Brian,
What made Miles call so alarming in postgame interviews he appeared to have no idea how little time was left at the snap. He made reference to still having a timeout, as if that would help.
I have no problem with him going for a TD, but you have to snap the ball earlier than that. He took an enormous risk for very little return, and didn't even seem to understand the risk he had taken. Dodgy all around.
Completely agreed, Brian. I was watching the game live and there were a solid 4 seconds left when the reciever came down with possession of the ball. The ONLY danger on that play was an interception.
I was a little surprised that LSU didn't call some sort of running play to get the ball to the middle of the field for an easier FG attempt, but a one-on-one fade attempt PLUS a FG attempt gives you not one but two opportunites at the win. Miles greatly increased his chances of winning by taking a very minimal risk. As stated in the previous thread, this is the difference between playing to win instead of playing not to lose.
The postgame interview thing has been blown out of context and proportion.
Holly Rowe grabbed him and asked about the play call 'after the timeout'. She was probably referring to the game winner, but there was NO TIMEOUT called. And thus Les was confused.
He said something about having plenty of time - 18 - 16 seconds to get the play off. Which is totally accurate. They had exactly that when they stepped to the line.
The only issue I have with the endgame scenario (beyond Tuberville's ridiculous insistence on eating his TOs) was how slow LSU was to get the play off. Flynn took it down too far and shaved the margin of error to zero.
Les Miles maximized their chances at the win. And his team has to be totally jacked up to play for a coach that will let it all hang out.
Russell, Flynn should have snapped the ball a little quicker, but that's on the QB. It is a bit concerning if Miles really had no idea how much time was left, but I have to disagree when you say "he took an enormous risk for very little return". In reality, he took a very miniscule risk (the pass being intercepted by a surprised corner in one-on-one coverage) in exchange for a huge payoff (a guaranteed win).
Heh, it's somewhat funny to see Michigan fans defend Les Miles to the death, and he's not even the coach yet. What do you want to bet that if Car made these same decisions, with less successful results, the MGoWorld would be all over him.
i agree brian, the choice was btwn letting it fly or trying a 7-15 yard pass to set up a shorter field goal. we can't see the lsu sidelines, but i'd hope the coaches were imploring flynn to get the play off quicker. if they snapped it 5 second earlier, the pass had fallen incomplete and they kicked the field goal all auburn can do is to try to run the kickoff back. those are pretty good odds.
les better be our coach next year, because we all spend way too much time agonizing over lsu games right now
oh, and it was the right call. gutsy, sure. but right
I didn't see the game,but if there was one second left, why didn't Miles go for two to try and make it a seven point game?
Brian, you're dead-on. I'm surprised that so few, given the ability of time to review the play and dismiss the commentators initial reactions, have come to the defense of Miles. It was ballsy, but it wasn't dumb.
Personally, I would rather not see Les anywhere near Ann Arbor. But it was a great call and it should be commended. It's one thing to make that call, it's another if your MNC hopes are on the line.
Also, it's nice to see some people thinking for themselves rather that just regurgitating whatever the WWL says. Just because Mike Patrick and Todd Blackledge think something is 'crazy' doesn't make it so.
The CLOCK stopped at 1. They still had time to get the play off. Anyone can sit back and Arm Chair QB a 'safer' scenario. But anyone who's seen their team go the safe route and shank the kick will howl for a more 'aggressive' approach.
GuestfromBC,
I wondered the same thing. Prematurely caught up in the thrill of victory?
Brian,
With Cal losing to UCLA, do you still think Tedford is a good coach/should be on the short list to replace Carr if Carr ever retires?
Considering what Cal was before Tedford got there, he should be a top candidate for just about any opening in the country.
I was watching the game at jumped out of my chair when I realized what Flynn was doing. Great fucking call and totally unexpected. If I was Bill Simmons I would call this Miles' Keith Hernandez Moment.
GuestfromBC and Mat have already said it, but I wondered the same thing: with only :01 left on the clock, why not go for two?
You're up by 5 with virtually no time left on the clock. The worst that could happen is Auburn returns the conversion for two points, but LSU then is still up three, and AGAIN, there is only :01 left on the clock. Auburn either pulls a Cal miracle kickoff return or they lose the game. Theoretically, Auburn could return the 2 point conversion AND a miracle kickoff return, but a miracle kickoff return wins the game in the case of a successful PAT, so it's a wash in that situation. So why not try to get to overtime in that unlikely scenario?
A successful two point conversion at least ensures overtime in case of a miracle kickoff return, and a successful PAT doesn't get you anything except maybe prevents an extra 2 points by Auburn, which because of the clock, DOESN'T MATTER.
I think everyone got caught up in the emotion of the stupendous catch that they didn't think it through. Unfortunately, that's precisely what the coaches are supposed to be doing. They're supposed to think this stuff through and make the right call.
(sigh) Since Auburn didn't return the kickoff it all worked out, but Jesus. That shook me up a little bit. Orson has it right- Les Miles has balls for brains.
I still like him, though. It would be one muthaf--kin' wild ride for 10+ years, that's for sure. I'm ready for a change.
brian, always love your stuff, but i disagree with one thing this time.
The point from your post, though valid, is a bit out of context:
"Watch the clock closely: the receiver hauls the ball in with four seconds on the clock"
The relevant consideration is not how much time the play actually takes. It's how much time the scoreboard operator lets tick off the clock. There's enough variation in this in college football in general (see Spartan Bob stopping the clock, Ryan Leaf not stopping clock at end of 98 Rose Bowl) to wonder a little whether Miles played it too close. But specifically in this case the scoreboard operator had been winding the clock for a few seconds after EVERY play.
This says nothing about the relative merits of Miles' call. Just that the fact that receiver hauls it in with 4 seconds is less relevant if the scoreboard operator is going to wind the clock down anyway.
Brian, you are right on. The QB almost missed executing the trap - playing the lackadasical role to the hilt - but in the end, he didn't. I can even see the coaches telling him to ham it up, to be, as Jon Lovitz would say, "An Actor!"
I am sold on Les Miles. The goof who said that we would be on Carr for a similar call is a chimp. I would weep tears of blood should Lloyd Carr attempt such a noble thing and then expire from a stopped heart. Les Miles has proven himself this year to be the anti-Carr and, for those who know me, that means I am in love.
Up 5 with 1 second left, with Tuberville on the other side... one or two, it didn't matter one bit. The game was won.
Criticism of Miles, if any, should be levied on him not advising his QB that he had to get the play off in time to leave a few ticks on the clock. Not sure if Miles did or not, but Flynn sure didn't appear to have a sense of urgency when breaking the huddle and getting the play snapped.
medals, he was "Acting!"
Keep in mind, Les is the CEO type coach. He's not calling the exact plays or communicating with the QB. He tells the OC he wants to take a shot at six and probably OKs the actual play call.
He didn't have the opportunity to coach Flynn on the exact time to call the play or tempo. LSU slowed down just a little too much...
But this is splitting hairs. The play worked and he had the stones to call it. Everyone who's repeating the ESPN storyline of that toss was the ballgame are just ignorant of the ability to think.
Is the impartial clock official a Big Ten rule, or an NCAA rule? Remember, the game was in Baton Rouge.....
Meeechigan Dan - Thesbian point taken, but, I'd still say Flynn shaved it a little too close for comfort.
Not sure if the scoreboard operator can stop the clock or not on his/her own, (meaning without first seeing the refs signal to stop the clock), but there is certainly some wiggle room to allow a few seconds to tick off in any game situation. A coach or player should not put himself in a situation to have a reverse-Spartan Bob moment.
This says nothing about the relative merits of Miles' call. Just that the fact that receiver hauls it in with 4 seconds is less relevant if the scoreboard operator is going to wind the clock down anyway.
I believe this is a reviewable call in so much as if the pass is incomplete and the and time runs out, it can be reviewed to determine exactly when it hit the ground and how much time should be left on the clock.
In that respect, citing that he catches the ball with 4 seconds left does indeed matter because an incompletion would likely end the play with roughly the same time left (you can say with good confidence that an incomplete pass wouldn't take more time than the completion did).
It was the right call, but agree I agree with medals. The biggest risk of that play was having Flynn let too much time off the clock before taking the snap. You're living dangerously expecting him to do the math on the fly to know how far he could let it run down (no slam on SEC academics intended).
We are missing the point, really. Let's say time ran out because Flynn scrambled for a second and threw the pass. These are execution issues.
What I love is the attitude! Miles has shown that he will pile up the points when he can, and, when he doesn't have all the pieces, he will gamble and attack and go for it and essentially claw his way to victory.
Simple alien to Michigan fans. I, for one, welcome our new alien overlords.
Miles is an expensive cheerleader. I'm more interested in who our coordinators will be.
Little Bro - good point but i dunno - i don't think you want to put yourself in a position where you have to get a call overturned to stay in the game
Korea Blue makes a good point. Since Miles has generally been considered a CEO-type of coach, and if he is indeed likely to take over next year as coach, it's certainly valid to wonder who he would be able to bring in as coordinators. This will have as much (if not more) to do with our eventual success on both sides of the ball, in my opinion.
Although I certainly give him credit for almost always being able to recognize and appoint the best offensive and defensive coordinators, not to mention his ginormous cojones. As mentioned before, his hiring philosiphy would be a vast improvement from the current situation.
FWIW (which is probably nothing), I was at a wedding this weekend and ended up watching the game on a small television at the nearby bar with two-time Michigan captain ('82, '83) Robert Thompson (who was also at the wedding). He was of the opinion that, based on what he's heard through his former-player connections, Miles will definitely come if offered the job.
That Thompson was a two-time captain is totally irrelevant, but I thought it was pretty frickin' cool.
Gnarls, way cool.
As for the coordinator question, I think we can kiss the idea of Bo Pelini goodbye. The nice thing about Miles is that we don't have to worry a bit about beating other premium programs to him, but they are going to raid his peeps as sure as we are standing here. Pelini to Nebraska? Probably.
We'll have to trust his acumen.
I totally like Miles:HC, Cam Cameron:OC and English:DC thing. Some commentor during McGuffie chat mentioned that Miles and Cam are good friends.
Cam Cameron might be out of the job if Miami goes 0-16 ( and it seems it will ). But I think a he might become OC of some teams with defunct offenses in NFL ( he might even return to Chargers as OC if Norv is fired ). I'd like to see Sam McGuffie used like LdT.
Again, Cam is a bad HC.. But he's a more than capable OC.
i don't think you want to put yourself in a position where you have to get a call overturned to stay in the game
Of course that's not a position you want to be in, but at that point the fault of the play call isn't the call itself, it's the execution by Flynn (even though most of the pundits won't see it that way).
Having a timeout was hugely important to the call. While Brian is 100% right that with max protect, a sack was nearly impossible, if something wacky happened, or if Flynn botched the snap and had to fall on it, they still could stop the clock. That took one of the two realistic threats of the play off the board. All that was left was an unlikely 1 on 1 INT.
Does anyone get the feeling that Miles - with his bold playcalling, with a display of the exact football traits so desired by Michigan fans - is auditioning for the Michigan job?
I want Les Miles to get the job if only to watch him interact with Jim Brandstatter each week on Michigan Replay. That would be an outstanding half-hour of television every week.
And for what it's worth, I think the call was defensible under the circumstances.
Proctor, that was a great post.
One of the reasons to love Les Miles is that he is willing to go into the "I'm Keith Hernandez" zone (the counterargument being that he does so to a fault) and that's pretty alluring considering the overall conservatism of the traditional Michigan coaching regime.
Ah.. someone has a man-crush on his dream next coach.
As it turned out there were nine seconds left when it was snapped and four when he caught it. Was Flynn aware of where the clock was? Don't know? Could Flynn just as easily have snapped it 4 seconds later? Don't know?
Brian, your adoration of LSU's coach has obviously caused you to experience brain lock.
If you were watching this game from the former comfort of your safe Lloyd Carr universe, you would lambaste this as a ridiculous play call, reckless, insane, lucky, etc. No coach I know or have ever coached with would have considered this a wise gamble with a national championship season on the line. There is almost nothing to gain and everything to lose by taking the risk that Miles did.
This is one of those calls that look OK in retrospect because it worked out. But it's a very lucky thing that it did.
The ball was snapped closer to :08 than :09. An pick is but one of the many catastrophic things that could have sunk the tigers here. A fumbled snap, and underthrown ball, ball bobbled by Byrd, a sack, and yes, an interception, are all possible outcomes. No big deal on any other down and distance when the game wasn't on the line, but a big deal here when already in field goal range with plenty of time to run it into the center of the field for an easy game-winner from your reliable FG kicker.
You say the ball was caught with 3 secs remaining. I agree. Unfortunately coaches do not control the referees or clock operators. Miles chose to trust the officiating crew rather than use the clock smartly in a manner that put LSU and only LSU in a position to win.
I have spent a small amount of time on your blog. You fashion yourself an expert on these matters. I read with amusement some of your 'expert analysis' on this web site and it is quite obvious you have never played nor coached a down of football.
There is a reason that every analyst and coach in America worth his whistle says this call was unwise. They know from experience and true knowledge of the game.
You would do well to listen to them instead of blindly admire this doofus.
gogogadgetgo played HS football and what, scored 4 TDs in his final game for Polk High in '69?
obviously, he's got to be an expert at selling shoes too.
I coached at a higher level than that... that is all I will say.
Yeah, real risky to trust the clock to stop within THREE SECONDS of when the play ended.
/sarcasm
gogogadgetgo....
As it has been discussed to death LSU needed to utilize slightly better time management. No question about it.
But the base logic at work is sound.
Run + FG attempt = 1 chance at win.
Endzone shot + FG attempt = 2 chance at win.
Which do you think is better?
Every scenario contains potential negative outcomes. The safe option - the FG - can be blocked, fumbled, shanked, etc.
The bottom line is that LSU ran it's play and it still had time to kick it. That last second did not tick off.
By the way, you obviously don't know much about LSU's kicker if you call him 'reliable'.
the funny thing is, brian refuted every point gogogadgetgo made. calling LSU's FG kicker 'reliable' was hilarious, tho.
Brian's right about this one and not just b/c he wrote what I had been thinking. There was a shitload of time left and anyone on LSU could've called a timeout if it had been an incompletion.
Besides, it's not Miles' fault if his QB waited a little too long and made it seem more "dangerous" than it actualy was. He had the right match up and his kicker isn't real realiable. On top of that he has a loss and a few more tough games left. A second loss and you're probably out of the NC game, so you might as well have it now than later when you still have a small chance at getting ranked highly enough. Les Miles isn't the greatest coach in college football but this particular decision wasn't as lame as the talking heads and football "experts" like gogo think.
another thing tho: can they kick on 3rd and still retain possesion for a 2nd attempt? i think that rule changed several years ago and i don't recall the details.
Hey gogogadgetgo,
There's experience, and then there's common denominator generated from repeated exposure to the same stupid thing over and over again. Brilliant thought is not going to be something that everyone will realize to be brilliant. You keep your mediocre group think and 'common sense,' and I'll take Les Miles and Brian's brilliant agile minds. Now let's see whose team comes closest to producing awesome results.
First, I did not read every post on this thread, but:
Miles is quickly climbing my list of favorite future head coaches, whenever that may occur. Tedford is out for all the reasons I was down on him before. Kelly is still high for the "darkhorse".
LSU-AU ending:
Remember how KY beat LSU in regulation? I'd try for a TD pass too.
Miles gutsy calls: He looks like a steel-eyed gambler always knowing his opponent. Maybe he does, BUT a hypothetical -- what if one of the many gambles against FL does work out or the pass is intercepted by AU? What do you think now? Careless tactician - horrible "in-game" coach... those were the things he was busted on going into the season. Is he auditioning?
I am a growing fan of Coach Miles. Isn't it funny, how "we" all seem to be watching the teams/coaches as if one season/game/decision makes the difference in who the next coach will be. Not saying that it will even happen next year...
Whoa now. Les Miles is not 'brilliant.' Nor is his mind agile. However, he is gutsy and knows his strategy and a he might even be a little reckless.
And he isn't auditioning for anything. He's got one of the top jobs in the country already. His sitting on a goldmine of instate talent with no competition. He's gone 28-4 to date at LSU. There's probably a flock of boosters begging the school to give him a massive extension.
A couple of gutsy play calls is not going to determine his fate regarding any potential opening at Michigan.
This whole Miles to Michigan thing is a preemptive game of connect the dots, with no substance to it. It's more than likely that WHEN Coach Carr steps down an extensive national search will happen.
They are not just going to throw money at the first available 'Michigan Man' who's getting a lot of buzz.
I have one problem with your otherwise excellent blog, Brian.
Your blatent hate of all things Lloyd Carr has led to you defending everything Les Miles does. At some point you have to admit that Miles can, at times, make mistakes. Miles was wrong in the situation, and you know it.
another thing tho: can they kick on 3rd and still retain possesion for a 2nd attempt? i think that rule changed several years ago and i don't recall the details.
I believe you can only keep possession if the kick doesn't cross the LOS. I'm not positive though.
A wrong decison is one that doesn't work. It worked. It was the right decision. So it wasn't executed perfectly in terms of time. You know his team LOVES him for it and will play that much harder...which it will surely need as it has finally started playing good offensive teams.
There is a reason that every analyst and coach in America worth his whistle says this call was unwise.
Yeah, it's called groupthink and conventional wisdom.
It's the same reason that guys who run fast but have a .290 OBP end up being leadoff hitters in baseball. Groupthink.
It's the reason that coaches punt on 4th and 1 1/2 on the opponents' 35 yard line, boot it through the end zone, then one pass play later the opponent is on the 35. Groupthink.
Coaches/managers rarely get criticized for groupthink decisions that don't work, at least not by others in their fraternity of former coaches and announcers. They get crucified any time they go against conventional wisdom and it doesn't work.
Well call me just another stupid Buckeye but if I were courtin' another coach for UM I think I wouldn't post crappy comments already!
And, Go Bucks. We're probably not really #1 but are trying to get there. I can't remember a year with such a lacking Div 1 leader. Most OSU fans think the same, but our #1 D is reaaaaaaaly good. Won'[t be shocked at a loss.
It's wrong to run around naked with your hair on fire. Groupthink.
"Interceptions are highly unusual occurrences"
what
have you seen matt flynn play? ever? God. the problem people have with this isn't that miles called a deep ball versus a shorter throw to get into better field goal range, it's that miles called on flynn to throw the deep ball rather than a shorter throw to get into better field goal range. not only that, BUT HE STILL HAD A FUCKING TIMEOUT TO WORK WITH.
brian, you're absolutely right about the clock being run down, but i've watched that drive a billion times now and the only conclusion i can come to is that les miles either wasn't aware of what was going on, or had an insane amount of confidence in his "plan," whatever the hell it was supposed to be.
i'm betting the latter, but i'll hedge my bets with the former. especially since miles seemed to completely forget about the timeout
in either case, you can polish the knob of the guy you want to take over for carr, and i'm sure that throwing scissors looks sexy as hell when you've seen nothing but rock for years, but sometimes paper works just as well. always throwing scissors is just as bad as always throwing rock
bupbupbup-
"interceptions are highly unusual occurrences"
flynn may throw a lot of INTs, but that's not the point here. the point is that a fade to the corner of the endzone where the receiver is basically the only person that can catch the ball in bounds does not get intercepted very often. especially in one-on-one coverage.
it was a ballsy, and GREAT, call. little downside and a huge upside (the W).
i'm betting the latter, but i'll hedge my bets with the former. especially since miles seemed to completely forget about the timeout
If he forgot about the timeout, why did he mention it immediately in his post-game interview? The fact is the play was called with plenty of time and it was Flynn's execution that made the play "questionable." To call the play stupid, crazy, etc. means you've put greater success in making a field goal than throwing one deep (in which an incomplete pass can still be considered a success since you have a chance to throw the ball).
Even if Flynn sucks at QB, your odd at an INT in 1 on 1 coverage deep down the sideline aren't dramatically higher to the point where you would never think about throwing the ball.
a chance to throw the ball* should read a chance to kick a field goal. Yay for not being able to edit.
With Colt David's questionable length and accuracy, even if you put a successful FG attempt at somewhere near 80%, you've just said that there's a 20% or greater chance in the pass play either being intercepted or time running out and not being able to kick a FG. I'd like to see numbers that prove that play had greater than a 5% of absolute failure.
yes, i realize that that's not a play that gets intercepted often. that's not the point. if that ball isn't thrown properly (not exactly a rarity when flynn is chucking it), it could easily be an INT.
if that's Troy Smith making the throw, then yeah, that's an acceptable call. but not matt flynn, and not when you've got a timeout to work with. does miles realize that the clock stops on an incompletion?
So on a route that the CB clearly has no clue what's going on is going to make an easy INT? It's all pointed out for the play call. 1 on 1, 8 men in the box, max protect, it's a simple play that doesn't get intercepted very often even if Flynn is your QB.
And that it IS the point. The interception has to have a greater chance of happening than a missed FG for it to be a bad call. It simply doesn't, meaning the plays success is greater than just a simple FG attempt. Just because the pundits don't understand the odds of the play doesn't make it a bad call. It may not be the best call, but it certainly is not an incorrect call.
Groupthink? Groupthink!
Couple answers to peoples' questions:
1. Neutral timekeepers are in the Big Ten only. The SEC still has homers doing it, and I think it showed on that play. The WR catches the ball with four seconds left and lands with three. The clock should have been stopped at three seconds. There was no reason for it to tick down to one. I think that was some home cooking. If that pass is incomplete, you can bet your bottom dollar the clock would have stopped at three seconds.
2. Regarding kicking on 3rd down, once you kick a FG, that's it - you get no more chances. (Otherwise everyone would kick on 1st down, kick again on 2nd, etc.) The only thing kicking on 3rd down instead of 4th gets you is that if there's a bad snap that *prevents the kick from being attempted*, you can try it again. That's it.
give me a break. even if the pass isn't intercepted, enough time will have gone off the clock to force a rush field goal in a bad spot.
the biggest problem everyone has with this call (aside from matt flynn getting he call) is that if it doesn't result in a TD, the game is essentially over, even if there's time left on the clock. miles isn't maximizing his teams' chance to win, he's gambling on a high risk-low probability play that could've lost him the game right there.
it wasn't the worst call ever made, but man, acting like it was anything less than complete hubris and thickheadedness is just wrong
"Does anyone get the feeling that Miles - with his bold playcalling, with a display of the exact football traits so desired by Michigan fans - is auditioning for the Michigan job?"
That can't be any crazier than me thinking Lloyd and co. read mgoblog regularly and carefully. Probably far less crazy.
One thing that is driving me absolutely INSANE, is the fact that people are making such a big deal about there being one second left. One thing that has obviously become a part of College Football is replay review, especially for time on the clock. Hence us beating Penn State in 05. Yes, there was one second showing on the clock, however, after he caught the pass, the clock kept running for 3 more seconds. There should have been AT LEAST 4 seconds left, and had the pass been incomplete, they would have put that time back on the clock.
"I have one problem with your otherwise excellent blog, Brian.
Your blatent hate of all things Lloyd Carr has led to you defending everything Les Miles does. At some point you have to admit that Miles can, at times, make mistakes. Miles was wrong in the situation, and you know it."
He laid out his argument in front of you, for one, and, for two, Brian has always done a great job of making his audience aware of his biases and the extent of his knowledge. The "Last Word On Hart" post was, as Brian acknowledged, right in line with how he ran the Trent-Arm-Injury deal, which was to let us know all the information he had on his plate and what he thought was. Instead of promoting his blog by breaking a story, he let's us know what he's got. That right there should tell you it's unlikely irrational Lloyd-hatred (which Brian's railed against many times, btw) is getting in the way of his opinions.
One of the great things about this blog is the way its run: we're allowed access to everything and we can judge for ourselves.
My only criticism of the post is maybe that we're giving credit to Miles brain when it may well be his balls making the calls, which means that we might not be able to rely on such able risktaking in the future. Anyone seen a press conference where he's laid out his thought process on such decisions before? Would he be honest anyway?
'the biggest problem everyone has with this call (aside from matt flynn getting he call) is that if it doesn't result in a TD, the game is essentially over, even if there's time left on the clock.'
WTF? Did you say you watched the replay? How is the game over, even with time on the clock?
What I saw was a gutsy call, a good throw, and a great catch. You should stop bagging on Matt Flynn so much and enjoy it.
"give me a break. even if the pass isn't intercepted, enough time will have gone off the clock to force a rush field goal in a bad spot"
----------------------------------
Uh, no. If the pass had been incomplete, the clock would have stopped.
I agree, Brian. It was not a reckless playcall. The LSU player caught the ball with 4 seconds remaining. I can't believe so many people are lambasting that call. I especially can't believe any MICHIGAN FANS are critical of that call, when many of these same M fans express frustration with Carr/Debord for being too conservative. You can't have it both ways, folks.
I'm ready for a coach who isn't afraid to let his players make great plays like that.
Of course, DeBord did give us some sugar that day as well, with that awesome fake reverse WR pass for the climching TD.
How many of you, if you were actually coaching a real live human football team, would take such a stupid risk? If that pass is bobbled or in any way contested by the defensive back THE GAME IS OVER. YOU LOSE. FOR NOTHING. It was a foolish gambit with a ton of downside. If I'm Auburn I hope they try that play every time versus kicking the field goal. Think about it.
Amazing to see dimwits come out in force on this one. They still don't get it. In the Miles world, the key to the play was obviously catchning Auburn napping thinking that they were going to simplly run a play to the center of the field. In Miles world, he knew exactly how much time was on the clock (you are an ass if you think he didn't). In Miles world, Flynn is scripted to do all this with a wee bit more time on the clock, leaving maybe 5 seconds in the event of an incomplete ball. All goes according to plan - the trap works, Flynn executes the pass but misses clock management by a couple seconds (not hard to do). There was still time left and would have been more if incomplete. The absolute morons hating this can only focus on a bad scoreboard operator and Flynn cutting the master plan too close. Given those two things, it still worked either way.
As for gogodickwad, we all laugh. Brian doesn't need to defend his credentials to anyone, let alone this clown who secretly coached at a high level (flag football).
I don't think anyone has a problem with the play call, it was letting the clock run down so much that is the issue. What if Flynn had put a little more air under the ball, or if it was tipped up into the air?
The issue is that you are putting the game in the hands of the refs and the clock operator rather than your team.
pass caught = call good.
i don't know if some of you vags have ever heard of the term gambling, but it can refer to taking a non-guaranteed chance at something in order to receive a big payout. for instance, sometimes i bet on teams i'm not 100% will win because if they all do, then i win a lot of money.
les miles gambled, fools. sure, it isn't a guarantee. but you know what else isn't a guarantee? a made FG, a spot in the BCS game, or the fact Auburn won't score on the band is on the field special. if we go by actual results and not fantasy land worst case scenarios, his team scored a TD to effectively seal the game the best they could and left the other team just one play to make up that deficit. he hit on 19 and got a 2, and won 10,000. that doesn't mean he's going to do it every time.
if we're going to play fantasy land, what would you nay-sayers have done in the almost 50-50 chance that LSU misses the FG?
I agree that LSU should have gameplanned to go for the touchdown. I believe that college (and other) football coaches generally are too risk-averse, and that teams can better maximize outcomes by going for it on more fourth downs.
That said, color me unimpressed, by the playcall and the commentary above.
Starting at the beginning of the series in the clip, Miles took the biggest resource at his disposal - time - and squandered it to the extent that an execution error, or an inattentive clock operator, or a half-dozen other eventualities could have lost the game. To use the vernacular of the couch commentariat, "playing to win" would have been trying to pick up multiple first downs and multiple yards, not watching time elapse to the point where the only branches on the decision tree were a prayer thrown by a bad passer or a shaky kicker from a shaky distance.
For those who scoff at the amount of time left I say that given the choice of me controlling my fate or a clock operator controlling my fate, I'm goint to take me every time, thanks. And that's not to mention a tipped pass, a sack, an ill-advised scramble or some other time-wasting event.
For those who dismiss the running of the clock as an "execution" issue that falls to the players, not the head man, I ask: Where did that get last month's flavor of choice, Jeff Tedford? And I'm baffled by the apparent thought that that was a low-interception risk pass. Flynn is not a precision passer, and if that ball is underthrown it it picked more often than not. Heck, if the Auburn DB merely turns his head he has a shot at it. Plus this: the playcall also left LSU vulnerable to the "execution error" of a missed blitz pickup. LSU may have been able to call time out and get off a kick, sure, but if you are worried about David from 42 yards then you can't be pleased with him from 49.
I'm just puzzled by the thought that the defense called supported the playcall. Unless someone thinks that Auburn shared its defense with LSU before Crowton called the play.
Everyone enjoys watching the erratic riverboat gambler. Very few allow the riverboat gambler to double down with their own rent money.
"he hit on 19 and got a 2, and won 10,000. that doesn't mean he's going to do it every time."
That has to be the most insane defense of game strategy that I ever have seen.
It's incredibly accurate, though. Folks here are admiring the spectacle, not the decision-making.
Man, it must be great to be Tommy Tuberville. He made one of the dumbest decisions of the entire year in squib-kicking to LSU with more than three minutes left, yet the only thing anyone wants to debate over is the supposedly "insane" call by Les Miles that, you know, won the game and everything.
I bet Tubbs also sleeps on a pile of money, with many beautiful women.
anon, you are not bright. You act as if the acquisition of 7 more yards is not fraught with the same risks (probably greater in the event of any underneath throw) or that those yards would even be likely. The previous two plays netted three yards. The move of 90 percent of coaches would have been to center the ball (no gain).
If you argue better clock mgt and more plys, the risks increase. Miles created an unheard of one on one coverage in the end zone in that situation by trickery. He turned one opportunity to win into two. If you had been coach, your fate would have been a long-ish FG by an iffy kicker. Your LSU would be 6-2. Miles is 7-1...
This is a little harsh on your team. I am a tOSU alum and am pretty sure that both Hart and Henne care VERY much. Mike Hart probably doesn't have the physical skills to do much at the next level, but he is one of the toughest S.O.B.s you will ever see play college football. He would have probably given just about anything to be able to play in this game.
If Michigan beats Ohio State in November it will be because Mike Hart will impose his will on that entire game. You will miss him when he is gone.
the simple fact is that the odds of something f-ed up happening on that fade to 1-on-1 coverage are just the same as that of running 1 more play to get 5-10 more yards and/or 'line up the FG.'
this compares in no way to the playcall in tedford's case: Cal had no TOs. they called a complex pass pattern against a D who was not stacked to stop the run (they were in zone iirc). it was clear that the Cal Qb had no freaking clue that he just needed to throw the ball away into the stands if there was nothing wiiide open. that was a 'anything but a sack or int is OK' situation to everyone but the QB, apparently.
Clearly, flynn was well aware of the situation and the only questionable decision was to snap it w/ less than 10 secs. and he snapped @ 9 secs.
the more brilliant thing miles did was let the time run down the way he did. auburn kept their TOs for no reason. once LSU got into low-40s-or-less FG range, they used the least amount of plays possible. this minimizes the chances of something going wrong. in fact, i bet on the last play that if flynn didn't see 8 in the box man coverage w/ no saftey help, he just waits to call a TO w/ 3-4 sec remaining. maybe that's why he waited til 9sec to snap it.
Just a quick observation, but are we going to change the name of this blog to LSUgoblog? While I also find myself getting into the speculation of whether Les will be our next coach when (and if) Lloyd steps down after the season, let's focus on the impressive turnaround that our team - and current coach - have orchestrated.
anon said:
For those who scoff at the amount of time left I say that given the choice of me controlling my fate or a clock operator controlling my fate, I'm going to take me every time, thanks.
For the love of Bo, the amount of time left on the clock is REVIEWABLE, you jackass. Have you forgotten how Michigan beat Penn State in '05?
It's reviewable. It's reviewable. It's reviewable. Get that through your head. The replay official would have put back 2-4 more seconds on the clock, and LSU would have been able to try for a field goal. A little more air under the pass, a bobbled incompletion, yada yada yada would not have taken ALL of the time off the clock, given the replay review.
If you really believe that upon further review, LSU wouldn't have gotten any more time, then you're simply assuming the replay officials would have made a gigantic f--kup. If that's the case, then you need to turn off the TV and not watch any more football, because clearly you have ZERO trust in the integrity of the officials and the integrity of the game. A coach doesn't and shouldn't make decisions based on the assumption that the officials are going to screw up, that's bass ackward. Sweet Chocolate Jesus.
WTF is up with some people? It's as if they can't wrap their heads around an unorthodox but defensible decision that ended in success!
give me a break. even if the pass isn't intercepted, enough time will have gone off the clock to force a rush field goal in a bad spot.
the biggest problem everyone has with this call (aside from matt flynn getting he call) is that if it doesn't result in a TD, the game is essentially over, even if there's time left on the clock. miles isn't maximizing his teams' chance to win, he's gambling on a high risk-low probability play that could've lost him the game right there.
This is completely wrong. When the clocks stops on an incomplete pass, how exactly is the FG attempt rushed? And if they felt rushed, I'm sure Miles could have used his final timeout to give his FG unit a bit more time to setup. To suggest that the game is over with time still on the clock is absurd.
How is the game essentially over with time on the clock? It wasn't a 60 yard attempt where it would pay huge dividends to get another 10-15 yards for the try. Completely ruling out the FG attempt on the possible next play only benefits your argument and doesn't hold any water.
The simple facts are all there as Brian laid out, and I've mentioned some brief, basic odds behinds the call. There's been no actual argument made to why the call is bad except that it could be intercepted (a highly unlikely result) or that time would run out (another highly unlikely result that an incompletion would take longer than a completion).
gobluemich, I understand what you're saying and I don't necessarily disagree.
OTOH, Brian (and others like myself) find Game Theory to be a fascinating topic, especially as it relates to football (remember all his mentions of Romer?). As it turns out, Les Miles is one of the few coaches that seems to intuitively understand Game Theory and how to maximize his outcomes. And he's a Michigan Man. And he's always expressed a love for Michigan, and Lloyd Carr seems to be exiting stage right soon, if not after this season. Thus all those reasons point towards frequent discussion of Miles' coaching decisions.
Yes, Lloyd Carr has staged a great turnaround, and he's to be applauded for that. Personally, I'm hoping for an undefeated Big 10 championship for Lloyd, so we can give him a nice retirement party and some parting gifts. He's been good to us, but it's time for him to go.
Even if Miles doesn't come to Michigan, I enjoy being able to discuss "off-topic" subjects like major coaching decisions at crucial points in a game and whether or not they are a good call or a bad call.
"are we going to change the name of this blog to LSUgoblog?"
this is funny..."we" aren't doing anything. it's brian's blog. he can do what ever he likes. now, while i'd like to see
1) more hockey & baseball coverage,
2) less nba coverage,
3) less 'profiles in heroism' till the offseason when they announce Carr is leaving for sure, and
4) more stuff about tempo-free stats in football
5) more slides from that wack-job guy who discussed 'defensing (HA!) the spread,'
i'm not going to pretend brian should feel any need to cater to my desires.
Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily mind the Les Mises discussion, and I very much enjoy the detailed strategy discussions. I must admit that watching LSU this season has indeed made me pretty psyched at the prospect of having Mr. Brass Balls as our HC. My only comment is that it seems like every monday, there is virtually no talk of Michigan - just LSU analysis (from all of us commenters, more than Brian). Of course Mondays do tend to be very slow news days, so it may be more a factor of that than anything else.
For all of those saying versions of, "it worked so it was the correct call"--thank you, come again. I don't think it works that way.
Any real analysis of a decision must be made w/o regards to the outcome because the decision is made w/o knowledge of the outcome. Otherwise, all you're doing is crowning the flavor of the week.
Ten years of Les Miles at UM will give me at least three heart attacks. I don't think I can handle a game like LSU-AU every week.
I'm constantly amazed that a university as fine asn Michigan can produce such ill-mannered, reactionary fans.
Meech Dan - I did not propose that Miles try to pick up "7 more yards." I proposed a different decision tree starting after Hester's run netted LSU a first down on the 25 with 1:32 left. Disagree if you wish - plenty of reasonable people do - but I would suggest that you refrain from labeling others "not bright" if you haven't taken the time to understand what they are saying.
cfaller - jackass - have you forgotten how Cal lost last week? The end of Michigan/OSU in 2005? You can't stop the clock - or review the time left - while the ball is live. LSU had a timeout, I grant you, but a timeout has little value if there is a guy on the field who decides to try to be a hero. Nine seconds ends the game if Flynn is flushed from the pocket before he throws.
DanK - Great comments. I agree entirely with your first paragraph. At 18 seconds left, I go for the endzone, not a first down. I'm not convinced about the strategy once the clock runs to 9, though, and we part company on the remainder of the strategy from 1:32 left. I think that the Cal situation is comparable, even given the (significant) timeout in LSU's pocket, because of the risk that the QB will freelance. Cal snapped with 14 seconds left and only 12 yards to the goalline. For Michigan parallels, think of the pass to Ecker in OSU '05, or the dropped passes to Breaston in Virginia '95 or Butterfield in Washington '03 (?). I guess that we just have different levels of confidence in Flynn "getting it" on the play. I'm also entirely unconcerned with Auburn's timeouts. Under 1:32, all I want to do is maximize my chances at a TD while minimizing the risk that I will blow a figgie opportunity. I think that I maximize my TD opportunities by running a two-minute offense, not waiting for one shot at the endzone that is hit-or-miss with the timing.
I'm not going to criticize Miles but consider this outcome. The play doesn't work. Now they've got a 'tetchy' FG. They miss. Now everyone says, "you wasted all that time when you could have gained 10 more yards. You knew your kicker was teh suck!"
Just a thought for the OMG HIS TESTICLES ARE GIANT I HAVE A BONER crowd.
The people who like the call like it because it worked. End of story.
Had Flynn's throw been intercepted, Les Miles would be the biggest idiot this side of the Mississippi. Yes, an interception is a "highly unusual occurence" but it is, to steal Woody Hayes' approach, one of the two bad occurences that may occur when the ball is thrown (out of three total).
Give your "highly unusual occurence" theory to Brian Sipe, Ozzie Newsome, and the Cleveland Browns of 1980 (referencing the 1980 playoff game where the Browns could beaten the Raiders with a 30-yard field in the brutal cold but instead opted to throw on 3rd down to just take "one chance" - the pass was intercepted, and the Raiders won 14-12...and the Super Bowl three weeks later.)
Better yet, tell it to Elvis Grbac, Gary Moeller, and the 1990 Michigan Wolverines (referencing Grbac's interception on the goal line against Notre Dame late in the 1990 game won 28-24 by ND).
Or Ryan Mallet, Adrian Arrington, and the 2007 Michigan Wolverines aginst Illinois.
If the coach throws and it works, he is a genius (ala Desmond Howard, 1991). If the coach throws and it is picked off, he is a complete moron. It doesn't matter if the coach's name is Lloyd Carr or Les Miles.
thank you for assuming i'd be angry in the event of an interception.
when i'm watching my club of choice, i'm rather entertained by the coach occasionally going batshit insane and doing something like this, and if it works, well hell yeah even better.
if it doesn't, tough shit. i'm not losing any sleep over it. oh nooooees we have a LOSS! whatever will we doooo.
WRT the possibility of relying on official review of the play clock winding too much time off after an incompletion, you have to factor in that, if the clock had run out on an incompletion, the Auburn team would have ran to the locker room before the old guys in the booth had a chance to signal the refs on the field, who would also be headed for the showers. You saw how quickly the booth officials were to call for a review of Arrington's TD vs. Illinois. Yes, it is possible that replay officials might have overturned the call after Auburn is in the locker room and called them back out for the FG attempt several minutes later, but I don't think you can rely on that.
@Cliff, ha ha Red Right 88! It has the never ending comedic value of Stanley Jackson!
Anon, encapsulates my feelings exactly. I've seen of Schottenheimer (more Browns schadenfreude) 'settling' for longish FGs and lose enough to know I don't wanna be wasting so much clock and reduce the game to a longish FG or a low percentage pass.
RE: "because of the risk that the QB will freelance."
based on the playcall, the defense, there was no risk of this. there was only one read to make. throw where the safety is not helping and there's 1-on-1 coverage. or thow OOB. 5 steps & release one way or the other. there aren't any decisions to make once the ball is snapped. max protect == no sack on a 5 step, one read drop. at least, no greater chance compared to even lining up the FG. this was the perfect (only) playcall for the situation: not the case for tedford. plus, that was a chippy of a FG for Cal, not so here.
I'm a math guy, so I like to look at Miles' call based on percentages. If you have a shaky kicker, what's the chance of making a 40 yard FG? is 60% chance fair? Maybe it goes to 75% on a 30 yard FG attempt? And what are the percentages on the TD pass - maybe 15% TD, 80% incomplete, and 5% interception? So, there are three choices (I ignore fumble/fumbled snap as possible outcomes, since each of the below choices carries that same risk):
1. Center the ball with a run and kick FG. 100% chance of a FG, and then a 60% chance to win the game.
2. Try to gain 10 yards with a safe pass. Assume 30% chance of success on the pass, and 5% chance of INT. So, if my math is right, that leads to about a 61% chance to win the game (30% * 75% on the shorter FG, plus 65% * 60% on the incompletion and longer FG), with a possible gut-wrenching interception coming into play.
3. Take the end zone shot, which is a 15% chance of winning, plus 80% of the time, a 60% chance to make the game winning field goal. That outcome leads to a 63% chance to win the game for LSU.
Again, these percentages are arbitrary, and if Adam Vinatieri or Jason Elam is your kicker, you go with the FG because the likelihood of success is so high on the FG. With a shaky kicker, taking the shot at the endzone seems to make sense, although it introduces a little more volatility in the outcome (due to the potential for an INT). Tweak the percentages a bit, and all the possible outcomes shift slightly.
All this leads to one conclusion - there's no clear best call here, and different people, with different risk tolerances, will have different opinions as to whether or not it was the right call.
Flynn on the year has thrown 5 INT on 190 ATT. 2.6%. The FG kicker is 14-19 on the year (73.7%), but 0-2 from 40+ yards. So their was a far greater chance that the FG would miss on the last play of the game than an INT.
There was no chance of an improvisation (like Cal) because of the Fade call. It is a 5 step drop and throw to a spot (exactly the call that Tedford should have made vs OSU).
If there was a sack you still have a timeout.
The only problem was that they cut it too close. If the ball was snapped with 12-15 seconds (which could have been done), would people be complaining about it?
In college 1:36, a TO, and a 1st down gives you time to run approximately 57 plays so scenarios involving 1 play are not necessary. Given that scenario LSU had time to drive entire field and score a TD or leisurely FG. That is what Miles sacrificed for his 'brilliant' call. Which the more I think about looks a little too Charlie Weis look at me I'm a genius for my taste.
freak, spare us. Just because we are impressed by an electric and bold coach (who I never paid attention to brfore this year), doesn't make us shallow any more than your observation makes you wise.
Criticizing his moves based upon time misses the point. The strategy was clever. The execution was good. I want my coach to go for wins.
"If the ball was snapped with 12-15 seconds (which could have been done), would people be complaining about it?"
No. that's the point. the play call itself was great. The timing was bad and potentially disastrous. I love aggressive coaching but you can be smart about it, too.
MDan, believe me I am very happy that you’re so excited. As a fan that is wonderful. When hiring a new coach, I think one must use the head as well as the heart. Notice, I have not commented on my feelings regarding Miles a potential new coach. I am simply enjoying a discussion of an end game scenario. Boldness is exciting. Boldness when unnecessary may be even more exciting but is also rash. We are simply discussing where that line may be for each of us. To me, the approach under discussion is a little too clever and bold—a tendency has cost ND much. I believe a simpler approach was called for in this end game. If that makes me wise or timid is for others to decided.
While your excitement is wonderful, your constant insults of those who disagree with you and your odd insistence on including yourself in a mythical “we” are more troublesome.
Can we all agree that sitting on the ball and hoping that the kicker improves his 50% rate from 40+ (39, whatever) is not the way to go? Would anyone be happy if Lloyd sat on the ball for 1:36, then trotted Gingell out there? Honestly? There's a reason Miles keeps calling these fake field goals and it isn't because he doesn't like guaranteed points on the board.
I can completely see imafreak's point of view, although to my way of thinking this incorporates more variability and is more "risky" than what Miles did.
No. that's the point. the play call itself was great. The timing was bad and potentially disastrous. I love aggressive coaching but you can be smart about it, too.
What about the execution involves the coaches? It was Flynn who took the clock that far down.
people seem to be consistently arguing "miles' playcall was a bad one because if something had gone wrong, LSU would have lost their opportunity for a field goal." TWO things went wrong (flynn takes too long to snap the ball and clock operator lets an additional 3 seconds burn), and the FG still would have been an option if a THIRD thing had gone wrong and the ball hadn't been caught. i wouldn't consider a play risky if having three things go wrong still gives you a FG try for the win.
freak, since i agree with MDan, I guess that makes the "we" OK, yes?
also - there is the recurring suggestion that miles put too much faith in the refs/clock operator. especially in the era of instant replay, it is absolutely not asking too much for the clock to be stopped before it hits :00 when the play ends with :04 remaining. "what if the clock keeps running for four seconds after the play ends" would not have been an appropriate reason NOT to go for it.
i really hope the negative crowd isn't that risk averse in their daily lives
imafreak makes an excellent point against the call- in the case of an incompletion and a missed FG, Miles opens himself to criticism that he wasted a lot of time going for a longass TD play instead of spending that time gaining more yards and increasing the chance of a successful FG.
This is a valid criticism, and the call can still be defended (e.g. with Auburn's 8 men in the box, how many yards could be gained if you do the "expected?"). But I think it's important to differentiate between imafreak's and others' criticism of the call.
A lot of the critics of Miles' call don't understand that there is no guarantee on ANY play, and you must weigh the percentages against the expected payout of each play. The percentages favored Miles' call, even though it's not a guarantee. But nothing is.
It seems like some people think a run up the middle to set up the field goal should gain some crucial yards, and therefore a run up the middle (even with 8 in the box) will gain some crucial yards. Likewise, perhaps they believe a 40 yard FG should be automatic, and therefore somehow in their minds a 40 yard FG will be automatic.
But that's not true, and no amount of wishing is going to make Auburn's 8 in the box any less sturdy, and no amount of wishing is going to make Colt David more reliable. Even though there are no guarantees, you still go with the percentages- a run into 8 is likely NOT going to gain much, and a 40 yard FG is NOT certain.
A coach ignores these realities at his own peril, especially in the ultracompetitive SEC. Michigan can get away with settling for missed FGs against Northwestern, but LSU does not have that luxury against Auburn (or anyone in the SEC, for that matter). Thus, Les Miles must be more aggressive in order to maximize his chances at winning. For Les Miles (and perhaps, the LSU faithful), it's not enough to do the "smart" thing and lose.
In the end, I think it comes down to risk tolerance. Some people are risk averse, period. Thus, they hate percentages that dictate higher risk calls and contradict the conventional wisdom that they grew up on, and so they're horrified when they see a coach go against it. Apparently, they love it when they see Lloyd Carr settle for a Gingell kick, rather than go for it. (sigh).
"i really hope the negative crowd isn't that risk averse in their daily lives"
Some people are fixed-rate mortgage and index fund people, others are ARMs with balloon payments and trading options and chasing last quarter's hot stock. Then again, some are stuff it in the mattress types. Personally, I put myself in the first category and am quite happy with the results.
The only thing wrong with the call is how long it took Flynn to snap the ball.
Otherwise, it was a relatively low risk play.
One correction -- there are 2 things bad that could've happened. The INT and a sack. A mediocre snap and a missed block could've put the play at risk for a sack. The risk was minimal, but it was there.
Regardless - the kicker needed at least 5 more yards one way or the other.
i'm not talking about your finances, i'm talking about running percentages on whether or not to wear the hoodie or jacket or talk to the blonde or the brunette when your shitfaced at the bar
" i'm not talking about your finances, i'm talking about running percentages on whether or not to wear the hoodie or jacket or talk to the blonde or the brunette when your shitfaced at the bar"
End of football game with national championship hopes on the line is more like a finances question for a football coach it seems to me.
I can certainly see why reasonable minds are disagreeing about the merits of the call/plan. I'm disappointed by the a-hole comments, and I'm slightly amused by the dozen or so straw men arguments I see people making and destroying.
My thoughts:
- You don't call plays assuming/fearing that the officials will eff up the time clock management. You just don't. If you have 10 seconds and you want to take a shot at the end zone, you don't say "hmmm, but what if the ball is incomplete at 4 seconds but the operator effs up." I just don't see that being in any good coach's decision making calculus. Maybe that's just me.
- anon: You said that you part ways from Meeechigan Dan in trusting Flynn to make the correct play. Fair enough, and look, I'm a Michigan fan, so I tend to be with you. What I was impressed with re: the play call was that MILES trusted his players to execute. He trusted his O-line and 2 blocking RBs to give Flynn time. He trusted his QB to execute the play at the right time (and all this "what if he waited too long" stuff seems a bit nonsensical to me-- there's a whatif on every play, you have to trust that superior preparation will lead to proper game-time execution). He trusted his players. I don't know-- like I said, I'm a Michigan fan. I'm not sure I trust some guys to execute something like that. I KNOW our coaching staff wavers in their trust at times. Apparently Miles has a lot of trust in Flynn and his O-line-- all this "whatiffing" about whether or not Flynn would have a brain fart and execute the play 4 seconds later than designed seems silly, in my opinion. And regardless, it's sort of refreshing to see a coach trust his players, no?
- The safe bet is to bleed the clock and then dance the conventional dance with your oppposing coach-- you call TO at 3 seconds. You line up for the FG. Opposing coach calls late TO to freeze kicker. You line up again. Then you go for it. All the weight on the shoulders of your iffy kicker and all the pressure off of you since you made the safe play. Make NO mistake, if Miles opts for FG only and David misses it, then besides a few post-game critiques of Miles' in-game decisions, you have the same story line, "FG misses clutch kick." Miles put it on himself and, as I said, perhaps some players he trusts more than his kicker. I just can't, for the life of me, see what the big problem is with that?
- What the big problem is with that, people say, is the risk compared to the reward. Again, drop the "seconds" thing. That's empty in my opinion, there was plenty of time despite what the ESPN drama queens made it out to be. And yep, it's reviewable. Execution? Fine, but I've said enough about why I have NO prob with the execution. Risk/Reward? Again, I'll take one play (which again, I'd submit was a relatively safe play) plus a FG rather than just the FG.
Irony of ironies is that someone (not sure who, this is a crazy long comments bo
Irony of ironies is that (not sure who, this is a crazy long comments board) called those that liked the call "reactionaries" and expressed disappointment that a fine university like Michigan would have those types of reactionaries.
Ironic. 1.) Reactionary doesn't characterize people who "react" immediately to things-- i.e., "Miles scored! Woo hoo! Crazy! My reaction-- he's the best!" It's characterized by conservatives (usually political) who loathe liberalism and progress and are very resistant to change (think totalitarianism). 2.) I'd humbly submit that it's NOT the people offering support of Miles' call, who loathe conventional wisdom, appreciate a coach that trusts his players and eschews "safe" FG plays, goes for it on fourth, "plays to win", etc., etc. that are "reactionaries", but all those are who stunned by this style of play and are ripping those that defend it that are being reactionary. Regardless, some of the criticism both of Miles AND Brian (who does a helluva damn fine job running this ole' blog, and bends over backwards to back up his arguments) is not only unwarranted, but dick-- and reactionary.
One more thing. I read Tuesday Morning QB from time to time. Don't always love his stuff, but often do (particularly for his love of Romer, as well).
One thing I love in his critique of the NFL is that coaches are ALWAYS playing for their jobs. They're playing so that the sportswriters don't rip them. They don't go for 4th and 8 at the opponent's 47, down 17 with 8 minutes to go because they'll be labeled risky/crazy in the press. They kick FGs when down 14 with 2 minutes to go, even though they still need to scores, because the margin of victory will be smaller and they'll look better.
I'm not comparing what some of you have suggested to anything as mind-numbingly annoying as what I just described. I OBVIOUSLY see the logic/merits in just doing one more play, maybe a run to center the FG, and then kick it away, or something like that. But if there's ONE thing I really like about Miles it's this: he doesn't coach for the media, he coaches to win. Cliche, obviously, but it appears to be true. There can be reasonable criticism of some of his playcalling, but I find the trust he places in his players and the fact that he almost says, "conventional wisdom, morning after quarterbacks, hindsight-driven sportswriters, eff you" to be refreshing.
I'm not endorsing brain dead, risky play calling just for the thrill of gambling, but as I've already stated (in just under 10,000 words), I don't think that play is nearly as risky as some of the Chicken Littles have suggested.
ThWard, I part ways with Meechigan Dan on most everything, so far as I can tell. It is DanK with whom I disagree only on insignificant (but fun) aspects of football endgame strategy.
The "reactionary" term was intended as a description of the message board totalitarians (the dominant, vocal set in these parts) who shout down any cricitism of a potential Carr replacement. Not in love with Miles in love with Carr. Perhaps "latter-day reactionaries" would have been a better term.
And to be clear, my primary criticism is that LSU should have tried to score a TD from 1:32 until :01 (or the last timeout was burned), not do nothing from 1:32 to :09, and then call a low percentage (though clever and "ballsy") home run ball. "Go for TD" is good strategy; "give yourself only one shot" is not. My secondary cricitism is the one identified by EricH - that Miles' third-down call (looked at in isolation), while a good one if snapped at :15, is noticeably less-good at :09.
I trust players so far as their instinct matches the team's goals. I would trust Flynn to manage the ball and the clock from 1:32 to :15 or so. My concern with under ten seconds is that if one Auburn rusher beats his man, Flynn's instinct would have been to side-step or twist out - a circumstance that likely would end the game. That's not even mentioning that everyone seems to agree that Flynn could/should have snapped sooner.
My concern with under ten seconds is that if one Auburn rusher beats his man, Flynn's instinct would have been to side-step or twist out - a circumstance that likely would end the game.
Umm, anon, in case of a sack, LSU had a timeout (which is where it differs from the Cal-Oregon State game you cited earlier). That makes all the difference in the world, because unless the entire play runs out the clock (highly highly unlikely), LSU is STILL able to stop the clock and try for a field goal.
I suppose you might be trying to concoct a scenario where the ENTIRE PLAY takes 9 seconds, or it takes less than 9 seconds but the officials eff it up, or whatever, but I don't see any of that as likely enough to affect the decision calculus.
Look, you're not comfortable with the call. Fine, you're more risk-averse than Miles and Brian. But just because you're not comfortable with it doesn't mean it's a "bad" call or it won't work. Miles had a timeout, replay review, element of surprise, and single coverage all in his favor, and given those advantages, he took a chance. You wouldn't have done so, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have been done.
IMO, in the end, Miles made the right call.
I can understand that he could have made a better effort at a real drive in the last 1:30. I can also understand that the timing was a bit off and it was cut too close for comfort (in terms of allowing enough time to get a FG attempt off if the pass had been incomplete)
But in the end two things stand out: 1)He did give his team not one, but two chances to win the game thereby increasing their chance to win 2)Instead of just pulling up for the FG, he tried to put the ball in the endzone, which IMO not enough coaches take a shot at.
Yes you can get intercepted, but you can get interecepted on ANY play. And not like things can't go wrong with FGs (appy state anyone?)
At the end of the day, from my experience (playing in college and friends that have played) very few PLAYERS like putting the whole game on the line with the kicker as the winner/loser without taking any kind of real shot at getting scoring a TD if time permits. I don't think I ever heard "great, my blood and sweat are all over the field, but here comes the soccer guy almost nobody talks to, to shank a kick and lose the game!" As you can tell by my tone, I think more players would think a FG more a last ditch effort than something you should count on for a win.
Also, this isn't the NFL, it is college and by and large most FGs are far from gimmies, much less a 40+ yarder with an already dicey kicker.
Lastly, by giving his team the opportunity to put the ball in the endzone, I am sure the day after most any player on that team would run through a brick wall for their coach if he asked them to. No FG to win will ever do that.
Just IMO.
anon. mea culpa. Like I said, I read this thread and by the time I posted, forgot 90% of the specifics due to its length.
Commenting by HaloScan
