Should Daniels have gone down?

I didn't read all six pages so I'm sure I'm repeating someone else. But how about score, play a freakin ounce of defense, and win by 12.
 
Yes. He should have, but that would have required a standard for presence of mind that few save a seasoned NFL player would achieve.
 
HawksMN said:
Guys this game is over, we beat the fuzzy rats, close thread.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree.......this discussion needs to be politely put to bed....unless someone has discovered new DNA evidence involving an alien conspiracy
vDDYKW
 
Here's the deal: When the other team has no timeouts, you can kneel out the game when the clock is at 2:00 (actually, at @ 2:05 because you can kill a couple of seconds per kneel.)

Daniels took the handoff with just a few ticks more than two minutes left. It wasn't his responsibility to do the math in his head. That's on the coaches. They should have told him that if he broke free he was to run as far as he could without breaking the plane and kneel down.

So yes, to marginally increase the odds of winning he should have gone down, but the onus for that decision was on the coaches, not on the running back. Again, a football genius like Marshall Faulk might have looked up at the clock and knelt down at the one yard line, but it's asking a little much to expect a college kid who's broken free to process all of that on the fly.
 
TychoBrahe said:
Unfortunately, no.

You NEVER give the opposing team the ball back again if you can run out the clock, as Iowa could have last night. Don't any of you remember Iowa-NW back in 2006, when we were up about 2 TDs late in the 4th? NW scores a TD, gets an onside kick, scores another TD, and we lost, boom.

All we needed was to get a first down, and we win. It's really on the coaches (and by proxy CJB) to tell his players: get the first down, but don't score, and we win. It's hard to blame the kid for scoring, but obviously he should've gone down and not given the Gophers the ball back again.
Click to expand...

That's ludicrous. You can't look at this from a perspective of knowing how the defense handles that game ex post facto. In that moment, 2 minutes left in the game, only up by 5 points, on a play designed to run clock already, you do not ever tell your player to take that knee. There are a few reasons:

1) You pull up early or try to slide or dive and your chances of pulling a hamstring or some other type of injury go up. And there is more chance that you will be hit by the other team if you slow up.

2) This is not the same as an interception near the end of the game when you're already winning. You're running your usual end of game offense, and a 12 point lead is always better than a 5 point lead. Certainly it allows MN the chance to run down the field again, but then they're in the exact same situation they were, down 5.

3) And this reason is a little silly, but it's still a consideration... we've been all about New Kirk. Just falling down after the first down is the single most conservative Old Kirk play call you can possibly come up with. It's more Old Kirk than taking a knee to go into half or to go into OT. So if we want New Kirk, we should expect New Kirk aggressiveness.

4) These are still college kids. Daniel's isn't even old enough to drink legally. You can't expect them to process something like that immediately and in the heat of the moment in a rivalry game with a giant bronze pig and 10-0 on the line when it took us several days to have this thought out of a conversation about it.

5) All of this argument is moot if you cheered for his touchdown. That would mean that you hadn't thought it out at that point either, and thought a touchdown was a good thing as opposed to a flop after the sticks.
 
HawkInATX said:
5) All of this argument is moot if you cheered for his touchdown. That would mean that you hadn't thought it out at that point either, and thought a touchdown was a good thing as opposed to a flop after the sticks.
Click to expand...

I am so busted... :eek:
 
HawkInATX said:
That's ludicrous. You can't look at this from a perspective of knowing how the defense handles that game ex post facto. In that moment, 2 minutes left in the game, only up by 5 points, on a play designed to run clock already, you do not ever tell your player to take that knee. There are a few reasons:

1) You pull up early or try to slide or dive and your chances of pulling a hamstring or some other type of injury go up. And there is more chance that you will be hit by the other team if you slow up.

2) This is not the same as an interception near the end of the game when you're already winning. You're running your usual end of game offense, and a 12 point lead is always better than a 5 point lead. Certainly it allows MN the chance to run down the field again, but then they're in the exact same situation they were, down 5.

3) And this reason is a little silly, but it's still a consideration... we've been all about New Kirk. Just falling down after the first down is the single most conservative Old Kirk play call you can possibly come up with. It's more Old Kirk than taking a knee to go into half or to go into OT. So if we want New Kirk, we should expect New Kirk aggressiveness.

4) These are still college kids. Daniel's isn't even old enough to drink legally. You can't expect them to process something like that immediately and in the heat of the moment in a rivalry game with a giant bronze pig and 10-0 on the line when it took us several days to have this thought out of a conversation about it.

5) All of this argument is moot if you cheered for his touchdown. That would mean that you hadn't thought it out at that point either, and thought a touchdown was a good thing as opposed to a flop after the sticks.
Click to expand...


Just because a random dude sitting on his couch didn't think of it right away doesn't mean a head coach shouldn't have thought it through. The good news though is I knew it before he scored, so the arguement isn't moot for me.
 
Yep. Kneel down after he had a first down or ran it to the one and knelt down. Game over.
But, Daniels saw 7 and game over in his mind.
Did Iowa State have a f&%$ up last week?
Maybe kneel down?
Hmm??!

Clock management has never been very solid at IA.
 
Well, here's a high school kid from IC Regina who said he should have went down after getting a 1st down late in the game. He ended up fumbling and giving the other team a chance to tie the game up, but it didn't happen.

http://www.thegazette.com/subject/sports/regals-claim-sixth-straight-state-crown-20151123

Regina looked on its way to extending its title stretch when Hunter broke free for a 22-yard run for a first down with less than 90 seconds in the game. At the end of the run, a hit popped the ball loose. Western Christian’s Ben Ganstra pounced on it, giving the Wolfpack 1:13 to go 63 yards for a potential go-ahead score.
Western Christian reached the Regina 34 with a little less than a minute remaining. Hunter rebounded with an open-field tackle to squelch a screen pass that could have been a big play. The Wolfpack finished with two incompletions for a turnover on downs.
“After I got that first down, I should have gone down,â€￾ said Hunter, who had a game-high 156 rushing yards and two TDs. “A bad mistake on my part. I’m glad our team stepped up after that and ended up stopping them. That was huge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top