, based on the current team.