Final Clemmins TD: what's your confusion, dunces?

[Robotech]

I understand that. They clearly went for the win with six seconds left because there was no way to know they'd have one second left on the clock. Why not go for the win with one second left?

Big difference between 6 seconds and 1 second. With 6 seconds left, I'm pretty sure they were counting on having one more play for a FG if the pass were incomplete on that play. Watson was probably instructed to take the snap and look for the pass right away. No rolling out, no scrambling, nothing.

 

[Robotech]

My bad. He did roll out a little bit. But it was a quick play, and if it were incomplete, I think there would've 2 seconds left, maybe even 3 seconds.

 

[RobBase]

Is the argument here that it wasn't a pick play? Watson called it a pick. Dabo called it a rub. Bama may have been trying to mug the WRs, but it was still a variation of a pick play. No?

 

[williewilliejuan]

Big difference between 6 seconds and 1 second. With 6 seconds left, I'm pretty sure they were counting on having one more play for a FG if the pass were incomplete on that play. Watson was probably instructed to take the snap and look for the pass right away. No rolling out, no scrambling, nothing.

Is the argument that Bama wouldn't "mug" the receivers if there was only one second left?

 

[Robotech]

Is the argument that Bama wouldn't "mug" the receivers if there was only one second left?

No, I think the argument is that Bama should've mugged the receivers on that play with 6 seconds left so that Clemson would've been forced to kick a FG. Clemson would've had 1-3 seconds left, and they almost certainly wouldn't have risked running one more offensive play.

 

[RobBase]

No, I think the argument is that Bama should've mugged the receivers on that play with 6 seconds left so that Clemson would've been forced to kick a FG. Clemson would've had 1-3 seconds left, and they almost certainly wouldn't have risked running one more offensive play.

Assuming Clemson doesn't catch the game winning TD anyways.

 

[ElTexan]

Why would Clemson kick a FG instead of running another play to try for the TD? Particularly if they knew the DBs were going to tackle the receivers.

If they had one second left, they'd have to kick the fg. Omg. Please tell me you're not actually questioning that.

 

[SDPaddlefish]

Every goddam week for years I school you morons on game management, strategy, logic, etc, but you refuse to listen.

I see all over these threads discussion and arguments about illegal offensive picks vs. the defense maybe having interfered on that last Clemmins td.

What don't you understand about that play?

Let me dunce-splain it for you dunces:

Alabama was supposed to buttfudge each receiver hardcore and gratuitously and take the penalty. Then, Clemmins would be forced to kick a last second fg to tie the game. BAMA did it on the previous play even though they had double coverage. They straight tackled the receiver, and it was smart to do so.
On the td play, The one DB did his job and grabbed the one receiver and tackled his ass. How the idiot DBs let themselves get crossed up is unfathomable. They should have maintained their zone, let the receivers do all their jukes or crosses or whatever, then when the qb even started his throw, they just tackle the wr.

...but the fact that you idiots don't understand exactly what was going on there is once again laughable. Please, get smarter.

You address your comments to "you morons" and "you dunces." Do you want those of us who aren't morons or dunces to read your comments or was this limited only to your fellow Texas fans?

 

[Robotech]

Assuming Clemson doesn't catch the game winning TD anyways.

Yeah, you're right. It's unlikely, but receivers have made catches despite being mugged. I guess the argument is that it would've been good strategy since Clemson was almost certain to at least get a FG attempt anyway in that situation, so the best strategy would've been to severely lessen their chance of getting a TD.

 

[williewilliejuan]

If they had one second left, they'd have to kick the fg. Omg. Please tell me you're not actually questioning that.

I am questioning that. What does Bama do if Clemson lines up to go for it?

 

[ElTexan]

No, I think the argument is that Bama should've mugged the receivers on that play with 6 seconds left so that Clemson would've been forced to kick a FG. Clemson would've had 1-3 seconds left, and they almost certainly wouldn't have risked running one more offensive play.

BAMA did try to mug all receivers. The one db just messed up on the last play and mugged the wrong guy thus 'picking' his own fellow defender... or the picked defender was supposed to mug the guy immediately instead of dancing with him.

But the point is that you ppl can't see what was plainly going in those last two plays. There's nothing but threads discussing whether it was an illegal pick or an accidental defensive holding.

It's a plain as day purposeful, called strategic play to mug all receivers and thus force a final play FG

 

[ElTexan]

I am questioning that. What does Bama do if Clemson lines up to go for it?

At that point, they'd play it out because a failed conversion wins the game for BAMA.
With six seconds left, Clemmins has TWO chance: both to win and tie... so the correct strategy for BAMA (WHICH THEY WERE CLEARLY EMPLOYING) was to take away that first 'chance to win.'

 

[4down20]

Is the argument here that it wasn't a pick play? Watson called it a pick. Dabo called it a rub. Bama may have been trying to mug the WRs, but it was still a variation of a pick play. No?

It was a pick play that didn't get called.

But everyone does it and that's the way it goes. Refs didn't allow them to march down the field like that. D-Line got tired and the secondary fell apart.

 

[4down20]

There's nothing but threads discussing whether it was an illegal pick or an accidental defensive holding.

huh?

 

[Milkshake]

This thread reminds me of the Bengals vs Ravens ending -- Ravens commit intentional holding to beat Bengals

 

[williewilliejuan]

At that point, they'd play it out because a failed conversion wins the game for BAMA.
With six seconds left, Clemmins has TWO chance: both to win and tie... so the correct strategy for BAMA (WHICH THEY WERE CLEARLY EMPLOYING) was to take away that first 'chance to win.'

The play Clemson called tells me they weren't counting on two plays. They called a rollout. If it took another second for the receiver to break free, they'd have been out of time regardless.

 

[ElTexan]

This thread reminds me of the Bengals vs Ravens ending -- Ravens commit intentional holding to beat Bengals

"All those holds and the punter holding the ball were just accidents because coaches wouldn't use strategies concerning the time clock and penalties." - SportsHoopla Members.

 

[osubuckeye89]

Not a ref in the world would make a offensive PI call on that play. It's pointless to cry about.

Add in that Bama appeared to be trying to mug the WRs (and they mugged the wrong guy)

 

[ElTexan]

The play Clemson called tells me they weren't counting on two plays. They called a rollout. If it took another second for the receiver to break free, they'd have been out of time regardless.

And what does that have to do with the BAMA strategy? It is BAMA counting on the two plays and strategizing for it. Is there a basic linear logic course you can take at your college?

 

[mrwallace2ku]

Clemson won?

nope…Bama just failed to to go offsides for 2 consecutive plays at the end and play for OT, then be called "pussies" for the rest of historical time according to the OP.

no wonder he stuck in the rear with the gear with Jexaz.