What did Harbaugh and other coaches do wrong

U

uihawk82

Well-Known Member
A million people and words have been written about the end of the Mich Mich St game. First of all any head coach or offensive coord in this position should know they need to run sweep plays to use up more time. Geezuz these guys make 6 million bucks a year and cant figure out they could run about 3 more seconds off of each of those 3 running plays by using sweep plays. Mich was left with 4th down and 10 seconds left. If you run sweep plays on the first 3 downs of the possession not worrying about losing yardage, even telling your running back or QB (why even handoff) to reverse their field to run more time off the clock, then you might not even have to run a 4th down play.

But even if it is 4th down with 1 second to play rather than 10 seconds to play you run a QB sneak to run out the 1 second left on the clock. Amazing how stupid these guys are. They should have a chart knowing how much time they can use up depending on how many time outs the opponent has.

Again, the only reason I say this is it drives me nuts how meticulous these coaches are but they havent figured out these end of game situations. And I really woudl rather see Dantonio go down after letting Rucker the jail boy play against Iowa a few years ago.
 
maybe he should have told his QB to run a bootleg just make sure the QB knows he should not throw the ball.

I mean we saw how that worked out for Neb against ILL.

There are risks to every play a team runs that somebody might fumble, run out of bounds, throw an incomplete pass, or do something unpredictable or stupid.. Mich ran low risk plays that got the clock down to only 10 seconds.

Harbaugh thought that was the safest bet, but miscalculated. Because then after all that, Mich went with a punt play that has high risks.

So ok,, I agree he should have ran some plays that took a little more time off the clock because that would have been less risky than punting at the end.
 
Last edited:
uihawk82 said:
A million people and words have been written about the end of the Mich Mich St game. First of all any head coach or offensive coord in this position should know they need to run sweep plays to use up more time. Geezuz these guys make 6 million bucks a year and cant figure out they could run about 3 more seconds off of each of those 3 running plays by using sweep plays. Mich was left with 4th down and 10 seconds left. If you run sweep plays on the first 3 downs of the possession not worrying about losing yardage, even telling your running back or QB (why even handoff) to reverse their field to run more time off the clock, then you might not even have to run a 4th down play.

But even if it is 4th down with 1 second to play rather than 10 seconds to play you run a QB sneak to run out the 1 second left on the clock. Amazing how stupid these guys are. They should have a chart knowing how much time they can use up depending on how many time outs the opponent has.

Again, the only reason I say this is it drives me nuts how meticulous these coaches are but they havent figured out these end of game situations. And I really woudl rather see Dantonio go down after letting Rucker the jail boy play against Iowa a few years ago.
Click to expand...

You are correct. These coaches make a ton of money and have an army of assistants on the sidelines and in the press box. A number of things pop up all the time that drive me nuts.
Poor clock usage. Using time off the clock with a lead in the 4th quarter should start earlier than the last drive. You see teams all the time with leads snapping the ball with 15 seconds left on the play clock. Coaches need to think ahead more than just the last drive.
Poor timeout usage. How many times do you see a coach take a time out a couple minutes into the 3rd quarter for no other reason than to save a five yard delay of game penalty? Is saving 5 yards really worth a time out? Time and again you see that come back to haunt teams at the end of a game.
Poor challenges. Happens a lot. Too many eyeballs available to miss as many challenges as they miss.
 
I love all of the poster who think they are some perfect kind of clock managers. I mean does anyone watch college football at all? It isn't as simple as just oh yeah, you always clock the ball, or you always run this play, or you always call TO here. It is a fluid game, and coaches work on clock management all the time. Problem is you have a Defense out there, you have unique situations on every play.
 
the ones on forums handing out advice .... their finest moment on the gridiron was the tackle they made on special teams in the 4th grade
 
deanvogs said:
I love all of the poster who think they are some perfect kind of clock managers. I mean does anyone watch college football at all? It isn't as simple as just oh yeah, you always clock the ball, or you always run this play, or you always call TO here. It is a fluid game, and coaches work on clock management all the time. Problem is you have a Defense out there, you have unique situations on every play.
Click to expand...

No one claims to be perfect. (although you must think coaches are?) Truth is, they "F" up all the time.

Stupid time outs
Poor clock usage
Poor challenges.

Too many coaches and too much technology for these issues to occur as much as they do.
 
Kudos to the young man, UM's punter, for handling it with class.

As for clock usage/management, remember, MSU is Master of the Fake Injury. In fact, I'm surprised it wasn't employed to the point of UM having to punt with a full minute left on the clock.
 
They should have false started. I don't know what rule could possibly be in place to prevent it but I saw a game last year where a team needed the ball back and looked like they would get it with 30 seconds or so left. But the offense had a false start, they wound the clock, and they ended up running the rest of the time off. Ridiculous rule but it's even more ridiculous that no one takes advantage of it.
 
imported_blubberhawk said:
No one claims to be perfect. (although you must think coaches are?) Truth is, they "F" up all the time.

Stupid time outs
Poor clock usage
Poor challenges.

Too many coaches and too much technology for these issues to occur as much as they do.
Click to expand...

I don't think coaches are perfect at all. It seems you expect them to be perfect with the help of hindsight, that is what is funny to me.
 
Yeah but he still should have spiked it at the end of the Pitt game. We're still talking about how much KF sux right?
 
I'm confused... Didn't Michigan win? All they needed was a punt and maybe one defensive stop and it was game over so I shut it off with about ten seconds left. Did I miss something?
 
AdamHawk said:
Yeah but he still should have spiked it at the end of the Pitt game. We're still talking about how much KF sux right?
Click to expand...


The same thing went down at half of the Northwestern game but instead of losing 4 second, which is ok, they lost 10 or so, which isn't ok. It leads me to believe that getting the play in that quick at Pitt was more luck than planned for.
 
PCHawk said:
The same thing went down at half of the Northwestern game but instead of losing 4 second, which is ok, they lost 10 or so, which isn't ok. It leads me to believe that getting the play in that quick at Pitt was more luck than planned for.
Click to expand...

Sigh.....

How do you come up with 10 seconds? They hiked the ball after 6 seconds came off the clock. You can't count the time the play takes as wasted time, as that is running an actual play trying to gain actual yards.

Spiking the ball take 1 or 2 seconds, they used 6 seconds to call a play and hike the ball, so that is "wasting" 4 or 5 seconds according to you.

Forward to the 1:15 mark of the YouTube video of the game. You will also hear Brian Greeseball saying they should have clocked the ball. Since that douchnozzle was wrong about absolutely everything he said, I am very comfortable saying it was 100% right to run a play. :)
 
imported_blubberhawk said:
No one claims to be perfect. (although you must think coaches are?) Truth is, they "F" up all the time.

Stupid time outs
Poor clock usage
Poor challenges.

Too many coaches and too much technology for these issues to occur as much as they do.
Click to expand...

I agree with the bolded part. What I disagree with is that it is due to stupidity, as was stated in the OP. If these people who have risen to the top of their very competitive and lucrative profession are making these errors, wouldn't it make more sense to conclude that their job is really hard? Why would you automatically assume they are simply incompetent?

There are certain things that are very obvious from the couch or from retrospect that might be a bit more challenging to implement in the heat of the moment. Coaches must make decisions under duress, communicate those decisions to their players, and then the players must execute those decisions (probably the weakest link in the chain).

Pertaining to the OP, I also do not think the assertion that a sweep play is the obvious call in these situations would be a consensus. Ball security is probably a bit more challenging while running laterally than while running straight forward. You can emphasize that the backs just run sideways to run out time and don't worry about gaining yards, but in the moment their instinct is always going to be to get yards. Running laterally also brings up the possibility of the back accidentally going out of bounds. We have seen this numerous times over the years at all levels. Again, just because you emphasize that he shouldn't, that is no guarantee that he won't. Even if the back does what he is supposed to and just runs backwards and laterally with 2 hands on the ball and then falls down, you probably lose 5-10 yards a pop. Now you are running into the danger of a fluke fumble resulting in a makeable FG for the win (Michigan started on their own 45).

The most clear-cut way that Michigan could ice the game would be to gain a 1st down, and by running up the middle 3 times they pushed the ball into MSU territory and got within 2 yards of a 1st down. Seems like a pretty good strategy. Now on 4th they probably should have just run it one more time (in retrospect), but what they had called should not have been that high risk. The punter was just to catch the ball and quick kick it as fast as he could out of bounds. Michigan runs another 5+ seconds on the clock, and MSU takes over 80 yards from the endzone if it works out. But, when you ask a player to do something different than usual, weird things happen like bobbling the snap as you are thinking about rushing the kick. So in retrospect, a mistake in strategy, but in the moment, it seems like a reasonable decision and not an example of stupidity.
 
PCHawk said:
The same thing went down at half of the Northwestern game but instead of losing 4 second, which is ok, they lost 10 or so, which isn't ok. It leads me to believe that getting the play in that quick at Pitt was more luck than planned for.
Click to expand...

In the moment I thought they should have spiked it vs. Pitt (in retrospect, I feel it is more of a toss-up). In the moment (and in retrospect), I think running the play was the correct move vs. NW. It probably cost them about 5 seconds, but it also saved them a down. They did not kick until 4th down, so it would have cost them 1 play if we assume 1st and 2nd down without the spike would have unfolded the same as 2nd and 3rd down after the spike. Just like with the discussion after the Pitt game, I do not think you can prove one strategy is better than the other because there are too many unknowns, but with as quick as they got that play off after the 1st down, I personally think they made the right call.
 
CP87 said:
In the moment I thought they should have spiked it vs. Pitt (in retrospect, I feel it is more of a toss-up). In the moment (and in retrospect), I think running the play was the correct move vs. NW. It probably cost them about 5 seconds, but it also saved them a down. They did not kick until 4th down, so it would have cost them 1 play if we assume 1st and 2nd down without the spike would have unfolded the same as 2nd and 3rd down after the spike. Just like with the discussion after the Pitt game, I do not think you can prove one strategy is better than the other because there are too many unknowns, but with as quick as they got that play off after the 1st down, I personally think they made the right call.
Click to expand...

Two great post 87. I also wouldn't have a problem if the clocked the ball. It is obvious the coaches have made the decision they would rather run a play and keep the defense on it heels than clock it. They obviously have specific plays for that situation, so I don't have a problem with it.
 
CP87 said:
I agree with the bolded part. What I disagree with is that it is due to stupidity, as was stated in the OP. If these people who have risen to the top of their very competitive and lucrative profession are making these errors, wouldn't it make more sense to conclude that their job is really hard? Why would you automatically assume they are simply incompetent?

There are certain things that are very obvious from the couch or from retrospect that might be a bit more challenging to implement in the heat of the moment. Coaches must make decisions under duress, communicate those decisions to their players, and then the players must execute those decisions (probably the weakest link in the chain).

Pertaining to the OP, I also do not think the assertion that a sweep play is the obvious call in these situations would be a consensus. Ball security is probably a bit more challenging while running laterally than while running straight forward. You can emphasize that the backs just run sideways to run out time and don't worry about gaining yards, but in the moment their instinct is always going to be to get yards. Running laterally also brings up the possibility of the back accidentally going out of bounds. We have seen this numerous times over the years at all levels. Again, just because you emphasize that he shouldn't, that is no guarantee that he won't. Even if the back does what he is supposed to and just runs backwards and laterally with 2 hands on the ball and then falls down, you probably lose 5-10 yards a pop. Now you are running into the danger of a fluke fumble resulting in a makeable FG for the win (Michigan started on their own 45).

The most clear-cut way that Michigan could ice the game would be to gain a 1st down, and by running up the middle 3 times they pushed the ball into MSU territory and got within 2 yards of a 1st down. Seems like a pretty good strategy. Now on 4th they probably should have just run it one more time (in retrospect), but what they had called should not have been that high risk. The punter was just to catch the ball and quick kick it as fast as he could out of bounds. Michigan runs another 5+ seconds on the clock, and MSU takes over 80 yards from the endzone if it works out. But, when you ask a player to do something different than usual, weird things happen like bobbling the snap as you are thinking about rushing the kick. So in retrospect, a mistake in strategy, but in the moment, it seems like a reasonable decision and not an example of stupidity.
Click to expand...


Lots of coaches are good at Xs and Os and really suck at game management.. That's why they have an army of assistants standing around on the sidelines and sitting in the press box.
 
Not being dumb, but why not run backwards to kill the clock? rather than run up the middle or a sweep why not a QB or RB run backwards at an angle toward the sidelines and then slide or take a knee as soon as the pressure gets there. In my opinion it would deplete the game clock, while running the play and would also take time to get the ball centered again. Just a thought, but you figure the play backs the LOS 10-15 yards what difference does it make if there's no TOs left and a first down isn't needed. Just a thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top