Question about the Washington/Texas game last night.

[Boyd94]

I don't get how Washington was punished for a player getting hurt. They should have been able to run the clock down to around 15 seconds before they had to kick it.
They ended up kicking it at 45 seconds. Anyone know why there is a rule to punish a team for an injury?

 

[EJonesy]

I was also questioning this. Rule needs to be changed. If you were a Texas player you would be advantageous in just trying to hurt something in order to win a free timeout. Really dumb rule. Clock should be wound the second injured player is removed

 

[UK Widget]

Didn't they make this rule just so players wouldn't be faking injuries to get a free timeout?

 

[bthaunert]

I have a feeling you will see it tweaked. Here is the current rule:

If the player injury is the only reason for stopping the clock (other than his or a teammate’s helmet coming off, Rule 3-3-9) with less than one minute in the half, the opponent has the option of a 10-second runoff.

1. The play clock will be set at 40 seconds for an injury to a player of the defensive team and at 25 seconds for an injury to a player of the offensive team (Rule 3-2-4-c-4).
2. If there is a 10-second runoff the game clock will start on the referee’s signal. If there is no 10-second runoff the game clock will start on the snap.

So, when they made the rule, they were not thinking about the scenario from last night. I imagine they will take a look at it.

 

[gamecockcat]

That rule definitely needs to be changed. Was a huge blow against WA, whose player got injured. I understand if the defensive team fakes an injury to get an unofficial timeout. But, WA got boned by this rule.

Another rule they need to look at is pass interference. In the NFL, it's a spot foul and automatic first down. In college, it's a maximum of 15 yards and first down. So, the bomb that WA threw late and drew the PI, instead of it being, in essence, a 50-yard completion (putting them in easy FG range which ices the game), the penalty is only 15 yards. Whether by design or not, the TX CB made a very smart play to interfere on that pass as he saved TX about 35 yards. That penalizes the offense and sets up a scenario where a WR is streaking past a S on a long pass and the S just tackles the guy, giving up 15 yards, not a much longer gain (maybe even a TD). It should be like the NFL rule, imo.

 

[Boyd94]

That rule definitely needs to be changed. Was a huge blow against WA, whose player got injured. I understand if the defensive team fakes an injury to get an unofficial timeout. But, WA got boned by this rule.

Another rule they need to look at is pass interference. In the NFL, it's a spot foul and automatic first down. In college, it's a maximum of 15 yards and first down. So, the bomb that WA threw late and drew the PI, instead of it being, in essence, a 50-yard completion (putting them in easy FG range which ices the game), the penalty is only 15 yards. Whether by design or not, the TX CB made a very smart play to interfere on that pass as he saved TX about 35 yards. That penalizes the offense and sets up a scenario where a WR is streaking past a S on a long pass and the S just tackles the guy, giving up 15 yards, not a much longer gain (maybe even a TD). It should be like the NFL rule, imo.

I agree.

 

[cats2010]

Rule definitely needs changed but guess the Washington coach learned nothing from Miami’s blunder earlier in the year. Coaches continue to be some of the dumbest people on the field when it comes to common sense.

 

[gamecockcat]

Rule definitely needs changed but guess the Washington coach learned nothing from Miami’s blunder earlier in the year. Coaches continue to be some of the dumbest people on the field when it comes to common sense.

True. Taking a knee in that situation keeps the possibility of a fumble to a miniscule number. Doesn't get a first down that truly ices the game but it prevents a player from getting hurt and stopping the clock and allows WA to burn the full 40 seconds, which would have only given TX about 15 seconds to score a TD with zero timeouts. While it's not 100% a sure thing, I like my chances in that circumstance.

I see more and more examples of coaches in college and the NFL getting too cute and overthinking what should be a no-brainer decision. Against WSU, WA's coach threw 2 passes trying for a TD when they were w/in chip shot FG range for the win and one darn near got picked off. Still have no idea what the reasoning behind such a risky strategy might have been.

 

[EJonesy]

True. Taking a knee in that situation keeps the possibility of a fumble to a miniscule number. Doesn't get a first down that truly ices the game but it prevents a player from getting hurt and stopping the clock and allows WA to burn the full 40 seconds, which would have only given TX about 15 seconds to score a TD with zero timeouts. While it's not 100% a sure thing, I like my chances in that circumstance.

I see more and more examples of coaches in college and the NFL getting too cute and overthinking what should be a no-brainer decision. Against WSU, WA's coach threw 2 passes trying for a TD when they were w/in chip shot FG range for the win and one darn near got picked off. Still have no idea what the reasoning behind such a risky strategy might have been.

I see why you’re not a coach.

So you would rather: take a knee. Risk a punt block. Risk a kick run back. Risk opponent scoring with 15-20 seconds left. Guarantee the opponent gets one last chance.

rather than: attempt to run for a first down to ice the game because of the off chance your running back who has done fine the entire game might get hurt?

 

[EJonesy]

Rule definitely needs changed but guess the Washington coach learned nothing from Miami’s blunder earlier in the year. Coaches continue to be some of the dumbest people on the field when it comes to common sense.

Miami earlier in the year wasn’t the same situation. Miami could have kneeled to the clock hitting 0. Washington would be leaving time on the clock.

 

[bigblueinsanity]

Miami earlier in the year wasn’t the same situation. Miami could have kneeled to the clock hitting 0. Washington would be leaving time on the clock.

Agree. Much different. Washington needed a first to run it out. Even so, I wouldn't call a pass play because the clock was so in their favor.

The rule needs some tweaks. The kid that went down was a warrior who played through injury and had to eventually be carted from the field. Imagine the gut wrenching pain of knowing your team lost because your injury stopped the clock. Brutal and unnecessary imo

 

[gamecockcat]

I see why you’re not a coach.

So you would rather: take a knee. Risk a punt block. Risk a kick run back. Risk opponent scoring with 15-20 seconds left. Guarantee the opponent gets one last chance.

rather than: attempt to run for a first down to ice the game because of the off chance your running back who has done fine the entire game might get hurt?

I never said that, as HC, I'd opt to take a knee. But, you can't argue that it's more risky, however incrementally, than handing off to a RB. Snap to the QB, he waits a count or two and kneels. Clock runs for 40 seconds down to roughly 15 seconds left. You punt (you could punt it OOB on purpose to eliminate the runback possibility or pooch kick it so it rolls and rolls and burns even more clock, which WA did NOT do). The likelihood of TX executing a 75 yard drive with no timeouts in 15 or less seconds is infinitesimally small. Not one fan would ever question your decision if you decided to take a knee and burn clock. OTOH, I'm sure there are WA fans today who have wondered why did they run that last play into the line and, unfortunately, give TX an additional 40 seconds to operate due to the injury? And, they still had to punt so that part of the equation is no different whichever option you choose. It's all about burning as much clock as possible. Also, IIRC, it was 3rd and about 8 with TX bringing everyone so the likelihood of picking up the first down running off guard was also pretty slim.

It was a weird situation that penalized WA. In 99% of these situations, there isn't an injury and the result is the same either way. IMO, there is more risk, however slight, in executing a handoff from QB to RB than for the QB to just kneel.

 

[EJonesy]

I never said that, as HC, I'd opt to take a knee. But, you can't argue that it's more risky, however incrementally, than handing off to a RB. Snap to the QB, he waits a count or two and kneels. Clock runs for 40 seconds down to roughly 15 seconds left. You punt (you could punt it OOB on purpose to eliminate the runback possibility or pooch kick it so it rolls and rolls and burns even more clock, which WA did NOT do). The likelihood of TX executing a 75 yard drive with no timeouts in 15 or less seconds is infinitesimally small. Not one fan would ever question your decision if you decided to take a knee and burn clock. OTOH, I'm sure there are WA fans today who have wondered why did they run that last play into the line and, unfortunately, give TX an additional 40 seconds to operate due to the injury? And, they still had to punt so that part of the equation is no different whichever option you choose. It's all about burning as much clock as possible. Also, IIRC, it was 3rd and about 8 with TX bringing everyone so the likelihood of picking up the first down running off guard was also pretty slim.

It was a weird situation that penalized WA. In 99% of these situations, there isn't an injury and the result is the same either way. IMO, there is more risk, however slight, in executing a handoff from QB to RB than for the QB to just kneel.

Is there a single example of this? I can’t think of a single time a team nfl/ncaa has not attempted to run for a first down to ice a game when it otherwise means giving the other tram a last gasp of hope by punting to them with any time left (excluding the rare times you punt with 3 seconds left and the game lock expires)

 

[cats2010]

I see why you’re not a coach.

So you would rather: take a knee. Risk a punt block. Risk a kick run back. Risk opponent scoring with 15-20 seconds left. Guarantee the opponent gets one last chance.

rather than: attempt to run for a first down to ice the game because of the off chance your running back who has done fine the entire game might get hurt?

The chances of fumbling the football on a normal running play are higher than getting a punt blocked even if just slightly. Washington has fumbled 18 total times this year in 391 rushing attempts which is 4.6%. Granted all of those fumbles weren’t on running plays (receivers, QB sacks, etc). They had exactly 1 punt blocked all year in 41 attempts or 2.4% of the time. Punter doesn’t have to kick to the returner and can angle out of bounds and should have practiced this numerous times throughout the year in quick kick situations. Running back getting hurt is really the least of your concerns here but obviously it happened. You make it sound as if doing anything the way Washington chose to do it would be wrong but hardly the case.

 

[cats2010]

Is there a single example of this? I can’t think of a single time a team nfl/ncaa has not attempted to run for a first down to ice a game when it otherwise means giving the other tram a last gasp of hope by punting to them with any time left (excluding the rare times you punt with 3 seconds left and the game lock expires)

I bet you would find numerous examples of this especially from where Washington took over possession on TX side of the field.

 

[Boyd94]

My only reasoning for him to run hand offs is to burn a couple extra seconds per play vs. taking a knee.

 

[bthaunert]

I bet you would find numerous examples of this especially from where Washington took over possession on TX side of the field.

I’m not sure I agree with this. You might see where the QB keeps the ball instead of handing off, but they make an effort to gain yards. I don’t recall seeing a team takes a knee, knowing they will have to give the ball back if they don’t get a first down, regardless of time left on the clock.

 

[EJonesy]

Again. Please provide an example. I have never once seen a team voluntarily give the ball back with a chance to lose the game by doing so.

 

[cats2010]

I’m not sure I agree with this. You might see where the QB keeps the ball instead of handing off, but they make an effort to gain yards. I don’t recall seeing a team takes a knee, knowing they will have to give the ball back if they don’t get a first down, regardless of time left on the clock.

With maybe :45 - 1 minute or so you would be correct but not taking it down to as far as Washington could. If nothing else you do a pooch kick to get rid of the ball if getting your punt blocked worries a coach that much. No way I’m risking a fumble in that situation. In this particular case you got your star running back injured on a rather meaningless carry and thus jeopardized his chances of playing in the national title game. I know that’s hindsight but still.

 

[bthaunert]

With maybe :45 - 1 minute or so you would be correct but not taking it down to as far as Washington could. If nothing else you do a pooch kick to get rid of the ball if getting your punt blocked worries a coach that much. No way I’m risking a fumble in that situation. In this particular case you got your star running back injured on a rather meaningless carry and thus jeopardized his chances of playing in the national title game. I know that’s hindsight but still.

Very hind site. I have just never seen a team voluntarily give the ball back to another team that was within one score by downing the ball and not trying to get a first down.

 

[EJonesy]

Not a meaningless carry. It was like 3rd and 5. He gets the 5 yards and they go into victory formation.

 

[cats2010]

Very hind site. I have just never seen a team voluntarily give the ball back to another team that was within one score by downing the ball and not trying to get a first down.

Cant say that I have ever seen a team lose the game by running clock down as far as they can before punting it away with mere seconds remaining. I have seen teams lose however by trying to pick up that first and fumbling the ball away.

 

[ThreeHogNight]

Interesting discussion, and while it was happening I also thought that the clock management was terrible. I am normally on the side of winning the game when you have the chance, but I thought Washington took an unnecessary risk, because a fumble, holding penalty, or injury could of, and did really change the game and almost cost them a victory.

I would have taken a delayed knee on third down and called timeout with 1 second left on the playclock. 4th down play would have been Penix rolling out and back to the left, and throwing the ball as high and deep out of bounds or the end zone, which would have burned another 6-10 seconds, since the clock doesn't stop until the ball hits something. A pooch/regular punt out of bounds would have also worked to win the game, but with either choice, in my opinion, a simple running play with Texas loading the box was way too risky.

 

[bthaunert]

Interesting discussion, and while it was happening I also thought that the clock management was terrible. I am normally on the side of winning the game when you have the chance, but I thought Washington took an unnecessary risk, because a fumble, holding penalty, or injury could of, and did really change the game and almost cost them a victory.

I would have taken a delayed knee on third down and called timeout with 1 second left on the playclock. 4th down play would have been Penix rolling out and back to the left, and throwing the ball as high and deep out of bounds or the end zone, which would have burned another 6-10 seconds, since the clock doesn't stop until the ball hits something. A pooch/regular punt out of bounds would have also worked to win the game, but with either choice, in my opinion, a simple running play with Texas loading the box was way too risky.

You would have given Texas the ball back at their own 44 yard line with between 5-10 seconds to go on the clock by chucking the ball out of bounds or throwing it through the end zone as your first choice?

 

[ThreeHogNight]

I honestly don't remember the yard line or the exact time, but if I could have gotten it down to 5-8 seconds yes, if not, a punt out of bounds would have been my choice.

No matter what, I would have definitely not risked a running play or pass play on third down, a knee would have been my choice. 40-50 seconds is way to dangerous to leave on the clock especially in the college game.

 

[bthaunert]

I honestly don't remember the yard line or the exact time, but if I could have gotten it down to 5-8 seconds yes, if not, a punt out of bounds would have been my choice.

No matter what, I would have definitely not risked a running play or pass play on third down, a knee would have been my choice. 40-50 seconds is way to dangerous to leave on the clock especially in the college game.

There would have been 17 seconds on the clock if you called timeout with 1 sec remaining. They had the ball on the Texas 44 yard line. You would be crazy to throw an incomplete pass on purpose and give them the ball with 5-10 seconds to go after than incompletion with a chance for a pass into the end zone.

It’s easy imo. Penix keeps the ball and runs it on 3rd down. Two hands on the ball and see if you can get a first down. If you get the first down, game is over. If you don’t get the first down, you punt it away and make them go 90 yards in 5-10 seconds.

 

[ThreeHogNight]

Fair point, but the probability of a first down doing that was extremely low, and you are still risking, a fumble, penalty or injury which all would significantly change the game. I am not sure exactly what approach I would have taken on 4th down, but on third down, I definitely would have taken a knee.

Leaving 40-50 seconds on the clock with a suspect secondary against a high powered offense, in my opinion was entirely too risky.

Good discussion.