Let them score
- Thread starter Hawkeye34
- Start date
Agree 100%!!!
And why are people still ******** about that game it was a F'ing week ago. Good God move on, we lost a game we should have won it wasn't the first and won't be the last.
You all are aware we play the 5th ranked team in the country tomorrow that just so happens if we beat we will be a half game back for 1st in the BT right?
Unreal.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
Thankfully what I do has no impact on the team. Otherwise our fitness regiment from the beginning of September would have consisted of sitting in the recliner drinking beer and eating cheese.
SDK46
Well-Known Member
Big LOL Hox....no $hit...maybe those complaining about what people want to post/talk about should:
#1--not read the thread
#2--not post to the thread
#3--petition Jon to BAN any topic which is retrospective in nature
If we would have let them score from the 30 with 3:30 left, we would have simply scored on them again and won the game. We had been doing it for a quarter and one-half. They had no answer. It's as simple as that really.
homes
Well-Known Member
Inside the 5 is one thing, but at the 30? That's not a wise strategy in my opinion. There was enough time to score even when they did get the ball. It didn't happen. For me at least, this will be my last post on the Wisconsin game. It's good to remember history, so as to not repeat it, but not to re-live it.
hawkfarmer
Well-Known Member
So let them score and go ahead by 1. Now we are driving and for some reason we hit a little stall at the Wisky 40, maybe a draw doesn't go the right way or they have a great pass break up and now it's 4th down. Too long for a field goal. We throw a pass and McNutt drops it even though it was a in his hands (it happens). Now we have lost the game and we let them waltz in for the touchdown! Everyone hear would be calling for KF's head. Iowa didn't score on every drive here, so it's not a guarantee. They needed a TD to win and you hope the defense which is so hyped could shut them down. Never give away points that give another team the lead.
NIUHawkeye
Well-Known Member
You do NOT simply let them score in that situation. What should have been done, and what I was screaming for in the stands, was for Iowa to begin using their timeouts once Wisconsin got down inside the 20 yardline. You know at that point Wisconsin is going to use much more clock in between plays than Iowa would on their final drive.
Had Iowa done that they could have got the ball back with 2-2:30 minutes left. Yes, they would've had no timeouts, but the clock stops on a play that results in a first down. I think that's partly what I was upset about.
Had Iowa done that they could have got the ball back with 2-2:30 minutes left. Yes, they would've had no timeouts, but the clock stops on a play that results in a first down. I think that's partly what I was upset about.
Good points. Given your scenario, the end result would be the same as the actual outcome, still lost by 1 - so you're really no worse off by letting them score early.
Given the situation, I thought we would have more of a chance to win by being on O with more time, then being on D trying to go all out for the stop.
hawkfarmer
Well-Known Member
They could just as easily have dropped a pass on 4th down. They needed a touchdown and as Iowa you have to trust your defense. We are supposed to be one of the best Ds in the country so you have to let them play. You can't just let them walk in and assume your offense will perform. And we had plenty of time to go get a field goal.
SDK46
Well-Known Member
Have to agree to disagree. In THIS game, and THIS game only, the D wasn't getting it done. Wisky already had 2x 80-yard drives for TD's, and were 50 yards into ANOTHER 80yd TD scoring drive. We hadn't stopped them but once the entire day (24 first downs, 7-minute difference in TOP)...and time was ticking away. We were going to all of a sudden be dominate? Not in my book.
Last edited:
Remember, we HAD come up with an interception on the previous Wisconsin drive. Hell, we even forced them to convert THREE 4th down conversions on that final drive! Wisconsin outplayed us and outcoached us on that final drive, plain and simple.
But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have had faith in the defense to step up and make the stop.
Last edited:
SDK46
Well-Known Member
I fail to see the correlation.
SDK46
Well-Known Member
Exactly...thank you.
hawkfarmer
Well-Known Member
This. We had them stopped, we could do it again.
Exactly, don't let them score but use your time outs so there's time left if they do score.
woodyk1
Well-Known Member
So, are you assuming with 3:30 left, we would take almost all of the remaining time to score when we got the ball back? What happens if we take 2 minutes to score and there is still 1 minute left for Wiscy? Don't you assume Wiscy can score again (after we retake the lead)? What amount of time left is enough to be safe with the lead? If Iowa only gets a FG to retake the lead, then Wiscy only needs a FG to retake the lead. How much time do they need for that? What if we get close to scoring and Wiscy lets us score to get the ball back? They had not stopped us a lot either.
There are very few scenarios where you let a team score against you, but it would never be when you lead by 6 points. I think taking timeouts when you are on defense is the way to get the most time available to come back especially when the offense can stop the clock in multiple ways.
I would agree that this is an interesting topic to discuss on a message board. I would be interested to hear coaches thoughts ahead of time about scenarios when to let an opponent score when you currently have the lead.
83Hawk
Banned
So in other words...you assumed Wisconsin was going to score.
