The narrative that Lanning cost Oregon the game is wrong. UW was just better.
Comments
-
creepycoug said:
I know. But let's turn lemons into lemonade. The other guy famous for inventing phony offenses and insults was Michael Jordan, and he was pretty good.RaceBannon said:
Disagreecreepycoug said:Isn't the point of your spin here the same exact thing that Doog nation employs currently any time the 2018 game comes up when trying rationalize the OT loss? You know, that if Pete had only been a bigger dick coach Washington wins in regulation? I mean, it's all fun and games, but the efforts to establish superiority as a fanbase is at times a little humorous. The word Doog didn't come out of nowhere.
Comparing plays and coaching decisions are slightly different things. And Penix's interception, as it turned out, meant nothing anyway because Oregon didn't capitalize. Lanning going for it rather than taking the points meant 3 pts, of course assuming the guy doesn't miss from 10 yards out, which is an assumption.
Also, PGOS just launched a thread the other day proudly asserting that Washington fans blame their coach and their players and their administration when Washington loses football games. Isn't that effectively what the Ducks are doing by calling their coach a dipshit? I mean, I know it's "bow down" around here, but don't hold your breath expecting anyone to actually do it.
The other thing to consider is that, if the "what if" game were to be ruled out of order here, half the site's traffic disappears.
Lastly, I've not read a serious post by anyone suggesting that UW was just lucky. In fact, I've read a ton of praise being heaped on Penix and the WRs, a ton of criticism about their coach and not a small amount of criticism of Nix. How much boot licking is required?
This seems to be an effort to find a problem that's not really there.
-
DerekJohnson said:
If Lanning punts with 2:00 left, UW probably loses. That doesn't mean Penix & Co. didn't take advantage to win.HairyBallsDawg said:
Pretty sure it was a figure of speech.DerekJohnson said:I haven't seen one single fan apologize for the win.
But many folks have said we only won because Lanning fucked up.
Including some posters here.
It's a loser narrative.
Penix and Co scored that last TD on two plays, going 53 yards, and only using 33 seconds. I don't think our probability would have gone down much if we had to go another 30 yards.
Edit: I jumped the gun a bit with my response here. I see Race is already all over this. -
When you play a legitimately great team you have to play perfect, including the coaches, and one or two mistakes will cost you and make you think that that is why you lost the game.
But the real reason is that they're so good that they force you to be perfect. Whereas they do not have to be. -
I unequivocally believe Lanning made the right decision on the last 4th down. This is how I break it down:
Go for it:
50% chance of success = win the game
50% chance of failure, subsequent outcomes are
--20% stop UW, win the game
--40% give up TD to UW with not enough time left on clock, lose the game
--40% give up TD to UW but with time left on clock to win/tie
----10% score winning TD
----60% do not score, lose the game
----30% make tying FG, go to OT where it's 50/50
That all adds up to (for Oregon)
65% win
35% loss
Punting:
30% chance to stop UW, win the game
70% chance UW scores TD
--95% chance not enough time left on clock, lose the game
--5% chance time on clock and make FG to tie, 50/50
That comes out to (with rounding)
32% win
68% lose
Basically have to believe Oregon had a better than 60% chance to stop UW, with all 4 downs available, or that their chance of moving the ball 3 yards were less than 40%, to think punting was a better decision. -
FG at the end of first half was the only bad decision Lanning made. Our D stepped up on 4th downs and Nix didn't do anything special. Winners win
-
In agreement on the basic principles there. This is the NFL 4th down stats from the last ten years. Have to figure that many of these are in the red zone, a 4th and 3 from inside the ten is harder than one at midfield theoretically. So that combined with it being college makes Oregon's 4th and 3 had probably 50/50 chance, or maybe even better as you said.whlinder said:I unequivocally believe Lanning made the right decision on the last 4th down. This is how I break it down:
Go for it:
50% chance of success = win the game
50% chance of failure, subsequent outcomes are
--20% stop UW, win the game
--40% give up TD to UW with not enough time left on clock, lose the game
--40% give up TD to UW but with time left on clock to win/tie
----10% score winning TD
----60% do not score, lose the game
----30% make tying FG, go to OT where it's 50/50
That all adds up to (for Oregon)
65% win
35% loss
Punting:
30% chance to stop UW, win the game
70% chance UW scores TD
--95% chance not enough time left on clock, lose the game
--5% chance time on clock and make FG to tie, 50/50
That comes out to (with rounding)
32% win
68% lose
Basically have to believe Oregon had a better than 60% chance to stop UW, with all 4 downs available, or that their chance of moving the ball 3 yards were less than 40%, to think punting was a better decision.
-
Long way of saying winners win.
-
I would counter that if UW can score in two plays from 53 yards in 33 seconds, a very reasonable argument could be made that they could do it from 90 yards in less than two minutes.DerekJohnson said:
If Lanning punts with 2:00 left, UW probably loses. That doesn't mean Penix & Co. didn't take advantage to win.HairyBallsDawg said:
Pretty sure it was a figure of speech.DerekJohnson said:I haven't seen one single fan apologize for the win.
But many folks have said we only won because Lanning fucked up.
Including some posters here.
It's a loser narrative.
Edit: Yeah, I just saw your other post. Bottom line is, we will never know. And probabilities are often wrong.
Second edit: I would also say that if Oregon punted, that pretty much squashes whatever "momentum" they had. -
Johnny Nansen >>>> Dan Lanning + Tosh LupoiHairyBallsDawg said:And while Washington has the toughest defense that Oregon has faced this year, Oregon is only the 2nd toughest defense that Washington has faced when you look at points scored. Arizona's defense was tougher.
We held Oregon to their season low of 33 points on Saturday.
Oregon didn't hold us to our season low, Arizona gets that honor. -
We won caz penix is not a lil bitch QB that we are accustomed to having. Grubb did some questionable play calling, but got bailed out by the talent. We should thank Junior Adam for getting them here
