What was Shaw thinking? - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: What was Shaw thinking? (/thread-13087.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: What was Shaw thinking? (/thread-13087.html)
What was Shaw thinking? - OutsiderFan - 11-20-2016
On Cal's last possession, the score was Stanford 45 Cal 24 with less than 4 mins remaining. This pleased me because I made a post on the Cal board on Saturday predicting that would be the final score and I wanted the bragging rights!
On 2nd and 10 from the Stanford 15 or so, Cal was called or holding. Instead of taking the penalty and making it 2nd and 20 from the Cal 25, Shaw refused it. Why in the hell would you do this? Stanford's pass rush was negated all day because Webb got rid of the ball quickly, and a 2nd and 20 would have tipped the sales in Stanford's favor. If it was a 7 point game instead of a 21 pt game, would Shaw have refused the holding penalty on 2nd down?
Was Shaw indifferent to Cal scoring that last TD?Â
Re: What was Shaw thinking? - CTcard - 11-20-2016
Obviously Shaw was thinking we had a better chance of stopping them on two plays rather than three.
I would imagine it's pretty close to a 50-50 proposition as to which is better, but it is a case where Shaw tends to go against conventional football wisdom. [At least I think I have seen him do something similar before.]
I was also counting on a stop there to allow me to move with a blaze of glory into the top ranks of the Cardboard Pick'em contest - but alas it was not to be.
... and why haven't we heard any complaints yet about punting from the ×ÉÉ 36???
Re: What was Shaw thinking? - stupac2 - 11-20-2016
(11-20-2016, 08:37 AM)CTcard link Wrote:Obviously Shaw was thinking we had a better chance of stopping them on two plays rather than three.
There's no other reason, but I think 2nd and 20 (need 7ypp to convert) vs 3rd and 10 (need 5 ypp to convert) are sufficiently different that the somewhat reduced variance in only having two plays isn't worth it. I would've taken it.
Quote:... and why haven't we heard any complaints yet about punting from the Cal 36???
Clearly too long for a FG, especially with the rain, and IIRC we needed 7 yards or something. That was one of those "no good option" ones and at least the punt pinned them back.
My actual problem with that punt was the 3rd down play, I think that's a great place to try to get a few yards so you make the kick/conversion reasonable, but we did something like a bomb downfield. Kind of silly.