3rd and 9

[scottsins 1,968]

Most of the game I chock up to rivalry game with huge implications and player execution. But to say the last two minutes or so aren’t at Sark’s feet is I think wishcasting there. I mean I watched Missouri beat Kansas State on a last second field goal. They left nothing to chance. Let the clock wind down each snap on their final drive. Made sure they converted a 3rd down to get a first. Took their time lining up for a field goal. Made sure Kansas State never got the ball back. That’s time management and coaching. My saying that doesn’t mean I think Sark should be fired or isn’t the guy. But Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick people Sark made those calls at the END of game to play for and settle for a field goal with too much time left (ask any team in the NFL that gave the ball back to Tom Brady with a minute and change and less than a seven point lead what happened to them.) that part is on Sark. If you listened to Sark after the game (you can watch a video or google it) he thought he’d won the game with that FG and yes the defense should have held and YES the refs screwed us but OU DOES NOT GET THE BALL BACK IF We LET THE CLOCK RUN DOWN to a few seconds and then kick it. I lay that at his feet. I’ve seen teams do that all season. Win with the last second FG or win by letting the clock run out with a tiny lead. It’s called clock management and that’s under his purview not the players and he whiffed on it. The last two minutes plus were under his control to make sure the other variable didn’t happen and OU never gets ball back. 

The only issue is that by letting the play clock run down to :01 does not necessarily end up with the same result of the play. There are advantages to going fast. In other words, if you call the EXACT same plays, but slowed down pre-snap, there is a real likelihood that the plays do not “work”. If we don’t get a first down or two, we are punting to them from our own end after burning Jack shit off of the clock with them using TO’s to preserve time.

It’s a tough call, IMO, and I’m not sure how I feel about it, but it isn’t some clear cut obvious abject coaching failure that everyone sees except for idiots.

[Nicole44 22,069]

3 minutes ago, scottsins said:

The only issue is that by letting the play clock run down to :01 does not necessarily end up with the same result of the play. There are advantages to going fast. In other words, if you call the EXACT same plays, but slowed down pre-snap, there is a real likelihood that the plays do not “work”. If we don’t get a first down or two, we are punting to them from our own end after burning Jack shit off of the clock with them using TO’s to preserve time.

It’s a tough call, IMO, and I’m not sure how I feel about it, but it isn’t some clear cut obvious abject coaching failure that everyone sees except for idiots.

Would you at least agree that if we’d run the clock down and Made the FG we win the game? The truth is most people that can’t criticize Sark are so black out drunk on the Koolaid they can’t say anything negative about his play calling or coaching decisions in game. They always blame the refs and the players. Since we lost a game against our most hate rival these folks now saying…”hey it’s no big deal. Just another game.”

 

Do people not understand that criticizing Sark isn’t a bad thing and that some of the criticism is accurate and warranted? That criticism doesn’t mean fire him? If he’d run the clock down OU doesn’t get the ball back and we win. As a HC he has not won a MNC. That is a fact. We can only rely on his past as a HC. I hope we steamroll the rest of our schedule and get a rematch and stomp OU and go to the CFP. 
 

Sark has been here long enough and recruited so damn well that anything less than winning the Big 12 is a letdown in a huge way.  Period. It’s ok to criticize Sark. It’s absolute dumbassery at its finest to criticize everything else but Sark. 

[JGrayDBU 340]

Somebody already mentioned this I guess, but it was the fake injury that stopped our momentum.   Why do we let stuff like that affect us, but we do.  

 

 

[Nicole44 22,069]

4 minutes ago, JGrayDBU said:

Somebody already mentioned this I guess, but it was the fake injury that stopped our momentum.   Why do we let stuff like that affect us, but we do.  

 

 

The conference we are about to join is very adept at the flop/injury so we’d better get better at handling it. 

[Treefidy 1,469]

1 hour ago, troph said:

He said he decided on third and 9 after a sack to play for the FG. Not a play sooner. Saying he’s a turtle when he played for the lead with 1:17 and OU had burned all their time outs while the D had been on a monster roll the last 3-4 series stopping OU is not a bad chess move. It’s just not. 

I would probably agree if we didn’t turn around and play prevent on D.  Spy Gabriel and bring the house.  Rushing 4 was ineffective with 5 guys holding the shit out of them, so bring numbers and pressure him because he’s not a great passer when he’s preoccupied.  
 

instead, we gave him the opportunity to tie or win outright, the time to do it and a soft zone prevent with minimal rush.   I can’t even think of the last time I saw a prevent defense be effective when there’s a minute and a half left to play.   Maybe when there’s 15 seconds left, but not with 1:17.   Being the HC means more than just calling offensive plays then turning it over to whatever the defense wants to do.

[Nicole44 22,069]

A last minute (well last few seconds) FG that leads to a WIN. What does that look like? Well…

 

Edited October 9, 2023 by Nicole44

[RichUT 1,832]

He said he decided on third and 9 after a sack to play for the FG. Not a play sooner. Saying he’s a turtle when he played for the lead with 1:17 and OU had burned all their time outs while the D had been on a monster roll the last 3-4 series stopping OU is not a bad chess move. It’s just not. 

That’s revisionist history. The last three OU drives ended with:

- A turnover on downs after Gabriel missed an easy pitch and catch to Stoops and threw it behind him. They had the perfect play, we defended poorly, and they just botched it. Total gift.

- Missed FG after a 10 play 72 yard drive that started from their own 1 (right after we couldn’t get 1 yard in 4 tries)

- An incomplete pass to Stogner on 3rd and 6 that Gabriel threw like a missile for some reason.

OU stopped themselves all three drives, and it had nothing to do with our Defense being on any kind of “monster roll”. That’s just laughable.

[Tex Long 4,408]

33 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

The conference we are about to join is very adept at the flop/injury so we’d better get better at handling it. 

IMO we need to learn to do it ouselves. For example, on the futile goalline possession, we run the first play... nothing. Instead of lining up and trying again, have someone fall down and grab their leg - preferably one we don't mind subbing out. Trainers out to the field, and presto we've got five minutes to cogitate. So... anytime we want to slow the oppo down... gander sauce. 

[DaysOff 7,959]

WE'RE TEXAS. We'd never stoop to such shenanigans.

[Tex Long 4,408]

7 minutes ago, DaysOff said:

WE'RE TEXAS. We'd never stoop to such shenanigans.

Improper use of stoops. Not actually a shenanigan when 15 of your 16 conference mates do it. 

[A’Dam Psycho 1,470]

55 minutes ago, RichUT said:

That’s revisionist history. The last three OU drives ended with:

- A turnover on downs after Gabriel missed an easy pitch and catch to Stoops and threw it behind him. They had the perfect play, we defended poorly, and they just botched it. Total gift.

- Missed FG after a 10 play 72 yard drive that started from their own 1 (right after we couldn’t get 1 yard in 4 tries)

- An incomplete pass to Stogner on 3rd and 6 that Gabriel threw like a missile for some reason.

OU stopped themselves all three drives, and it had nothing to do with our Defense being on any kind of “monster roll”. That’s just laughable.

This. We didn’t stop shit. Gabriel clams up in pressure situations. Everytime we got a little pressure in his face he throws lame ducks. Playing prevent and rushing 3 first play with 1:17 is an inexcusable fuck up on PK and unless we skull fuck the rest of our schedule & make the playoffs, he’ll never live that down tbh

Edited October 9, 2023 by A’Dam Psycho

[msucolt45 4,063]

The whole O/D game plan , with under 3:00 in the 4th, sucked!

Thought we’d pulled victory out of the jaws of defeat at 1:16 left, but NO. OUsucks, with Zero TOs goes right down the field for the game winning TD.

Got to win out and reverse 2018 in Arlington.

Hook’em!!!

[gmr548 16,587]

It wasn’t all roses that drive. They had already sacked us once that set of downs. Another sack and we’re punting or going for it on fourth and long. 
 
I don’t mind the call. Brooks very well could have broken that for a first down, especially if they were looking pass. 
 
I would have gone for it on fourth, though. Especially with how disorganized they were. 

This. I don’t mind the run as a four-down territory call. Maybe you get them expecting pass and it pops. Maybe you get a few yards and make your fourth down conversion more manageable(what happened). If not goes nowhere you’re back in the same place. All of that while making OU use their last TO or burning more clock.

As it went, I think you have to take the chance at four yards to either win the game or at least essentially guarantee OT. Especially with how the game had gone. Kicking the FG then essentially conceding the ability to tie the game with soft zone defense is just baffling.

Props to Auburn by the way. He hit from 45 and a clutch kick from 47 after having struggled from that distance this year. He delivered when called upon, even if I would not have called on him that second time.

[Tex Long 4,408]

I still don't see why we wouldn't go for it on 4th and 4. The FG from there is probably not much better than 50-50. Miss it and they've got good position and that same time, need only FG to win, but if we stop them we go to OT. Make it and we've got 3 point lead and they need a FG for OT or a TD for the win. OR - go for the 4 yards. Don't make it and nothing changes from a FG miss. Do make it and worst case is we run out the clock, miss the next FG and go to OT. Make it, and Game Over.  

All Gas? No: Brakes.

[Vic Mackey 47,089]

I still don't see why we wouldn't go for it on 4th and 4. The FG from there is probably not much better than 50-50. Miss it and they've got good position and that same time, need only FG to win, but if we stop them we go to OT. Make it and we've got 3 point lead and they need a FG for OT or a TD for the win. OR - go for the 4 yards. Don't make it and nothing changes from a FG miss. Do make it and worst case is we run out the clock, miss the next FG and go to OT. Make it, and Game Over.  
All Gas? No: Brakes.

Exactly. The call on 3rd down only makes sense if you plan on going for it on 4th or there is very little time left in the game. That sequence made no sense in how it played out. Offense could have easily picked up 4 yards with how it had the OU defense on it's heels.

[immamac 42,872]

This is what happens when you have an offensive coordinator instead of a head coach at the end of the game. It doesn't work to call the plays and manage the game for Sark. 

[scottsins 1,968]

Would you at least agree that if we’d run the clock down and Made the FG we win the game? The truth is most people that can’t criticize Sark are so black out drunk on the Koolaid they can’t say anything negative about his play calling or coaching decisions in game. They always blame the refs and the players. Since we lost a game against our most hate rival these folks now saying…”hey it’s no big deal. Just another game.”
 
Do people not understand that criticizing Sark isn’t a bad thing and that some of the criticism is accurate and warranted? That criticism doesn’t mean fire him? If he’d run the clock down OU doesn’t get the ball back and we win. As a HC he has not won a MNC. That is a fact. We can only rely on his past as a HC. I hope we steamroll the rest of our schedule and get a rematch and stomp OU and go to the CFP. 
 
Sark has been here long enough and recruited so damn well that anything less than winning the Big 12 is a letdown in a huge way.  Period. It’s ok to criticize Sark. It’s absolute dumbassery at its finest to criticize everything else but Sark. 

Would you at least agree that if we’d run the clock down and Made the FG we win the game?

Sure. Would you agree that running the play clock down longer does not necessarily accomplish that, and that and that it could easily result in leaving them more time on the clock, possibly only tied when they get the ball back?

[scottsins 1,968]

I still don't see why we wouldn't go for it on 4th and 4. The FG from there is probably not much better than 50-50. Miss it and they've got good position and that same time, need only FG to win, but if we stop them we go to OT. Make it and we've got 3 point lead and they need a FG for OT or a TD for the win. OR - go for the 4 yards. Don't make it and nothing changes from a FG miss. Do make it and worst case is we run out the clock, miss the next FG and go to OT. Make it, and Game Over.  
All Gas? No: Brakes.

My preference would be to go for it here also since with a touchback after the made fg, you’re only looking at 4 yards difference in starting field position for OU, assuming zero yards on the 4th down conversion attempt. I will say that there are probably a lot of coaches who disagree with us so Sark isn’t on an island with his choice, but to me, the risk/reward justifies just going for it.

[Nicole44 22,069]

1 hour ago, scottsins said:

 

 

Sure. Would you agree that running the play clock down longer does not necessarily accomplish that, and that and that it could easily result in leaving them more time on the clock, possibly only tied when they get the ball back?

 

 

I won’t disagree with you. This is what Sark said about the final series:

“We were trying to go score. We were trying to make sure we had the last possession. That second down call there,* we had called an RPO. We were blocking the run, Quinn was getting ready to throw the RPO, and the guy came off and make the sack. At that point, it put us in a third and long with about a minute and something left. I wanted to make sure we were in good field range because if I throw a pass there and it doesn’t work out, now we’re out of field goal range. Ultimately to get the lead and to try to win the game, that’s what we’re trying to do. We ran the ball there on third down, then we got to 4th and 4,” Sarkisian said.

“Then you’ve got to make that decision. To get a lead was what we tried to do. We tried to draw them off to see if that could keep us on the field. It didn’t work. Then we kicked the field goal. The mindset shifted on one play, really. All along, it was we’re going to finish the game with the ball in our possession whether we score, whether we kick the field goal. Whatever it looks like, we’re going to end the game with our possession. We got a little off kilter there after second down.”

*Sarkisian misspoke and meant first down.

[TexasGolf 4,972]

41 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

I won’t disagree with you. This is what Sark said about the final series:

“We were trying to go score. We were trying to make sure we had the last possession. That second down call there,* we had called an RPO. We were blocking the run, Quinn was getting ready to throw the RPO, and the guy came off and make the sack. At that point, it put us in a third and long with about a minute and something left. I wanted to make sure we were in good field range because if I throw a pass there and it doesn’t work out, now we’re out of field goal range. Ultimately to get the lead and to try to win the game, that’s what we’re trying to do. We ran the ball there on third down, then we got to 4th and 4,” Sarkisian said.

“Then you’ve got to make that decision. To get a lead was what we tried to do. We tried to draw them off to see if that could keep us on the field. It didn’t work. Then we kicked the field goal. The mindset shifted on one play, really. All along, it was we’re going to finish the game with the ball in our possession whether we score, whether we kick the field goal. Whatever it looks like, we’re going to end the game with our possession. We got a little off kilter there after second down.”

*Sarkisian misspoke and meant first down.

that sack was devastating. 

[Tex Long 4,408]

10 minutes ago, TexasGolf said:

that sack was devastating. 

And yet, we still scored, we still handed the game to the D with a lead and a chance to win, and...

I caught a lot of flak for saying the D lost the Bama game last year, under virtually identical circumstances. I guess twice is still only a coincidence, right?

[Tex Long 4,408]

4 hours ago, immamac said:

This is what happens when you have an offensive coordinator instead of a head coach at the end of the game. It doesn't work to call the plays and manage the game for Sark. 

Been saying this for a couple of years now. I'm not sure why Steve is so hell-bent on proving his chops as offensive genius. You'd think - or I would, anyway - that the same inborn strength that led him to get past alcohol would also lead him to get past his stubborn insistence on still being the guru of offense and start being the great HEAD COACH. It's time.

I'm genuinely curious, but I'm old and lazy, so perhaps one of our smart fellers already knows, or at least knows where to look and time to go find out, which highly successful big-time coaches have been their own coordinators?

[immamac 42,872]

2 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

Been saying this for a couple of years now. I'm not sure why Steve is so hell-bent on proving his chops as offensive genius. You'd think - or I would, anyway - that the same inborn strength that led him to get past alcohol would also lead him to get past his stubborn insistence on still being the guru of offense and start being the great HEAD COACH. It's time.

I'm genuinely curious, but I'm old and lazy, so perhaps one of our smart fellers already knows, or at least knows where to look and time to go find out, which highly successful big-time coaches have been their own coordinators?

Jimbo is the only one ever to win the national championship doing it iirc we looked it up last time it came up. People give examples in the NFL but those aren't the same IMHO. Andy Reid and Sean Mcvay are the only 2 to win a superbowl that way. 

[Rockethorn1978 6,098]

From the stands when we trotted the offense out everyone was yelling “what are you doing?”. We all thought it was a decoy to draw them offsides and he wasn’t gonna go for it. Questioning the FG now after the defense shit the bed is dumb. I was questioning more once we got across mid field to take a little more time to snap the ball. Had sark gone for it on 4th and didn’t get it? Surly would have shutdown. I was fine with the FG and thought the time and the no timeouts played on the favor of a defense we thought would step up in the situation like this.

 

Still blown away at how bad that series was called by pk. You don’t call prevent up 3, why would you give them 10-15 yards of cushion when all they need to do is get into FG range? We weren’t up 7 and keeping them from scoring a td, we were supposed to be keeping them from a game tying FG. Fucking dumb.

Edited October 9, 2023 by Rockethorn1978

[immamac 42,872]

https://www.latimes.com/sports/rams/story/2023-09-05/rams-offensive-coordinator-matt-lafleur-sean-mcvay

Even those guys have realized head coaching is most important. I guess Andy Reid only calls plays when he feels like it and has had a true OC for a while now, it's just sometimes he is the play caller. As good as Sark is, Andy Reid is responsible for changing the entire game of football so I wouldn't equate the two.

Games like this, Bama last year, OK state last year tech last year etc all need a head coach to really look at overall strategy not an offensive guru when it gets to crunch time. You hate to say this is a pure coaching loss, but honestly I don't know how else to quantify it, Quinn had 3 pretty big fuck ups so some of it goes on him, he also had a pretty crazy good game outside of that though. This one is complicated and that's the super frustrating part - you would almost prefer to just get beat instead of snatching defeat from the Jaws of victory. We will see if the staff grows from this, the players will need to keep improving like they have, if their trajectory stalls out then we will have a big problem. This game furthers my belief that Sark just doesn't have the killer instinct needed to be an elite coach. 

[Tex Long 4,408]

Overall game... yeah, the offense failed to score enough points, and gifted points to 0U with turnovers, and failed the 1st-and-goal gut check. So, sure, blame the offense and its playcaller and its players. But the bottom line remains: we put the game in the hands of the defense with under 90 seconds to play, needing just one stop to win. And we failed that gut check too.

Under pressure, the offense came through. Kudos to the OC. Under pressure, the defense ate the hairy banana. Runny eggs and burnt toast for the DC. If only we had a Head Coach to manage the whole game.

 

[hook me 2,103]

He was aggressive all fucking day until that moment & he puckers. He had a chance to end the game with the ball in his hands & his decision is to make an OU team, whose normal offense is run at 1000mph, burn a TO that they don't really need anyways. Didn't trust his QB who had been perfect since the 2nd quarter, didn't trust his WRs who had made a lot of plays, didn't trust his TEs who had made several big catches. Maybe he was thinking he could get it to 4th & 2 or so and bring in Red but we were stopped at 4th & 4. Doesn't matter, go for it there. It was a bitch decision in the biggest possible moment. The 1st & goal from the 1 featured a couple of bad play calls, but at least he was aggressive. Being a pussy isn't how you beat a decent OU team.

[Nicole44 22,069]

1 hour ago, immamac said:

https://www.latimes.com/sports/rams/story/2023-09-05/rams-offensive-coordinator-matt-lafleur-sean-mcvay

Even those guys have realized head coaching is most important. I guess Andy Reid only calls plays when he feels like it and has had a true OC for a while now, it's just sometimes he is the play caller. As good as Sark is, Andy Reid is responsible for changing the entire game of football so I wouldn't equate the two.

Games like this, Bama last year, OK state last year tech last year etc all need a head coach to really look at overall strategy not an offensive guru when it gets to crunch time. You hate to say this is a pure coaching loss, but honestly I don't know how else to quantify it, Quinn had 3 pretty big fuck ups so some of it goes on him, he also had a pretty crazy good game outside of that though. This one is complicated and that's the super frustrating part - you would almost prefer to just get beat instead of snatching defeat from the Jaws of victory. We will see if the staff grows from this, the players will need to keep improving like they have, if their trajectory stalls out then we will have a big problem. This game furthers my belief that Sark just doesn't have the killer instinct needed to be an elite coach. 

Spurrier also won in 1996 doing that. I don’t think Sark gives up play calling. When given time to prepare for a specific opponent he’s amazing (see Alabama) but as I and many others have said from his first season at UT it’s nearly impossible to be both. You lose or get fired or forced to hire an OC. Very very rarely do you win a MNC. 

I posted this OLD article in the Sark thread after a loss last. This was written when he was HC at Washington.  He can either be OC or HC. If he will not give up both he needs to sit up in the BOOTH. Otherwise he should focus on being HC and He can occasionally call plays and script them in special circumstances but here is the TEN year old article: 

https://www.latimes.com/sports/la-xpm-2013-sep-17-la-sp-0918-football-play-calling-20130918-story.html

Read Sark’s words and my selected excerpts:

“Half the reason I coach is because I call plays,” Sarkisian said. “I got hired for a variety of reasons. One reason was my play calling. I’m not saying that in an arrogant way. Play calling is one of my strengths.”

Taking the play sheet from these guys is tantamount to yanking a lollipop from a kid’s mouth.

———————

A survey of this week’s Associated Press poll showed that five of the nation’s top 25 teams have coaches who call their own offensive plays: Jimbo Fisher for No. 8 Florida State, Steve Spurrier for No. 12 South Carolina, Steve Sarkisian for No. 17 Washington, Hugh Freeze for No. 21 Mississippi and Kliff Kingsbury for No. 25 Texas Tech.

Barry Switzer, who won three national titles at Oklahoma, said there’s a good reason head coaches should not call the offensive plays.

“You’ve got the worst seat in the house,” Switzer said. “I would never call plays from the sideline. No way I could. You don’t know where the ball is. You need someone upstairs to tell you it’s third and two.”

Switzer had a simple game plan when his teams ran the wishbone. “If it was second-and-five and my offensive coordinator called pass I’d have fired him,” he said.
https://www.latimes.com/sports/la-xpm-2013-sep-17-la-sp-0918-football-play-calling-20130918-story.html

Edited October 9, 2023 by Nicole44

[dcar00 14,307]

1 hour ago, immamac said:

Jimbo is the only one ever to win the national championship doing it iirc we looked it up last time it came up. People give examples in the NFL but those aren't the same IMHO. Andy Reid and Sean Mcvay are the only 2 to win a superbowl that way. 

I think there are more in super bowl.  Didn't doug peterson?  Joe Gibbs did.

[USNALonghorn 5,078]

1 hour ago, Rockethorn1978 said:

From the stands when we trotted the offense out everyone was yelling “what are you doing?”. We all thought it was a decoy to draw them offsides and he wasn’t gonna go for it. Questioning the FG now after the defense shit the bed is dumb. I was questioning more once we got across mid field to take a little more time to snap the ball. Had sark gone for it on 4th and didn’t get it? Surly would have shutdown. I was fine with the FG and thought the time and the no timeouts played on the favor of a defense we thought would step up in the situation like this.

 

Still blown away at how bad that series was called by pk. You don’t call prevent up 3, why would you give them 10-15 yards of cushion when all they need to do is get into FG range? We weren’t up 7 and keeping them from scoring a td, we were supposed to be keeping them from a game tying FG. Fucking dumb.

I really wish I could be a fly on the wall for Sark/PK conversation after this game. 
 

The second we took the sack, we were playing for a field goal, barring OU falling for the draw offsides attempt by the offense on 4th and 4. I can’t imagine Sark thinking “my defense has held them scoreless for the past 20 minutes… I better go for it and score a TD, because by dipshit DC will revert to old habits and play prevent against the fastest defense in the nation”. 
 

I wish we could see what was going through Sark’s mind, during their game winning drive. I bet he was pretty frustrated to see the DBs 12+ yards off and no effective blitzes dialed up to disrupt DG.

[Nicole44 22,069]

2 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

I think there are more in super bowl.  Didn't doug peterson?  Joe Gibbs did.

Not a lot. Spurrier and Fisher in NCAFF though. Nick Foles asked Pederson if he could run that trick play Philly Philly that beat the Patriots. It’s a short list. Reid is a legend and first ballot HOF guy and just happened to draft a QB that can do everything he ever wanted to do. He’s got Mahomes. The list is short. The list is longer of guys who try to be both and who are fired or with yet another team or retired that never won doing both.

[B00M 6,423]

12 hours ago, Tex Long said:

I still don't see why we wouldn't go for it on 4th and 4. The FG from there is probably not much better than 50-50. Miss it and they've got good position and that same time, need only FG to win, but if we stop them we go to OT. Make it and we've got 3 point lead and they need a FG for OT or a TD for the win. OR - go for the 4 yards. Don't make it and nothing changes from a FG miss. Do make it and worst case is we run out the clock, miss the next FG and go to OT. Make it, and Game Over.  

All Gas? No: Brakes.

Exactly. Hell, if we don’t get the 4th, OU may even turtle themselves and play less aggressively knowing they’re tied and all they need to win is a FG. 

[Tex Pete 20,403]

13 minutes ago, USNALonghorn said:

The second we took the sack, we were playing for a field goal, barring OU falling for the draw offsides attempt by the offense on 4th and 4. 

That was a mistake and I said so at the time. You play to win the game. We didn’t and we didn’t. 

[Sir Ulrich 5,187]

We will be dissecting this set of downs until the rematch in Arlington but running the ball there accomplishes two things which I know have been talked about ad nauseum but alas

1. They were forced to use their last timeout and make the full length drive that much harder. Which did ended up being a moot point. 

2. Auburn's career long was 49 yards against Rice this year and he was 3-6 coming into this game. This also moved the ball to the middle of the field to make a FG attempt easier. 

If Sark attempts a pass on 3rd and 9 and it goes incomplete then OU has one timeout remaining and it forces Auburn to hit a 51 yarder from the left hash. Worse case scenario is they bring pressure and QE has to take a sack and the FG attempt is 55+. 

If either a sack or incompletion forces an Auburn miss then Sark would be eviscerated here for making those calls. Even though I do think he should have thought more about going for it on 4th down. 

[B00M 6,423]

1 hour ago, Rockethorn1978 said:

From the stands when we trotted the offense out everyone was yelling “what are you doing?”. We all thought it was a decoy to draw them offsides and he wasn’t gonna go for it. Questioning the FG now after the defense shit the bed is dumb. I was questioning more once we got across mid field to take a little more time to snap the ball. Had sark gone for it on 4th and didn’t get it? Surly would have shutdown. I was fine with the FG and thought the time and the no timeouts played on the favor of a defense we thought would step up in the situation like this.

Sounds like you and those around you were steeped in decades of how not to lose(TM) football … that pussy shit works in the big 10

[OU Sucks 8,890]

This thread should be on the 1st and goal from the 1 instead.  I disagree with the 3rd and 9 play-calling and decision to kick it, but it's a should've/could've/would've situation...I can understand Sark's motives, as shitty as I think they were.  The four plays from the 1 were just terribad.  Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

[Tex Long 4,408]

Playing scared, playing the odds. There are times when I wonder if Sark found MensaTom's binder, read it, loved it, and started using it. Or he just has his own binder. Either way, the binder (mental or otherwise) is a map, and the map is not the territory.

[Tex Long 4,408]

1 minute ago, OU Sucks said:

This thread should be on the 1st and goal from the 1 instead.  I disagree with the 3rd and 9 play-calling and decision to kick it, but it's a should've/could've/would've situation...I can understand Sark's motives, as shitty as I think they were.  The four plays from the 1 were just terribad.  Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

You spelled woulda-shoulda-coulda wrong.

That, and your point is off the mark. You might as well talk about this interception, or that interception, or the fumble, or the running into the kicker/actor... all of them, and 1st-and-goal resulted in the end game as it happened. The end plan had two needful actions: run out the clock, and score. We gave up the one and succeeded in the other. Halfway turned out to be not enough. Just like last year with Bama.

[OU Sucks 8,890]

9 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

You spelled woulda-shoulda-coulda wrong.

That, and your point is off the mark. You might as well talk about this interception, or that interception, or the fumble, or the running into the kicker/actor... all of them, and 1st-and-goal resulted in the end game as it happened. The end plan had two needful actions: run out the clock, and score. We gave up the one and succeeded in the other. Halfway turned out to be not enough. Just like last year with Bama.

Like I said, I thought the end-of-game play calling was bad, and if you saw any of my game comments, I was questioning in real time why we were moving so quickly and that we couldn't leave any meaningful time on the clock since OU could move down the field under a minute.  But I can see why Sark ran it on 3rd and 9....he wanted to avoid another sack, which would've fucked things up monumentally and he thought we could rip off a big gainer on the ground while OU expected the pass.  He was wrong, and it was way too conservative.  But the 1st and goal playcalling was downright egregious.

Edited October 9, 2023 by OU Sucks

[Sir Ulrich 5,187]

As for time remaining for OU to drive for a score, the officials made their biggest gaffe of the day when Worthy knocked Bowman out of the game. They took an officials timeout with 2:35 left but never restarted the clock once play was ready to resume saving OU a timeout and :30 seconds of game time. We all know Sark was ok with a field goal at this point so its fair to say we would have snapped the ball with around 2:05 left and either ran the same play for a sack or ran brooks up the middle. Venables  didn't call a timeout 30 seconds after our 3rd down play which was an insane thing to do in its own right. So with 1:29 we run play 3 and get into FG range and kick with 1:22 left after the OU TO leaving 1:17 left. If the officials restart the clock with 2;35 left we could have been looking at taking the lead with around 48 seconds left instead of 1:17. Even with prevent defense this would have been a FG to tie at worst, sending the game to overtime if they were successful.

If the game plays out the same with Official starting clock:

2:35 Bowman Hurt

2:05 Snap 1st down

1:58 Play concludes

1:28 Snap 2nd down

1:21 play concludes and Venables calls TO #2 at 1:00

1:00 Snap 3rd down

:53 Play concludes and Venables calls TO #3

:53 Snap FG attempt

:48 FG good

 

NCAA rule in spoiler:

Spoiler

Starts on the Referee’s Signal. For each of the following reasons, the game clock is stopped on an official’s signal. If the next play begins with a snap, the game clock will start on the referee’s signal:

Team A is awarded a first down, either through play or by penalty. 2. A Team A forward fumble goes out of bounds.

Other than with fewer than two minutes remaining in a half, a Team A ball carrier, fumble or backward pass is ruled out of bounds.

To complete a penalty (Exception: Rule 3-4-4-c).

An injury timeout is allowed for one or more players or an official (A.R. 3-3-5-I-V).

 

[Had Enough 2,083]

Just like last year with Bama.

And in both cases, the second down play call was very conservative.

On first and second downs OU only had one guy in position to make the play. They did.

[Tex Long 4,408]

3 minutes ago, OU Sucks said:

... But the 1st and goal playcalling was downright egregious.

No argument. We shoulda scored there. We coulda scored there. If we scored there we woulda been farther ahead and the end game woulda been more mooter or certainly somewhat mooterer.

Hook'em.

Next time.

[WinningIsHard 4,051]

We all hated when Tom would turtle at the end of games and not run the offense full speed right? I don't think you can bitch about it both ways, I mean you can but that seems like a losing endeavor. The real question is why in the fuck couldn't we punch it in from the 1? 

[Horn Dogg 3,928]

We can argue about it all we want - doesn’t change the fact that OU fucking sucks and we are going to beat their ass in the CCG rematch. 

[Rockethorn1978 6,098]

[MonkeyDoughnut 10,327]

All this run down the clock early in the drive nonsense is just hindsight talk. What was going to happen under the Sark plan was we get another 1st (or two) and OU has no timeouts and we are setting up for a shorter FG to win it and Sark gets credit for a perfect last drive. Getting to a point on the field where we give ourselves a chance to win more than outweighs any let's strategically milk the clock concerns AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

 

[sidis 9,832]

on third and 9, steve was playing for the same scenario as alabama.  remember, on the key third and long driving at the end, we ran brooks up the middle and it worked and we all called it a genius move...because it worked.  ou was ready for it and i think it was a mistake.

the reason i thought it was a mistake was because the short passing game was there to be had.  their best cb had to go out and two plays earlier on the first down, bowman idiotically targeted xavier and got hurt.  don't know if anyone else noticed this but bowman going down had an enormous unintended impact.  specifically, the officials never restarted the clock after he went down until we snapped the ball on first down.  even though the clock should have obviously stopped for the first down, it would restart after the ball was set.  but because of bowman's injury, they stopped the clock and they never restarted it on first down.  had they, it would have put the clock at closer to 40 seconds at the time of the fg.  the other thing is it should have been targeting and moved the ball downfield.  but either way, bowman is their best player and he was out.  we should have have tried to get that damned first down in the passing game imo regardless of 20/20 hindsight.

biggest mistake on first and goal from the 1 imo (and i was screaming it as it happened) was the stupid decision to totally change the offense and sub everyone out for the heavy set.  that was super fucking dumb.  just get down there, go fast, line up, and run it in for the td.  ou was fucking gassed at the end of the drive.  because we subbed, ou was able to sub their entire defense and bow up on the line.  also, running out a million huge guys meant we weren't multiple but totally predictable for three straight plays.  that was some of the worst coaching i have seen from sark imo.  they should have never subbed and given ou the opportunity to reset. 

 

[A’Dam Psycho 1,470]

1 hour ago, OU Sucks said:

But the 1st and goal playcalling was downright egregious.

No it wasn’t. It’s a fucking yard. 1 yard!! Somebody man tf up and get a damn yd

[OU Sucks 8,890]

19 minutes ago, A’Dam Psycho said:

No it wasn’t. It’s a fucking yard. 1 yard!! Somebody man tf up and get a damn yd

Maybe if a play that OU has seen on film and schemed against doesn't work the first time, don't fucking try the same thing 2 more times?  Maybe spread out the receivers so OU has to at least respect a pass and can't stack 11 bodies right middle where we're about to run it?  Maybe run a little motion to create some confusion/misalignment?  Nope, just line up with the big guys and repeatedly bang your head against the wall (or the RB into a wall of defenders).

[Tex Pete 20,403]

1 minute ago, OU Sucks said:

Maybe if a play that OU has seen on film and schemed against doesn't work the first time, don't fucking try the same thing 2 more times?  Maybe spread out the receivers so OU has to at least respect a pass and can't stack 11 bodies right middle where we're about to run it?  Maybe run a little motion to create some confusion/misalignment?  Nope, just line up with the big guys and repeatedly bang your head against the wall (or the RB into a wall of defenders).

I truly thought Sarkisian expected it to work on first down and was stunned that it did not. He was then too stunned/stubborn to change the personnel grouping. By third down, we should have pulled the big men.