Can we discuss the stupidity of using Nathan Robinson as an extra O Lineman on a pivotal 4th Down?

#1
L

LegionnaireOfTheMiserable

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2024
Messages
3,134
Likes
4,654
#1
There is zero reason to use a D Lineman in that position. Of course bootlickers will say it was open, but it threw off a pivotal play that was designed for a true freshman that barely plays.

On top of that, Heupel directly cost his team 3 points when he refused to accept a holding penalty and let their awesome kicker kick from 55. It is every week now that he costs his team points with his stupidity and tries to get too cute in pivotal situations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dblair, Rushin Orange Collusion, TartanTurff and 1 other person
#3
#3
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
There is zero reason to use a D Lineman in that position. Of course bootlickers will say it was open, but it threw off a pivotal play that was designed for a true freshman that barely plays.

On top of that, Heupel directly cost his team 3 points when he refused to accept a holding penalty and let their awesome kicker kick from 55. It is every week now that he costs his team points with his stupidity and tries to get too cute in pivotal situations.
Click to expand...

I wonder what Fulmer thought watching that game with Peyton up on the box on that 4th and 1 call
 
#5
#5
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
There is zero reason to use a D Lineman in that position. Of course bootlickers will say it was open, but it threw off a pivotal play that was designed for a true freshman that barely plays.

On top of that, Heupel directly cost his team 3 points when he refused to accept a holding penalty and let their awesome kicker kick from 55. It is every week now that he costs his team points with his stupidity and tries to get too cute in pivotal situations.
Click to expand...
Play call was fine. Guy was wide open
 
  • Like
Reactions: thegeneralneyland, Behr, Jax_Vol and 4 others
#8
#8
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
There is zero reason to use a D Lineman in that position. Of course bootlickers will say it was open, but it threw off a pivotal play that was designed for a true freshman that barely plays.

On top of that, Heupel directly cost his team 3 points when he refused to accept a holding penalty and let their awesome kicker kick from 55. It is every week now that he costs his team points with his stupidity and tries to get too cute in pivotal situations.
Click to expand...
The play call was fine and the guy was wide open and the defense was fooled...don't have an issue with that

You are correct on the holding penalty
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlwaysOrangeNeverBlue
#12
#12
C-south said:
Just who was in the game. You get the ball to your best players in critical situations, not a dude that never plays and lets the ball bounce off his face.
Click to expand...
The pass was there and the call to someone who is unlikely to get the call is an EXCELLENT strategy if it works.

It's like having Steve Kerr get the pass from Jordan for the game winner. EVERYONE is looking elsewhere and that's part of the call.

If it had worked and the easy catch was made folks would be praising Heupel's cunning call to a nobody as a shrewd move.

Some you win, some you lose. Shrug.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN1111, A.J., WeeohdeeWood and 7 others
#13
#13
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
The pass was there and the call to someone who is unlikely to get the call is an EXCELLENT strategy if it works.

It's like having Steve Kerr get the pass from Jordan for the game winner. EVERYONE is looking elsewhere and that's part of the call.

If it had worked and the easy catch was made folks would be praising Heupel's cunning call to a nobody as a shrewd move.

Some you win, some you lose. Shrug.
Click to expand...
It didn’t work because you had a defensive tackle serving as an extra O Lineman. It was dumb.
 
#15
#15
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
It worked fine. The pass was there and the receiver didn't execute.

The lineman had nothing to do with the failure of the play.
Click to expand...
Yes the receiver was bumped off his route. It’s kind of insane that I have to say this, but that absolutely had a lot to do with the failure of the play.

Sheer stupidity to use that personnel
 
  • Like
Reactions: ttocswob
#16
#16
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
The pass was there and the call to someone who is unlikely to get the call is an EXCELLENT strategy if it works.

It's like having Steve Kerr get the pass from Jordan for the game winner. EVERYONE is looking elsewhere and that's part of the call.

If it had worked and the easy catch was made folks would be praising Heupel's cunning call to a nobody as a shrewd move.

Some you win, some you lose. Shrug.
Click to expand...
The play before the missed field goal we forced a 50-50 jump ball into the end zone to Brazzle. We gave our playmakers chances to make plays in this game and they didnt connect either.

If I have a problem with coaching its that this team is undisciplined and continues to make mistakes. I think this explains some of the conservative play calling we saw earlier this year.
 
#18
#18
Yes it was a brilliant call and I hoped they had a surprise play as all else had failed in the running game. Anyway the play was botched and it becomes suddenly stupid or questioned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jax_Vol
#21
#21
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
Yes the receiver was bumped off his route. It’s kind of insane that I have to say this, but that absolutely had a lot to do with the failure of the play.

Sheer stupidity to use that personnel
Click to expand...
My man, if a pass bounces off your helmet, you didn't execute. The pass was there and football is a collision sport (dancing is a contact sport.)

You're stretching. "Hey, look, they've got an extra lineman in so we can disrupt this receiver at the line. We never get a chance to do that." 🙄
 
#23
#23
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
Using a defensive lineman to block was ******* stupid. His man disrupted the play. There’s no way around it, that was ******* stupid.

We deserved to lose because Heupel does the dumbest thing he can do 80% of the time he has to make a pivotal decision.
Click to expand...
Again, the pass bounced off the helmet of the receiver. It wasn't a 50cal round like Milton threw but a reasonable, catchable pass.

Blathering on that you didn't like the formation has nothing to do with a receiver not executing and letting a ball actually bounce off his head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsSince78, ChiTownVol, Big Al Orange and 2 others
#24
#24
LegionnaireOfTheMiserable said:
There is zero reason to use a D Lineman in that position. Of course bootlickers will say it was open, but it threw off a pivotal play that was designed for a true freshman that barely plays.

On top of that, Heupel directly cost his team 3 points when he refused to accept a holding penalty and let their awesome kicker kick from 55. It is every week now that he costs his team points with his stupidity and tries to get too cute in pivotal situations.
Click to expand...
They have had success all year using Gentle in goal line situations. I wasn't a big fan of the play call. I don't understand why they always go jumbo on short yardage plays. They spend the whole game trying to run against a light box and then in crunch time they let the D load it up. That's the 1 area where Nico surpasses JA, running the ball.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top