You do that because the D is not going to have an idea it's coming and I'm sure they have been practicing and having that play in their arsenal for that situation. If worked, everybody would be saying hell of a call by Lester. Hindsight is hindsight.
It's a non opt-out opt out.
Or making the opposing team eat up clock with great punting and zone defense.
Pavia is a legend in his own mind.
Throwing a fastball to our 2nd/3rd RB in that situation just isn't something I thought shoulda been on our bingo card at that point. The odds of him catching that clean weren't high. It did make me wonder if that play woulda been for Washington had he not left. Feels like that's what it may have been designed for but then XW was who replaced his role. We have a litany of other pass catchers that coulda been used instead. I just thought Lester was trying to get cute and over thought it. 1st and goal from inside the 4 is pound that thing or play action. Not go 4/5 wide. When I saw the formation I assumed MG was going to run a draw.
Yeah I've neve understood why they put him in those positions on a consistent basis. I get you want to put the ball in his hands but it is also so predictable and it is always on the outside on the same type of play with the same type of motion.
All I'm saying is that sometimes ya have to go against the obvious. Ya can't just always go to the obvious players using the obvious plays that you've used all year. Ya got to throw something different to them. There was a reason the reserve flea flicker worked. Nobody is bitching about that play, Why, because it worked. If it didn't work and an IT were thrown, people would be questioning that. In addition, in games, especially bowl games I think coaches want to spread the ball around to maybe some other players. They need to keep them happy to. Like the Clear Lake TE got a look or two. I'm confident they have practiced that play for that situation ad nauseum, and, the play was there. He was open but just didn't complete it. Yes, it was a bullet.
It's situational though. If it had been 21-3 going in to go up 28 I'd not be so critical of it. But it was 7-0 and still very much a game yet. A play like that not only took 7 pts off the board for us but coulda flipped momentum to them and.... Thankfully it didn't and it worked out the way it did. But the overall situation is as much why I'm critical of it as I am anything.
That is because you know what the result was. It could have easily worked and the % of it working is more than 50% because he was pretty open. If your going with % of course you would take that chance. He could have very well caught it and they would have been up 14 which looks real good for Iowa and nobody would have questioned it. That's all I'm saying. Good debate.
