3rd and 17

Didn't their guy have our guy around the ankles before he lunged and missed LSU's QB ? Holding...Flag...3rd and 27 ? Hmmmmm , didn't happen. No flag.
 
Statalyzer said:
I don't think they'd have gone for it on 4th and 7, but probably on 4th and short.
Click to expand...
Coach O is on record saying he knew the LSU defense could not stop Texas in the second half (at least he was watching the game and not running the flopping program). Therefore they would have gone for it on 4th down even if it was 4th and 17 (or greater if a penalty was involved).
 
Htown77 said:
The bigger problem is that fact that we drop 8 and it is meaningless. The secondary needs vast improvement. Blitzing 6 should not be your best option. The bodies back there have to improve and cover better.
Click to expand...


Yep, Perhaps blitzing was our best option.
Reminder: Joe Burrow was better than 80% completion rate and averaged
15.2 yards per completion on Saturday.
We could have dropped 8 and the chances would have still been pretty God damn favorable to Joe Burrow.
Plus, we almost* got to him with pressure on that play. If the pressure got there a split second sooner no one would be second guessing the call.

That said, its a play call born out of desperation. our secondary going to need to grow up very fast.
 
Last edited:
I agree with those posters who say we could not cover no matter how many we dropped into coverage. Our only shot was to get to Burrow before he could get the ball out. We came close but did not close the deal. TO did the best he could with the players he had IMO.
 
Blitzing usually requires an element of surprise. Two problems with Orlando blitzing:

1) Hard to blitz when the D call is made after the offense is lined up and ready to snap the ball, and the D is out of position

2) Hard to blitz successfully when you telegraph it to the offense allowing the QB to audible at the line
 
SabreHorn said:
Blitzing usually requires an element of surprise. Two problems with Orlando blitzing:

1) Hard to blitz when the D call is made after the offense is lined up and ready to snap the ball, and the D is out of position

2) Hard to blitz successfully when you telegraph it to the offense allowing the QB to audible at the line
Click to expand...
Burrow said after the game that he was having trouble in the first quarter figuring out where the blitz was coming from. When they went tempo in the second quarter, if forced UT to line up quickly and show the blitz, which changed everything.
 
To me the risk reward associated with blitzing on 3rd and 17 was just too high. Again, they needed 17 yards for a first down, not 10 or 7. Even if Burrow was hitting 80% of his passes, he needed a 17 yard pass on that occasion. Less than his YPP that night. Advantage defense. Yet instead of playing coverage “and keeping everything in front of us,” we rolled the dice.

Many have speculated here that Orgeron would have gone for it on 4th down regardless, but that’s pure speculation. I know what he said about stopping Texas but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they would have gone for it. Why risk giving Texas the ball at midfield when you can pin them down much deeper?

In 2006 USC went for it on 4th down because they really had no choice. Vince was invincible. We’re not there yet with Sam and this offense.

My point is that bringing 8 was “not” our only reasonable option in that situation.
 
I don't know what Orgeron would have done, but the 3rd and 17 call reminded me of Saban kicking the onsides kick against Clemson a few years ago in the playoff, late in the game. He said he didn't think they could stop Clemson from scoring if they kicked the ball deep.

Seems O had the same thought process and might have gone on 4th and reasonable. Not sure what he would have thought was "reasonable".
 
Htown77 said:
Did we ever stop LSU without blitzing though? I remember an LSU touchdown where we dropped 7-8 in a confined space and they just stood there doing nothing in no man's land.
Click to expand...
We could have rushed 5 and put enough pressure to hurry a throw. Problem was that Orlando brought the house. The OP described the situation well.

Blitzing like that on 3rd and 17 is a "give up" call. A desperate call. And clearly was the wrong call. And no way Orgeron doesn't punt, trying to pin us deep in our end of the field. He would not have risked giving the Horns a short field considering the way we were driving the ball in the 2nd half.
 
Orlando went for the knockout blow and caught one in the chin. He should brought some pressure from a corner perhaps...but not everything. I'm sure it kept him up at night. However if he would of played conservative and they completed it then we would be bitching about bringing pressure.
We must of done something right to be in 3rd in 17.
This was just another Big 12 game with whoever had the ball last wins....there will be more this season......
 
Some of you probably have really sore arms from your Sunday morning chairs. Good grief, LSU and Joe Burrow played a great game. That was simply a season defining play for them. Anyone remember Vince’s throw at Ohio State in 2005?
 
moondog_LFZ said:
And offensive coordinator.
Click to expand...
You already have them, and but for two brain farts by the HC in the first quarter Texas 3rd and 17 would have been LSU trying to get within a TD.

All you have to worry about Herman is when will the brain farts affect the game? Otherwise, he is one of the best in the business.
 
One of the pay services had a post that basically eviscerated Orlando, but not in a nasty way. They made some very good points:

Texas had no turnovers.

Texas’ O controlled the LOS. In fact, the O played great.

Texas dominated the TOP in the 2nd half.

LSU’s average starting field position was the 23, so no short fields.

All of these factors should have helped our defense significantly, but it didn’t. We didn’t take away either the short or the mid range pass. In essence, we didn’t take away anything except the running game which was inconsequential because LSU was successfully operating both the short and mid range/long pass game. The fact that they had THREE receivers with over 100 yards each is an inditement of our scheme. Either that or Burrow and the WRs are the most talented in history.

His point was that Orlando’s scheme wasn’t working, he wasn’t able to adjust, and that the issue wasn’t the talent on our side, or the effort.

It was an interesting, plausible and troubling take.
 
dukesteer said:
Again, they needed 17 yards for a first down, not 10 or 7. Even if Burrow was hitting 80% of his passes, he needed a 17 yard pass on that occasion. Less than his YPP that night.
Click to expand...

I don't know man. He was averaging 15.2 yard per completion. I am no statistics whiz, but I think that means a many of his passes had to be beyond the 15.2 average and beyond the 17 yards required for the first down as well.

I was just a Communications major though.
 
dukesteer said:
One of the pay services had a post that basically eviscerated Orlando, but not in a nasty way. They made some very good points:

Texas had no turnovers.

Texas’ O controlled the LOS. In fact, the O played great.

Texas dominated the TOP in the 2nd half.

LSU’s average starting field position was the 23, so no short fields.

All of these factors should have helped our defense significantly, but it didn’t. We didn’t take away either the short or the mid range pass. In essence, we didn’t take away anything except the running game which was inconsequential because LSU was successfully operating both the short and mid range/long pass game. The fact that they had THREE receivers with over 100 yards each is an inditement of our scheme. Either that or Burrow and the WRs are the most talented in history.

His point was that Orlando’s scheme wasn’t working, he wasn’t able to adjust, and that the issue wasn’t the talent on our side, or the effort.

It was an interesting, plausible and troubling take.
Click to expand...
Yea, maybe. Remember, Coach used to say that the easiest thing to do is gamble with someone else's money.

If the all out blitz had worked, they would all be saying TO was a genius and criticizing LSU for not running us out of TOs.
 
dukesteer said:
One of the pay services had a post that basically eviscerated Orlando, but not in a nasty way. They made some very good points:

Texas had no turnovers.

Texas’ O controlled the LOS. In fact, the O played great.

Texas dominated the TOP in the 2nd half.

LSU’s average starting field position was the 23, so no short fields.

All of these factors should have helped our defense significantly, but it didn’t. We didn’t take away either the short or the mid range pass. In essence, we didn’t take away anything except the running game which was inconsequential because LSU was successfully operating both the short and mid range/long pass game. The fact that they had THREE receivers with over 100 yards each is an inditement of our scheme. Either that or Burrow and the WRs are the most talented in history.

His point was that Orlando’s scheme wasn’t working, he wasn’t able to adjust, and that the issue wasn’t the talent on our side, or the effort.

It was an interesting, plausible and troubling take.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the QB and wrs were not the best in history but they were very very good.:facepalm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top