The narrative that Lanning cost Oregon the game is wrong. UW was just better.
Comments
-
FOHFireCohen said: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
-
If UW kicks a field goal at 6:50 to pull within 1 they only need a field goal. But going for it was right. It was a bad play call
I think that's where you criticize Lanning. The play calls
I wanted to fire Petersen for punting 10 yards closer
-
I actually didn’t have a problem with any of Lannings decisions. Even the one before half, which is probably the most debatable one, was an attempt to deflate the entire stadium. Didn’t work but you are still only down 4 with the ball back.
The play calling on the other hand was beyond fucktarded. I think 2 of the 3 were roll out passes, which hardly ever work in those situations. -
I don’t have any problem with them, either. In fact, I think they were all terrific choices.CuntWaffle said:I actually didn’t have a problem with any of Lannings decisions. Even the one before half, which is probably the most debatable one, was an attempt to deflate the entire stadium. Didn’t work but you are still only down 4 with the ball back.
The play calling on the other hand was beyond fucktarded. I think 2 of the 3 were roll out passes, which hardly ever work in those situations. -
I think it's accurate and a gripe that making everything about Lanning making bad calls there and not getting it is distracting from:
1. The Husky defense doing a great job in tough 3rd and 4th down situations. It's really fucking hard to get modern offenses off the field with losses of down.
2. The Husky offense and team as a whole making winners win plays
I remember damn well in 2019 and possibly 2018 Mario going for it in tough 4th downs and it really swinging the game by getting it
To me the Huskies having a scheme but also kind of having it be backyard our best players will beat your players instead of Oregon's kind of Petersen like dink and dunk ground control ball control shit which doesn't work in tight moments and when you just plain need to score. The Franklin TD and long pass down the field were set up by shit they had to run for 3 quarters.
I'm kind of tired about the bitching about the Nix sprint out passes. What? You thought he was going to drop back and get the conversions that way? They also tried to run on that third and short where Lanning got the timeout or shit in but the play ran and got fucking blown out. Their short yardage run game was slipping as the game went on. They were also struggling to pass pro. -
If I'm Lanning, I'm thinking that my odds are even better than that, because Oregon's offense had been moving the ball better than your average NFL team, statistically speaking.Bob_C said:
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.
Oregon's yards per play against UW was over 7. The NFL average is between 5 and 6.
-
Lanning made stupid decisions based upon data on UW' defense that rarely played into the 4th quarter. Those decisions allowed us to hold 0regon to 33 points. It is a different game if he kicks the field goals (or punts).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.
He now has much better data on UW's defense.
It is still appropriate to thank Lanning for making bad decisions on bad data. -
Watching @DerekJohnson and @RaceBannon disagree in this thread is triggering. Feels like watching my two dads argue before they got divorced.
-
Or have hot butt sex….either way you loseEsophagealFeces said:Watching @DerekJohnson and @RaceBannon disagree in this thread is triggering. Feels like watching my two dads argue before they got divorced.
-
I don't see any big deal in this. We're all hanging out here talking about football for god's sake. Lanning made terrible decisions but Washington capitalized and won the game. End of discussion as far as I'm concerned.EsophagealFeces said:Watching @DerekJohnson and @RaceBannon disagree in this thread is triggering. Feels like watching my two dads argue before they got divorced.
Hang on -- someone's at my front door trying to serve me some sort of papers. Be right back.
