Game Thread: Texas vs UCLA

[occupant]

It's the coaches.

It's the players.

It's the coaches.

It's the players.

It's the coaches.

It's the players.

:rollseyes:

 

[Sid Mead]

Tyrone Swoopes is still a sophomore will plenty of upside. I heard that Charlie Strong was going to spend Monday practice going over the fundamentals of the coin toss so they don't have this snafu repeat itself anymore this season.

 

[yourTEAMreallySUCKS]

Fuck the TexasHatingTrolls. We are leading the game at HalfTime and you shits are fucked up.

 

[ElTexan]

HTF DID WE KICK THE BALL OUT OF BOUNDS AFTER TAKING THE LEAD AT THE END OF THE 4TH!???????!!! GODAMMEEEETTTT!!!!

AND THEN WE GET A TURNOVER WITH 4:17 LEFT... AND WE START SNAPPING THE BALL WITH 24 SECONDS LEFT ON THE PLAY CLOCK!! wtf!!!!!!!!!!

 

[pennstatenut]

LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!

 

[Codaxx]

HTF DID WE KICK THE BALL OUT OF BOUNDS AFTER TAKING THE LEAD AT THE END OF THE 4TH!???????!!! GODAMMEEEETTTT!!!!

AND THEN WE GET A TURNOVER WITH 4:17 LEFT... AND WE START SNAPPING THE BALL WITH 24 SECONDS LEFT ON THE PLAY CLOCK!! wtf!!!!!!!!!!

#1.. Coaches dont plan on coverage breakng down. After teh game it was supposed to be kicked to one sideline and the punter kicked it to the other. Physical error

#2... That is the right call. Texas had its most success in the hurry up. It is over 4 minutes. UCLA is getting the ball back, unless Texas gets at least 1 first down. Playing to run the clock is stupid at that juncture. You run what ever it is that you believe gives you the best opportunity for a first down.

I love when people second guess decisions, but really are only criticizing the results not the process.

 

[ElTexan]

Nope. Snapping the ball with 25 seconds left with less than 4 minutes and the lead is stupid.
1. Hurry up wasn't working all that well. We had 17 points all game.
2. Even if hurry up was a good weapon, you still have to be able to execute and use the clock.
I AM criticizing the process, dunce.

By your standard, 'being an aggressive runner' was what helped a team all game, so fighting for every extra yard after a first down and going out of bounds is 'the right process' with the lead and a few minutes left… instead of getting the first down and staying inbounds???

Pure duncery.

 

[Codaxx]

Nope. Snapping the ball with 25 seconds left with less than 4 minutes and the lead is stupid.
1. Hurry up wasn't working all that well. We had 17 points all game.
2. Even if hurry up was a good weapon, you still have to be able to execute and use the clock.
I AM criticizing the process, dunce.

By your standard, 'being an aggressive runner' was what helped a team all game, so fighting for every extra yard after a first down and going out of bounds is 'the right process' with the lead and a few minutes left… instead of getting the first down and staying inbounds???

Pure duncery.

I understand what you are saying. I am just informing you that it is stupid. UCLA scored with 3:00 left. TExas ran off 1 minute of clock time in their possession. Trying to burn time would have still left UCLA with over 2 minutes to score and 3 timeouts. Unless you know a play that burns 2 minutes and 3 time outs, the right play is to use whatever you think is the optimal offense. Texas had just went hurry-up and scored a TD. Texas needed 1 to 2 first downs to ice the game. Your logic is flawed.

 

[ElTexan]

Which one of us is arguing the results and not the process, as you accused?

You, Mr. UCLA scored with so much so on the clock.

 

[Codaxx]

Which one of us is arguing the results and not the process, as you accused?

You, Mr. UCLA scored with so much so on the clock.

there were over 4 minutes left and UCLA had 3 time outs. There was no way Texas was going to run out the clock. Texas went hurry up the drive before and caught UCLA unprepared and scored a TD. I am sure that influenced the coaches decision. YOu can argue that, but it is reasonable to think that might work again. The only way to assure a TExas win was to acquire more downs. Your comments have nothing to do with the decision tree a the time. It is simply a matter of you are Texas fan, Texas lost, and you are mad.

 

[Codaxx]

Which one of us is arguing the results and not the process, as you accused?

You, Mr. UCLA scored with so much so on the clock.

That was to highlight how much time was left. They scored on 1 play. Over 3 minutes left and 3 time outs. It is obvious that no matter when Texas snapped the ball on that previous drive, UCLA was going to have a lot of time left to score. Has nothign to do about if they scored or not.

 

[ElTexan]

there were over 4 minutes left and UCLA had 3 time outs. There was no way Texas was going to run out the clock. Texas went hurry up the drive before and caught UCLA unprepared and scored a TD. I am sure that influenced the coaches decision. YOu can argue that, but it is reasonable to think that might work again. The only way to assure a TExas win was to acquire more downs. Your comments have nothing to do with the decision tree a the time. It is simply a matter of you are Texas fan, Texas lost, and you are mad.

Maybe you're armchair psychologist take on me can be kept to yourself.

You waste a full minute, then get a first down... now the other team has to use its time outs... so even if you hand the ball to them with 3 minutes... if they are down some time outs, they have to rethink their offensive gameplan. That is much different than running hurry up, getting a first down, they decide they don't have to yet waste their time outs, you fail to get a 2nd time out, hand it back to them wit the same three minutes PLUS their time outs intact. a BIG difference.

And like what was pointed out, we had 17 points all game... it wasn't like hurry-up was some kind of super-weapon against their D.

1st down was run at 4:17 left... we could have snapped 2nd down at 3:34 instead of 3:58... you CANNOT argue hurry up is a good thing to do in this situation. Ridiculous.

 

[ElTexan]

...and a 2nd First Down pretty much ends the game if you're running clock.... in your HURRY UP scenario, it doesn't That is also a BIG difference.

 

[outofyourmind]

Some of the better comments in this thread.

Wonder how long it takes UCLA to realize Texas' QB wants to go right. Might not be able to go left. He's like quarterback Zoolander.

Why does Swoopes look so slow?

LOL..."our defense couldn't stop them even with their backup QB because we fucked up the coin toss."

well, that sucked. mistakes, and boom.

THROW IT TO THE WHITE GUY!!!

This is the most disgusting self-inflicted loss ever.


Texas had every chance to win, but just decided to fuck themselves with mistakes.


How the hell does a team screw up a coinflip???

meh, look on the bright side, it wasn't 66- 3.....

It's the coaches.

It's the players.

It's the coaches.

It's the players.

It's the coaches.

It's the players.

:rollseyes:

 

[Codaxx]

Maybe you're armchair psychologist take on me can be kept to yourself.

You waste a full minute, then get a first down... now the other team has to use its time outs... so even if you hand the ball to them with 3 minutes... if they are down some time outs, they have to rethink their offensive gameplan. That is much different than running hurry up, getting a first down, they decide they don't have to yet waste their time outs, you fail to get a 2nd time out, hand it back to them wit the same three minutes PLUS their time outs intact. a BIG difference.

And like what was pointed out, we had 17 points all game... it wasn't like hurry-up was some kind of super-weapon against their D.

1st down was run at 4:17 left... we could have snapped 2nd down at 3:34 instead of 3:58... you CANNOT argue hurry up is a good thing to do in this situation. Ridiculous.

I already have. Texas went hurry up once in the game and scored. You, myself, and the coaches all agree that Texas needed at least 1 first down to ice the game. It's probably 2. So choosing what you feel is the offense that you feel delivers the best odds for a 1st down is prudent. The Offense ran off 1 minute. At best they can run off a little under 2 minutes, so you are talking an out leaving an extra 50 seconds and 2 timeouts. You are not dramatically changing the probabilities for a UCLA win that way. Only meaningful way to do that is to get the first down. I am surprised you aren't arguing throwing on 3rd down was a bad decision also. Many articles were written on this, you should look them up. This is probably the 3rd late game decision I have seen you question and not once have I seen an accurate conclusion

 

[Codaxx]

...and a 2nd First Down pretty much ends the game if you're running clock.... in your HURRY UP scenario, it doesn't That is also a BIG difference.

No. It would be first down with over 3 minutes and at least 2 time outs left. UCLA still gets it with a bit under 2 minutes to go. Much better odds but not over.

 

[ElTexan]

. This is probably the 3rd late game decision I have seen you question and not once have I seen an accurate conclusion

Seahawks throwing on 2nd and goal was the right decision. Fer reelz

 

[TheRobotDevil]

It's the coaches.

It's the players.

It's the coaches.

It's the players.

It's the coaches.

It's the players.

:rollseyes:

Do longhorn fans normally have lovers quarrels

 

[Codaxx]

Seahawks throwing on 2nd and goal was the right decision. Fer reelz

completely different, but keep throwing out scarecrows.

 

[Shanemansj13]

It's ok, it's a new year. Never said it was a going to be a good one, but at least it's new