Dear Kirk

Kirk's decision to not try to score at the end of halfs has cost his staff a lot of clock management experience over the years. There is nothing better than real game experience and he would have a lot more of it if he wasn't so conservative.
 
deanvogs said:
It only took 10 pages or so, but the decision is actually being discussed rationally. With the situation as it was, I don't think either decision is a mistake. There are pros and cons to Clocking it, and pros and cons to not clocking it, and only hindsight can really prove either right or wrong.
Click to expand...

Hindsight doesn't prove right or wrong.
 
HawkInATX said:
Can clock management be better? Yes. Always and forever on every coaching staff and team there is room for improvement (to wit: Urban Meyer's horrific management this weekend, abysmal).

Now, you all wanna talk probabilities in a game that is inherently stochastic (random). The fact that enough people are arguing both sides of this issue and have (for the most part) compelling reasons is evidence that this particular game and drive is on or near a probabilistic cut point, where the chance of success is approximately equal between clocking it or running the play. It becomes a coin flip. No matter which decision KF had made, people would have argued it was wrong and others defend his decision.

While I understand the need to be reflective and critical of mistakes, even in a win, I think that it's not at all productive to spend a ton of time over-analyzing what amounts to a coin flip (and one that can't ever be repeated to test which outcome is better).
Click to expand...

Thread/
 
PCHawk said:
Hindsight doesn't prove right or wrong.
Click to expand...

Sure it does when it is a 50/50 call. We ended up needing the extra down as it turned out to get the yardage. So looking at it in hindsight, I'd say not clocking it was the correct call.
 
deanvogs said:
Sure it does when it is a 50/50 call. We ended up needing the extra down as it turned out to get the yardage. So looking at it in hindsight, I'd say not clocking it was the correct call.
Click to expand...

In hindsight, with 4 or 5 more seconds on the clock, maybe CJ runs for 15 more yards and we shank a 42 yard field goal. Then Kirk would be right for getting us closer and wrong because we didn't win in regulation. Hindsight doesn't work with any legit arguement.
 
PCHawk said:
Yea but that extra play would be 4th down. Like i said earlier, do you run another play and risk time running out or not getting a 1st down, or do you kick the 57 yarder right there? He probably kicks it there anyway. Of course that's all hindsight so it doesn't really matter. The true question is would you rather lose 1st down or lose 5 seconds? It's a tough decision and that's why this thread is 11 pages and counting.
Click to expand...

The thing is normally you lose more than 5 seconds there trying to get a play in and everyone lined up, we got that off really fast and cleanly so it didn't end up hurting.

But almost everyone spikes it there because the risk isn't worth saving a down.
 
PCHawk said:
Kirk's decision to not try to score at the end of halfs has cost his staff a lot of clock management experience over the years. There is nothing better than real game experience and he would have a lot more of it if he wasn't so conservative.
Click to expand...

Probably true.

I am just glad that he is finally attempting to score at the end of halfs.
 
ColoradoHAWKEYE said:
Look, mistake or not...it did not end up with us taking a knee on our 30 and settling for OT...they did what they could in the heat of the moment...CJ is a heads up player, but they lost about only 4 seconds, and he showed great poise and patience...I'll take this ending, good kick or bad kick, any day over the previous game end mismanagements the past whatever number of years!
Click to expand...


If Desmond King doesn't return the kick to the 30 or so and instead gets tackled at, say, the 20, Kirk probably does call for us taking a knee. In any event, kudos to Kirk for being more aggressive than he's been in the past and going for it. At least he's been humble enough to admit that he's been too stubborn in the past in certain aspects and has made some positive changes.
 
PCHawk said:
I also said you would obviously need enough to get a 1st down. We would have kicked the field goal on 1st down had we decided to run another play. What gives you better odds. Kicking a field goal from 57 on 4th. Or running a play with 6 seconds on the clock on 4th down. I think kicking the field goal is better but like I said, it would have been a tough decision.
Click to expand...

Yes kicking was much safer.
It is a tough call, that is why KF is paid a small fortune.

I think the crux of this entire thread comes down to whether or not you think the offense could pick up the first after clocking it. I don't think they do.
 
RocknRollface said:
The thing is normally you lose more than 5 seconds there trying to get a play in and everyone lined up, we got that off really fast and cleanly so it didn't end up hurting.

But almost everyone spikes it there because the risk isn't worth saving a down.
Click to expand...

The staff really deserves credit for the fact that it only cost us 5 seconds. I was under the impression that me made a mistake by not spiking it and got lucky that it only cost us 5 seconds. There is no way Kirk improved enough to know it only takes 5 seconds after a 1st down. But one thing I just thought of is maybe Davis knows that. Maybe the keys were finally passed to him to do something that Kirk can't. If Davis is good enough to have a plan to not spike the ball after a 1st down and get a play in really quick, then I'm really happy because our clock management problems are over. Hopefully that's the case because if he was doing it just to save the down and had no idea how much time it would cost, then a blind squirrel found a nut.
 
PCHawk said:
The staff really deserves credit for the fact that it only cost us 5 seconds. I was under the impression that me made a mistake by not spiking it and got lucky that it only cost us 5 seconds. There is no way Kirk improved enough to know it only takes 5 seconds after a 1st down. But one thing I just thought of is maybe Davis knows that. Maybe the keys were finally passed to him to do something that Kirk can't. If Davis is good enough to have a plan to not spike the ball after a 1st down and get a play in really quick, then I'm really happy because our clock management problems are over. Hopefully that's the case because if he was doing it just to save the down and had no idea how much time it would cost, then a blind squirrel found a nut.
Click to expand...

*Dodges pieces of sky that is falling, like Chicken Little*

I did hear you say hell was freezing over, right? That Davis may actually have been a good choice for OC?

*Hawkeye fans everywhere scramble to revise their history and say that we've always loved GD*
 
HawkInATX said:
*Dodges pieces of sky that is falling, like Chicken Little*

I did hear you say hell was freezing over, right? That Davis may actually have been a good choice for OC?

*Hawkeye fans everywhere scramble to revise their history and say that we've always loved GD*
Click to expand...

There is a lot more to being a good OC than being able to run a good 2 minute drill.
 
PCHawk said:
In hindsight, with 4 or 5 more seconds on the clock, maybe CJ runs for 15 more yards and we shank a 42 yard field goal. Then Kirk would be right for getting us closer and wrong because we didn't win in regulation. Hindsight doesn't work with any legit arguement.
Click to expand...

Not Clocking it was a good call and the right call, even if MK misses that kick. The chance to keep the Pitt D on its heels and the get some yardage on 1st down was way more important than saving 3 seconds.
 
deanvogs said:
Not Clocking it was a good call and the right call, even if MK misses that kick. The chance to keep the Pitt D on its heels and the get some yardage on 1st down was way more important than saving 3 seconds.
Click to expand...

I agree... as long as they practice it enough to know they were only going to lose that amount of time.
 
deanvogs said:
It only took 10 pages or so, but the decision is actually being discussed rationally. With the situation as it was, I don't think either decision is a mistake. There are pros and cons to Clocking it, and pros and cons to not clocking it, and only hindsight can really prove either right or wrong.
Click to expand...


Are you really going to stay it took 10 pages to discuss this rationally? (I'm laughing that this thread is still going).


You are the one who attacked me for this thread. When I said REPEATEDLY that this was just a strategy discussion not some ... whatever you thought it was.

Now that lot's of different people are saying many different opinions... you cant try to bully me with childish LOLOLOL and name calling tactics (which is easy to do after a win regardless).

Now that the emotions have settled and you see that many people agree with me you suddenly don't have the brute numbers on your side.


Wow dude... just wow.
 
Last edited:
doughudd said:
Didn't Rudock do that last year? Spike the ball before the line was set and we got the penalty.
Click to expand...

No we sometimes get penalties for doing that QB sneak when the line isn't set.... I think that what you are thinking.

There have been SOOO many times in the past years where the QB stood there staring at the sideline.. not knowing what to do.

I can remember one game last year were Ruddock was staring at the sideline not spiking the ball and it basically cost us any chance.

I will say this... at least Kirk did go for the win in this case.
 
The weather conditions with the air temp and no wind was also favorable for a long attempt. Maybe it played into the decision, maybe not.

This is what makes college f-ball so fun. It's not always perfect, for the players or for the coaches.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top