Stitt addresses passing on FGs

[fanofzoo]

The Truth

You all better get used to it cause it ain't gonna change. It was done that way at the mines and it's gonna be done that way here and do you actually think he gives a rats ass about what fans/team think.

 

[kemajic]

Last night on the coaches show, Stitt talked about passing up on those field goals. His biggest point was that the Griz were down by 7 at the time and were down to their third string quarterback and he didn't know how many other opportunities they would have to try and tie the game. He said if they were down 6 points that's a different story because then another field goal ties it.

But his own argument goes against going for it. The assumed lack of future opportunities leads you to believe Stitt is thinking we are not moving the ball consistently. If that is the case you don't go for it on 4th and short because of that same offensive inconsistency. That is a lot to ask of the 3rd string QB with no game experience.

or you could think that the odds are better to pick up 2 yards and only having 7 more yards to score a touchdown instead of having to drive 60 or 70 yards....lots of ways to look at it....

You seem unfamiliar with our ability to move the ball in the red zone. We fail on 4th down conversions more often than we succeed. And Sullivan makes short FGs. Lots of game left to play; you take the points.

 

['68griz]

IF we kicked the field goals and didn't score in the ENTIRE fourth quarter THEN I think the bitching would be more about how horrible the offense is rather than the fact that he took a field goal in the 3rd quarter?

This!

 

[grizindabox]

IF we kicked the field goals and didn't score in the ENTIRE fourth quarter THEN I think the bitching would be more about how horrible the offense is rather than the fact that he took a field goal in the 3rd quarter?

This!

so the horrible offense gets a pass now?

 

[grizindabox]

Last night on the coaches show, Stitt talked about passing up on those field goals. His biggest point was that the Griz were down by 7 at the time and were down to their third string quarterback and he didn't know how many other opportunities they would have to try and tie the game. He said if they were down 6 points that's a different story because then another field goal ties it.

But his own argument goes against going for it. The assumed lack of future opportunities leads you to believe Stitt is thinking we are not moving the ball consistently. If that is the case you don't go for it on 4th and short because of that same offensive inconsistency. That is a lot to ask of the 3rd string QB with no game experience.

or you could think that the odds are better to pick up 2 yards and only having 7 more yards to score a touchdown instead of having to drive 60 or 70 yards....lots of ways to look at it....

You seem unfamiliar with our ability to move the ball in the red zone. We fail on 4th down conversions more often than we succeed. And Sullivan makes short FGs. Lots of game left to play; you take the points.

What is their ability to have a sustained drive of 60-70 yards with a 3rd string QB? Would their ability to convert increase on the next drive...or the next drive...sometimes you have to take the chances when you have the opportunity...it didn't work...

 

[nzone]

I picture nzone as a guy that has gone through life always kicking field goals never to taste what it is like to score a touchdown.....

Since your such a weasel lets get on topic...........middle of 3rd quarter 4th and 2 down by a touchdown (score 21-14) Do you?
1. Try for a 1st down when you just failed on 3rd down from the same position
2. Kick a 20 yard field goal to get within 4

 

[Eriul]

IF we kicked the field goals and didn't score in the ENTIRE fourth quarter THEN I think the bitching would be more about how horrible the offense is rather than the fact that he took a field goal in the 3rd quarter?

This!

so the horrible offense gets a pass now?

You missed a step. This is under the assumption that our offense didn't have an opportunity to score. But we did have another opportunity and we did score. The failed 4th down conversions aside I feel our offense did good given their situation.

Simple is you kick the field goal and take the points. There really would be no debate amongst any decent coaches. It's ok he made a mistake. He should learn from it. If he doesn't and it keeps costing us games he won't last long. Period.

 

[Ursus1]

Simple is you kick the field goal and take the points. There really would be no debate amongst any decent coaches. It's ok he made a mistake. He should learn from it. If he doesn't and it keeps costing us games he won't last long. Period.



BINGO!!

 

[SoldierGriz]

The Truth

You all better get used to it cause it ain't gonna change. It was done that way at the mines and it's gonna be done that way here and do you actually think he gives a rats ass about what fans/team think.

Yes. Coaches who do not care what their fans...alumni...boosters think...do not stay. He certainly doesn't give 2 craps about what is written here on egriz, but the things being written about here are talked about elsewhere. If the negative sentiment gets into the media in viral drumbeats, he will care. Coaches who lose their locker rooms do not stay. Period. This is his job, and he wants to keep it.

Poor performance and loss of support is exactly what prompted Steve Spurrier to resign. Happens all the time.

I'm not suggesting that is the case with Stitt right now, but to suggest he doesn't care about these things is wrong in my opinion.

 

[grizindabox]

So only decisions a majority of coaches would make are good decisions? My thinking is those are the safe decisions.

I will add this now...would I have gone for it the first time...most likely not, but sometimes you get that gut feeling and you roll with it.... I can understand the thought process that would lead to the decision...and it is not 100% as cut and dry as many people want to make it...

 

[zengriz]

...got to give him two full years...
...if stitt isn't happening by then...
...print the shirt..in the past tense...

... ...

 

[Eriul]

So only decisions a majority of coaches would make are good decisions? My thinking is those are the safe decisions.

I will add this now...would I have gone for it the first time...most likely not, but sometimes you get that gut feeling and you roll with it.... I can understand the thought process that would lead to the decision...and it is not 100% as cut and dry as many people want to make it...

I understand fully his thinking. I just think it's wrong. And that's not based on hindsight but rather on the game scenario.

Field goal #1: 5:32 left on the clock in the 3rd quarter. Your defense has come out of halftime allowing 1 yard on each drive by Weber State. You've driven the ball down 36 yards due to great field position given by your def. You are 9 yards away from the endzone. You REALLY assume with 20:32 left in the game you will NOT get another opportunity at the endzone?

Field goal #2: 2:37 left on the clock in the 3rd quarter. After a turnover on downs your defense holds Weber to 14 yards on their drive and Weber punts. You push 30 yards forward to the Weber 23 yard line. By this time you have held Weber to 16 yards in 3 drives and have gotten into field goal range 2 out of your 3 drives coming out of half. AGAIN you REALLY assume you aren't going to get another scoring opportunity with 17:37 left in the game?

Like really? Look at it objectively and without bias and from a numbers stand point. His reasoning makes ABSOLUTELY no sense. We score 0 points in the 3rd quarter with our defense holding them to 31 TOTAL yards.

 

[grizindabox]

But you still want to use the later FG attempt as a reason to kick the first...which is the definition of hindsight. Secondly, the main reason that they had the opportunity at 2:37 was because Weber took the ball over at the 9 after the first attempt failed. You can't use what happened later to support your decision on the first failed attempt. Once they kick the first field goal, there is no way to know how the game would unfold. If we can do that, I want to go back to the pick 6 that Chalich threw right before the half.....

 

[Eriul]

But you still want to use the later FG attempt as a reason to kick the first...which is the definition of hindsight. Secondly, the main reason that they had the opportunity at 2:37 was because Weber took the ball over at the 9 after the first attempt failed. You can't use what happened later to support your decision on the first failed attempt. Once they kick the first field goal, there is no way to know how the game would unfold. If we can do that, I want to go back to the pick 6 that Chalich threw right before the half.....

No no no. I would kick the field goal in BOTH the scenarios.. My point is I gave you BOTH the situations individually. The first one has only the information UP TO the first one.

The point of the first one is to show that your defense is playing great and you have PLENTY of time left on the clock. Why would you think at that point in the game you would not have another chance at scoring?

 

[grizindabox]

But you still want to use the later FG attempt as a reason to kick the first...which is the definition of hindsight. Secondly, the main reason that they had the opportunity at 2:37 was because Weber took the ball over at the 9 after the first attempt failed. You can't use what happened later to support your decision on the first failed attempt. Once they kick the first field goal, there is no way to know how the game would unfold. If we can do that, I want to go back to the pick 6 that Chalich threw right before the half.....

No no no. I would kick the field goal in BOTH the scenarios.. My point is I gave you BOTH the situations individually. The first one has only the information UP TO the first one.

The point of the first one is to show that your defense is playing great and you have PLENTY of time left on the clock. Why would you think at that point in the game you would not have another chance at scoring?

Not what I said...what I did say is that if you kick the first FG, you more than likely aren't in the same situation 3 minutes later. It is an entirely different game that no one can say how it would unfold. You can not kick the FG and assume the game happens the same. We can play that game all day...they could have returned the kickoff for a TD...who knows. Just because they kick the first FG ensures nothing.

 

[Eriul]

But you still want to use the later FG attempt as a reason to kick the first...which is the definition of hindsight. Secondly, the main reason that they had the opportunity at 2:37 was because Weber took the ball over at the 9 after the first attempt failed. You can't use what happened later to support your decision on the first failed attempt. Once they kick the first field goal, there is no way to know how the game would unfold. If we can do that, I want to go back to the pick 6 that Chalich threw right before the half.....

No no no. I would kick the field goal in BOTH the scenarios.. My point is I gave you BOTH the situations individually. The first one has only the information UP TO the first one.

The point of the first one is to show that your defense is playing great and you have PLENTY of time left on the clock. Why would you think at that point in the game you would not have another chance at scoring?

Not what I said...what I did say is that if you kick the first FG, you more than likely aren't in the same situation 3 minutes later. It is an entirely different game that no one can say how it would unfold. You can not kick the FG and assume the game happens the same. We can play that game all day...they could have returned the kickoff for a TD...who knows. Just because they kick the first FG ensures nothing.

But that's what Stitt said. He said he went for it because he did not think he would have many more opportunities to tie the game. I understand (sort of) the second one is much more likely to go for it but even then you have an ENTIRE quarter left with a defense playing lights out and an offense moving the ball on 2 of the 3 possessions with the backup qb. Why would you assume you wouldn't get another chance to score?

 

[Glendivegriz]

But you still want to use the later FG attempt as a reason to kick the first...which is the definition of hindsight. Secondly, the main reason that they had the opportunity at 2:37 was because Weber took the ball over at the 9 after the first attempt failed. You can't use what happened later to support your decision on the first failed attempt. Once they kick the first field goal, there is no way to know how the game would unfold. If we can do that, I want to go back to the pick 6 that Chalich threw right before the half.....

No no no. I would kick the field goal in BOTH the scenarios.. My point is I gave you BOTH the situations individually. The first one has only the information UP TO the first one.

The point of the first one is to show that your defense is playing great and you have PLENTY of time left on the clock. Why would you think at that point in the game you would not have another chance at scoring?

Not what I said...what I did say is that if you kick the first FG, you more than likely aren't in the same situation 3 minutes later. It is an entirely different game that no one can say how it would unfold. You can not kick the FG and assume the game happens the same. We can play that game all day...they could have returned the kickoff for a TD...who knows. Just because they kick the first FG ensures nothing.

But that's what Stitt said. He said he went for it because he did not think he would have many more opportunities to tie the game. I understand (sort of) the second one is much more likely to go for it but even then you have an ENTIRE quarter left with a defense playing lights out and an offense moving the ball on 2 of the 3 possessions with the backup qb. Why would you assume you wouldn't get another chance to score?

Well, the message is sent to the team. Let's hope there are lessons learned.

 

[HookedonGriz]

Grizindabox = winning. And again folks are saying Stitt should have known that the Griz would have another opportunity to score. So if you think like that then by deductive reasoning alone one also has to believe that Weber would have another opportunity to score. Stitt assumed he needed TDs bc he assumed that Weber would also score sometime. Whether is assumption was right or wrong it was reasonable for sure, especially with Weber gnashing us in the run game

 

[grizindabox]

But you still want to use the later FG attempt as a reason to kick the first...which is the definition of hindsight. Secondly, the main reason that they had the opportunity at 2:37 was because Weber took the ball over at the 9 after the first attempt failed. You can't use what happened later to support your decision on the first failed attempt. Once they kick the first field goal, there is no way to know how the game would unfold. If we can do that, I want to go back to the pick 6 that Chalich threw right before the half.....

No no no. I would kick the field goal in BOTH the scenarios.. My point is I gave you BOTH the situations individually. The first one has only the information UP TO the first one.

The point of the first one is to show that your defense is playing great and you have PLENTY of time left on the clock. Why would you think at that point in the game you would not have another chance at scoring?

Not what I said...what I did say is that if you kick the first FG, you more than likely aren't in the same situation 3 minutes later. It is an entirely different game that no one can say how it would unfold. You can not kick the FG and assume the game happens the same. We can play that game all day...they could have returned the kickoff for a TD...who knows. Just because they kick the first FG ensures nothing.

But that's what Stitt said. He said he went for it because he did not think he would have many more opportunities to tie the game. I understand (sort of) the second one is much more likely to go for it but even then you have an ENTIRE quarter left with a defense playing lights out and an offense moving the ball on 2 of the 3 possessions with the backup qb. Why would you assume you wouldn't get another chance to score?

I would like to assume that I would score every time and stop them every time...but that isn't how it always plays out.

 

[Eriul]

Grizindabox = winning. And again folks are saying Stitt should have known that the Griz would have another opportunity to score. So if you think like that then by deductive reasoning alone one also has to believe that Weber would have another opportunity to score. Stitt assumed he needed TDs bc he assumed that Weber would also score sometime. Whether is assumption was right or wrong it was reasonable for sure, especially with Weber gnashing us in the run game

Except they weren't "gnashing" us. Yes the defense wasn't AMAZING in the first half, allowing 205 yards(which is about average yardage expected.) But the second half we held them to under 150 yards(that's really good btw.)

Obviously there are chances for Weber to score but at that point in the game it was clear that our defense was going to hold them better than their defense was holding ours. (by the time of the 2nd field goal the yardage was 93-16 on 3 drives a peice.)

I don't get this belief that Weber was just "crushing" us on offense when we held them to 330 yards in regular time. 330 yards allowed a game is a very good defense...I don't know if you know that :?