[Husker] Risky Business

[Scott R Lawson]

Not to take anything away from those involved in the play, but I wonder if the outcome would've been any different with players who regularly handle the ball instead.

To me (and I'm obviously not paid to make these decisions at Nebraska) the call had way too many things that could go wrong compared to what could go right. And to those who think the kid would've rambled for a huge gain after the reverse, for all we know he may have dropped it or been decked and fumbled, or whatever. As sure as it was bad luck the play never developed, it could have been bad luck if he ran with it too, who knows. After watching tape of the game it almost looks as if a defensive lineman's foot brushed the ball and messed things up a bit, but I can't be sure. People can argue this decision until the cows come home, but the bottom line is it did not work and it may or may not have cost Nebraska a game.

Scott in NY


-----Original Message-----
From: husker-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:husker-bounces at tssi.com]On Behalf
Of Pat Gaule
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 2:45 PM
To: husker at tssi.com
Subject: Re: [Husker] Risky Business


Kaufsss at aol.com wrote:

> Sorry - Some spacing got messed up at the beginning of the E-mail - 
> Darn AOL!!!
>  
> >As I  have mentioned about 3 previous times, if the play had worked, NU
> >still  would have 40-50 yards out of scoring range. I am not convinced
> >that  momentum would be enough to carry the team down the field. 
>  
> Just because you say it alot - doesn't make it true - I think it looks 
> like 
> it would have gone quite a ways and momentum WAS carrying them down 
> the  field.


With all due respect, I can't agree.  It's debatable whether the play 
would have  resulted in a first down, let alone "quite a ways" down the 
field.  It's not as if Nebraska had their fastest athlete carrying the 
ball on the play, either.

>
>
> >K-state  the first down.  Nonetheless, their drive stalled immediately 
> >thereafter. At best, it gained them a slight advantage in field 
> >position. Similarly, NU ran a fake punt against USC early in the game 
> >and the drive stalled immediately thereafter.  To take such a big  risk
> >for a possible "momentum change" is simply a horrible  decision.
>  
> I respectfully disagree - I think it wasn't a momentum change, but 
> trying  to
> continue the momentum

Unfortunately, it did change momentum, but to Auburn.  Nebraska never 
really seemed the same after that play, despite tying the game on a 
later drive.

>  
>
> >>.Everyone is calling Peterson a genius, but  if the  ball got dropped
> >>in the statue of liberty play or the  ladder didn't hook- what  would
> people be
> >>saying?  
> >
> >People need to watch the replay of that play and realize that  BSU 
> likely
> >wouldn't have converted the first down if not for the  lateral.  Whether
> >or not it worked, I would have been applauding  the call.  I know 
> this is
> >hard for some fans to grasp, but there  are some of us that judge the
> >quality of a play call on more merits than  whether it worked.
>
> Well I guess my limited 'some fans' knowledge can't grasp these tough 
> concepts - but I liked the Boise State calls, all of them - the idea 
> is to  throw
> under the defense and then get the first down with the lateral/RAC.   
> I think
> both plays had merit.

I really can't see where the disagreement is, because you basically 
affirmed what I said: BSU likely would not have gotten the first down if 
not for the lateral.  They probably would have been 2-3 yards short.  I 
do not think BSU would have had success throwing downfield on 4th and 18 
against a talented Sooner defense.  Im my opinion, their chances were 
greatly increased by running the hook and ladder play.  While it's a 
trick play, it's not one that develops early (i.e. a halfback option 
pass or a throwback reverse to the quarterback), so it sets the defense 
up perfectly.  The little juke inward that the receiver did before 
lateraling the ball was a thing of beauty.

>
> >The Huskers were trying to make  things happen- just like 
> >Osborne did going for 2 against Miami. 
> >
>
> >From  the standpoint of winning that game, it was the only decision
> >Osborne  could have made.  I don't think you can even try to compare 
> that
> >to  a fake punt on 4th down in the 1st half, deep in our own territory.
>
> I was comparing the idea of making something happen - did he have to 
> win  the
> game to be #1? He was trying to make something happen.

Osborne's goal was to win that game *and* the title, not to just win the 
title.  At best, Callahan's goal was to get a first down that kept an 
early (and long) drive, alive.  I understand the idea of "making 
something happen", but there are situations that are better suited for 
it than others.

>
> Again - respectfully disagree - I think the benefit far outweighed the 
> risk 
> - the play would have worked if not for the timing being off from I 
> think the 
> snap. And by the way - people were complaining about the trick plays, 
> when
> they  were run, how they were run... everything about them.  Maybe not 
> you, but 
> some have been.  Then 'they' complain he closed the playbook later! 

If you honestly believe that the "benefit far outweighed the risk" in 
the case of the fake punt, then I don't know what I can say to change 
your mind.  I don't think Callahan would even try to defend that 
position, at least not after the game.  And I apologize if I sound 
rough, but I think that was clearly a case of risk outweighing the 
potential benefit.  If you poll the majority of unbiased fans who are 
not connected to Nebraska, I don't think they would agree that the 
potential benefits outweighed the risk.  More importantly, I doubt that 
most coaches would have committed to such a call.

>
>
>
> As you said -  sometimes they make a good decesion and it costs the 
> team also
>  

I agree, and I would never rag on a coach for something I agreed with at 
the time.  I remember after the 2002 Texas game, I was initially upset 
with Solich's decision to throw into the endzone instead of immediately 
kicking the game-tying field goal.  Of course, this resulted in an 
interception and a loss for NU.  I soon reminded myself that only 
minutes earlier, I was screaming at the team to go for the win.  I never 
complained about that call after that.

_______________________________________________
husker site list
husker at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker