DiderotsGhost
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2011
- Messages
- 4,584
- Likes
- 23,256
Spurrier's two timeouts in the game last Saturday have been talked about repeatedly on VN, ESPN, and sports talk radio. By almost unanimous opinion, everyone has agreed that Spurrier made an inexplicably dumb coaching move.
When I was watching the game, I had the same view. South Carolina's defense held Tennessee's offense to points in the second half (prior to the winning drive). UT couldn't get anything going at all, so why not punt the ball on 4th & 2 and leave the game to your defense? After all, if UT couldn't move the ball, the worst thing SC could possibly do is give UT the ball on the 26 yard line. At that range, it was basically no worse than a 50-50 shot for the Vols. If the Vols could push 5 or 6 yards forward, it would probably be more like a 70-30 shot.
Yet, the more I think about it, the more I come to conclude that Spurrier made the right call. There's a reason why he's Steve Spurrier and one of the greatest college football coaches of all-time. Spurrier is a master tactician. That doesn't mean he's always right, but the guy understands football strategy.
Answer this question: how many times in college football have you seen a team drive for a game winning touchdown or field goal, with less than two minutes to go? I've been watching college football regularly since about 1990, and I can remember it happening dozens of times. It's not that unusual for a team that's offense can't seem to do anything all day, to suddenly make the game-winning drive when everything is on the line.
Spurrier is smart enough to know this. He knows you never want to leave your fate hanging with the opposing team's offense. Even though all logic says you punt it on 4th and 2 at your own 26, Spurrier knew that if he got one more first down, it was game over, and the Gamecocks would have a "W".
Yet, Spurrier is not stupid enough to go "balls to the wall" in that terrible situation. Rather, he wanted to call a quick play, see the Tennessee defense, and if things played out as he wanted them to, he'd run the play and hopefully grab the first.
Except it didn't work. Our guys had the perfect defense called. Spurrier retreated and came out with another idea. Our guys called the perfect defense once again, forcing Spurrier to retreat a second time.
After that, Spurrier had no choice. He had to punt it and he was down to one timeout. It's true that having three timeouts would've helped him conserve clock, but it's also true that Tennessee would've likely scored a touchdown in that event.
UT would've gone up either 26-21 or 28-21 (depending on the two point conversion). Then Spurrier would've ended up with no more than 45 seconds (at most) to charge down the field, with a backup quarterback who had barely been in the game, with ZERO timeouts. Those aren't great odds.
All in all, I'd completely disregard the idea that the extra timeouts would've helped Spurrier that much. Whether Spurrier made the right call is certainly debatable, but what's not debatable is that the exact thing that Spurrier likely feared (a dormant offense suddenly comes to life in the last few minutes), did occur.
This is why Spurrier planned to go for it on 4th & 2 on his own 26. In one sense, it was the right call. It just didn't work, because Butch & Co were one step ahead of "The Ole' Ball Coach." If it had been another team with another defense, Spurrier's play may have very well worked and been hailed as "brilliant".
After thinking it through, I think Spurrier made the right call. Butch & Co simply out-coached him. That's an encouraging sign for the future.
When I was watching the game, I had the same view. South Carolina's defense held Tennessee's offense to points in the second half (prior to the winning drive). UT couldn't get anything going at all, so why not punt the ball on 4th & 2 and leave the game to your defense? After all, if UT couldn't move the ball, the worst thing SC could possibly do is give UT the ball on the 26 yard line. At that range, it was basically no worse than a 50-50 shot for the Vols. If the Vols could push 5 or 6 yards forward, it would probably be more like a 70-30 shot.
Yet, the more I think about it, the more I come to conclude that Spurrier made the right call. There's a reason why he's Steve Spurrier and one of the greatest college football coaches of all-time. Spurrier is a master tactician. That doesn't mean he's always right, but the guy understands football strategy.
Answer this question: how many times in college football have you seen a team drive for a game winning touchdown or field goal, with less than two minutes to go? I've been watching college football regularly since about 1990, and I can remember it happening dozens of times. It's not that unusual for a team that's offense can't seem to do anything all day, to suddenly make the game-winning drive when everything is on the line.
Spurrier is smart enough to know this. He knows you never want to leave your fate hanging with the opposing team's offense. Even though all logic says you punt it on 4th and 2 at your own 26, Spurrier knew that if he got one more first down, it was game over, and the Gamecocks would have a "W".
Yet, Spurrier is not stupid enough to go "balls to the wall" in that terrible situation. Rather, he wanted to call a quick play, see the Tennessee defense, and if things played out as he wanted them to, he'd run the play and hopefully grab the first.
Except it didn't work. Our guys had the perfect defense called. Spurrier retreated and came out with another idea. Our guys called the perfect defense once again, forcing Spurrier to retreat a second time.
After that, Spurrier had no choice. He had to punt it and he was down to one timeout. It's true that having three timeouts would've helped him conserve clock, but it's also true that Tennessee would've likely scored a touchdown in that event.
UT would've gone up either 26-21 or 28-21 (depending on the two point conversion). Then Spurrier would've ended up with no more than 45 seconds (at most) to charge down the field, with a backup quarterback who had barely been in the game, with ZERO timeouts. Those aren't great odds.
All in all, I'd completely disregard the idea that the extra timeouts would've helped Spurrier that much. Whether Spurrier made the right call is certainly debatable, but what's not debatable is that the exact thing that Spurrier likely feared (a dormant offense suddenly comes to life in the last few minutes), did occur.
This is why Spurrier planned to go for it on 4th & 2 on his own 26. In one sense, it was the right call. It just didn't work, because Butch & Co were one step ahead of "The Ole' Ball Coach." If it had been another team with another defense, Spurrier's play may have very well worked and been hailed as "brilliant".
After thinking it through, I think Spurrier made the right call. Butch & Co simply out-coached him. That's an encouraging sign for the future.
