The fake punt
- Thread starter newIUfan
- Start date
Am I wrong in believing that this was a horrible call regardless of whether our punter ran the wrong way? I'm all for playing aggressive but this was just dumb. There comes a point where you way the risk reward of a play and this play was mostly risk. Gaining a first down at our own 20 or so against that defense would still have left us with a long, long way to go. We essentially gave them 3 points and we were lucky that this was all they got out of it. Don't tell me this was about showing confidence in our D or in our O or taking a gamble blah blah blah. You can play smart and still be aggressive. Wilson seems to have these brain farts at least twice a game.
I think he would have made it even going the wrong way had he not stumbled within his first three steps.
I like the call, as the advantage gained at that point would have been significant in a game where we sorely needed not to have to play catch up . . .
. . . besides, IU's defense was playing well, OSU didn't yet have the benefit of making half-time adjustments and the failure to make the first down only cost IU 3 points anyway. On balance, I think it was a good decision . . . I just hope we can upgrade our punter soon.
I loved the call.. I would have rather Wilson ran Howard for the 1 yard, but I didn't see the open side from where my seats were. sounds like it was the right call on the fake. we got the ball there on a takeaway so I wasn't going to be to upset giving it back to them on a 4th down. When they lined up to punt I told my dad they should have gone for it.
But it was very poorly executed, which negates any perceived upside. Unless and until IU can actually execute in these situations, they'd be well served to stop. They're risky enough as it is. Not being able to execute them properly creates an extremely low probability of success.
Punt and we automatically lose any momentum shift we had after recovering the fumble, we just push them a little farther back.
The potential momentum shift by picking it up was worth the risk of the 30-40 yards of field position.
I didn't love the call but like you said, they only got 3 points. So it worked out.
A lot of that depends on what you've seen in scouting film. If you have a very high degree of certainty that the other team is going to peel to set up a return and that your punter can run for the yardage needed, the risk is dramatically reduced. In fact, deep in your own territory might be the best place to fake a punt given that the other guy is not expecting you to take the risk there.
Given KW's comments about the play, I would gather that IU had indeed seen a tendency in OSU's punt return setup that made that call predetermined rather than spontaneous. I'm not sure though how you run the wrong way if you have practiced it. Perhaps it was a short side/wide side setup rather than a left/right setup. If so, that should have been made more clear to the punter ( or perhaps it was and he lost focus).
As for demonstrating that you can execute, there is no way of knowing that until you try and succeed. You can't justify an argument that you should never gamble because something didn't work in a previous, different situation. Sometimes even the best gamble fails due to poor execution. If the odds are good the next time, you just have to have faith that you can execute successfully the next time.
Don't disagree, but low odds plus a demonstrated inability to execute (for at least the third time this year) equals a failed gamble.
Failed gamble, yes; but that's looking at it in hindsight with the result known. Looking at it at the time CKW made the decision presents a completely different, and of necessity incomplete, set of data. So the question isn't whether the gamble failed - it did - but rather whether the gamble was worthy of taking. My sense is that you think it wasn't a good decision even based on the incomplete information available at the time . . .
. . . I understand your thought about this being the third time a fake punt has failed . . . but that's assuming the team remains static in its ability to execute. Here the team's execution was fine except for the punter . . . so it now comes down to a question as to whether the punter can continue to develop to a point where he can execute the fake punt effectively or whether IU has the right personnel at punter. If Wilson concludes that (a) no, the punter won't develop to where he can execute with the rest of the team, and (b) nevertheless he's the right punter, then I would agree that Wilson should shelve the fake punt for the season. But if Toth can continue developing in that part of the game, or IU can demonstrate a capable alternative at punter, then I think Wilson should keep the fake punt in the playbook.
Love the gamble but would prefer to see it in the situation where it was 4th and 2 at midfield. Didn't like the decision to take the 5 yard penalty for delay of game and then punt. None of the other fans sitting near me at the game liked that decision either.
Either they were just purely looking to pick up an offsides call, or they were looking for a bad defensive alignment that they thought they could attack.
I had a OSU fan sitting next to me and when Meyer went for it on 4th & 1, he was totally against it. Elliott takes it to the house and they guy said he still hated the call but give him one more year to finally get out of Tressel thinking. I got a kick out of it and made me laugh.
But I didn't mind the fake punt.
But I didn't mind the fake punt.
I LOVED the call frankly. We had to use the element of surprise against a team that is bigger, stronger, faster at EVERY position. Toth just blew it. Simple as that. If he runs where he was suppose to, it would have been a large gain and you aren't saying that. I've been a huge critic of Wilson's calls over the years, and I agree, he makes some pretty scary ones. But this one wasn't one of them. You can't just play status quo against OSU. You have to keep them guessing. Sure, the D stepped it up and held to 3, but I'd do that call again and be just fine with it.
Agree, and let's not forget , we were punting into a very strong wind which we hadn't executed well. We almost gave up a couple punt return TD's to Jalin Marshall , and did so, in last year's game in an eerily similar situation. Obviously, they saw something on film and thought they could exploit it, which they would have if not for one mistake. It was a good time to catch them off guard, but as CKW said, it needs to be coached better so they are all on the same page.
That has to be evidence that our defense has vastly improved over the past performances.
At the time of the fake, IU had only punted twice. The first resulted in a six yard return by Marshall, while the second was a shank that went for 14 yards (no return). The wind really hadn't had any impact, and they hadn't almost given up two punt return TD's to anyone.
You are correct, in my old age I was thinking the punt occurred in the 3rd and it was the 2nd, that said, Marshall did have 76 punt return yards against us in the game, he did return one for a TD against us last year in a similar circumstance, and whether you feel the wind was a factor or not in the game it was. Furthermore, since we already had a shanked punt into the wind, probably a real good chance we weren't going to change field position immensely, imo, a good gamble.
Do you have any background of watching IU football and Toth's punting in particular? This is a guy that punts it 60 yards from the 50 and 14 yards from the 20. Why would a coach trust the next punt after a 14 yard shank. You had to expect some risks throughout the game. If stated punter knew right from left this would be a non-issue.
It was a borderline mentally retarded call. And I say that only because right before the half we decided to punt on a 4th and very short from there 40 yard line? A score there could have made a huge difference. Why on earth do you call a fake from your own 10, but neglect to go for it on a 4th and short on their side of the field? Instead we pick up 20 yards of field position after a touch back. Unbelievably unbelievable.
LOL, so are you saying we should have faked another one (which at that place on the field they were ready for) or should we have just gone for it ? Which if it failed would have given the "CKW's crazy" crowd more ammunition
Gone for it obviously. If you are faking from your own 10 how do you not go for it from there 40???
Perhaps because we were without Jordan Howard and weren't able to run well with him, and you had a lead which you preferred not to give up just prior to the half.
So then why do you fake from your own 10??? The risk/award ratio is opposite. If you want to beat the #1 team you try to score instead of playing not to lose.
You nailed it Kelper. I have a difficult time believing that we can't find a better punter. From a situational perspective, Toth is as bad as I've ever seen at IU. I can't believe there isn't another guy on the team that we could at least use for pooch punting on a short field. I don't know what Toth's percentage is on punts inside the 20 but it can't be very good.
Ahh, because it is through good film study and scouting that your opponent tends to do certain things in certain situations, so you devise a plan to take advantage of those tendencies . If Toth runs the correct way he has an easy first down and then some. If you want to argue that the specials teams need to be more sound , and therefore, on the same page, I'd agree. The thought process was good, the execution , not so much.
Big IF, and if Jalin Marshall had run it back for a TD, we would have not had any chance at the end, like MTIOTF said ,Beat PSU.
Toth's average so far this year is about 40 yards per punt, which is OK but not exactly mind blowing. Who did you have in mind that you had watched and thought was as bad?
If he's not able to trust him to consistently do his "job", I'm not sure why he'd be trusted to execute something he's never had to do. Good discussion, but it didn't seem worth the risk.
Your point about the risk is a good one. Trying the fake for the first time against the number one team in the country doesn't seem like a sensible risk.
Again, that is exactly when you should run it. Please go back and look at the play (if you have it recorded), if the kid runs the correct direction it was set up for a huge gain , we had 3 blockers and that side of OSU's line had retreated to set up a return. There is a difference between the thought process and the execution.
What do you gain from faking from your 10??? You still have 85 yards to drive. I have no problem with the fake call, but the risk reward is pathetic from your own 10. And then to punt from their 40 on 4th and 2 after faking from your own 10 makes it appear there is no logical thoyght process.
You don't determine a fake punt based on how far you have to go if successful. The point would be to try and score obviously, but if not, to flip the field . Again you scout teams to determine their tendencies which we seemed to do well in this situation, out around the 50 your opponents are much more likely to be looking for a fake. I repeat, this particular fake would have been wildly successful had the punter headed in the correct direction. The idea was great, the execution, not so much, if you want to be critical, the special teams coaching obviously wasn't good enough to get everyone on the same page.
I disagree. At your own 10 the element of surprise is completely in play, especially if you have scouted a tendency by the defense to turn and set up a return. This is exactly what IU had seen and if the punter had run the correct direction we would have kept a drive alive with a first down and much less than 85 yards to go. What you have to gain is continued possession in a game that you lead, a potential scoring opportunity, and the clock running without the ball in your opponent's hands. In short, you can gain a helluva lot if you successfully execute.
At the opponent's 40 you insure that worst-case scenario they are going to have to go 80 yards to score. Again, if you execute you might pin them inside the 10. If you can get an early stop, you still have field position on your side. If you go for it and get stuffed, they have the short field and at best, if they don't score they still flip field position on you.
Again, the issue in both cases was execution, not strategy. Execution is on the players in this case, not indicative of unsound decision making.
It was a horrible call, plain and simple, did it cost us, not really, but lets face facts, a fake punt from the 10 yard line is never a good idea, I do not care who is lining up to punt.
You talk about the element of surprise and if the announcer mentioned something about the possibility of a fake before we kicked, I am sure the OSU staff is smarter than the announcers, especially that crew which was awful!
You talk about the element of surprise and if the announcer mentioned something about the possibility of a fake before we kicked, I am sure the OSU staff is smarter than the announcers, especially that crew which was awful!
Given the circumstances, it was both unsound strategy and poor execution, and it cost them points.
Similar threads
