PDA

View Full Version : Which was a worse call?



yukonmiller
10/4/2010, 10:58 PM
The fake FG or not having anyone at least semi back on the final kick off? I was at the game and both nearly gave me a heart attack.

Btw this is not being critical-just asking.

SicEmBaylor
10/4/2010, 11:04 PM
Would you still think it was a bad call if it had worked? Sometimes a great call just isn't executed; likewise, sometimes a terrible call works itself out.

olevetonahill
10/4/2010, 11:10 PM
How many ****ing ways can Idjits ask the same dumbassed questions ?:rolleyes:

ouwasp
10/4/2010, 11:13 PM
I didn't "mind" the fake... but probably only a small% of people were actually surprised.

Don't understand the tactics on the onside prevent <shrug>

GKeeper316
10/4/2010, 11:34 PM
Would you still think it was a bad call if it had worked? Sometimes a great call just isn't executed; likewise, sometimes a terrible call works itself out.

yup... its only a "bad call" when it fails. when it works its "genius".

CrimsonRez
10/4/2010, 11:59 PM
The field goal definitely. Not having someone deep on the onside kick didn't bother me at all. I would much rather have extra players up close. Besides DM7 and Broyles were both a little further back (5-10 yards) from all the other players. Both of them are very fast and as you saw even though * kicked it deep DM7 still beat all of the * players to the ball by at least 25 yards.

sooner518
10/5/2010, 12:11 AM
if the "fake" had worked, I still would have shook my head at it because it just didnt make any sense, especially after we get a delay of game penalty. if it had worked, I would have said it wasnt a smart play but we got lucky. i didnt like the call at all. after we got the delay penalty, i thought we should have lined up in FG and punted to try to pin them deep.

Crucifax Autumn
10/5/2010, 12:43 AM
Do none of you idiots actually read the game recaps and posts on this board?

It's been stated about 5,743 times and counting that they had issues with communication thanks to headset malfunctions.

OUstud
10/5/2010, 01:32 AM
if the "fake" had worked, I still would have shook my head at it because it just didnt make any sense, especially after we get a delay of game penalty. if it had worked, I would have said it wasnt a smart play but we got lucky. i didnt like the call at all. after we got the delay penalty, i thought we should have lined up in FG and punted to try to pin them deep.

yup.

fwsooner22
10/5/2010, 07:19 AM
This just in.......We won

ashley
10/5/2010, 07:23 AM
tu made a smart call on the kickoff given the time left.

OU_Sooners75
10/5/2010, 07:37 AM
All you ****ers that are bitching about which call was worse, are flat out ignorant in this game.

You are also the people that would be cheering the loudest had the fake field goal worked out in benefit for OU.

Why don't you people just STFU and allow people to have sensible conversations without your pathetic griping and uneducated opinions.

These types of questions have been ran into the ground. We are 5-0. No matter what you want to think, no game is called perfectly, but they can be called good enough to win the games...and that is what is happening this year.

If you don't like it jump back on whichever bandwagon you came from!

OU_Sooners75
10/5/2010, 07:39 AM
if the "fake" had worked, I still would have shook my head at it because it just didnt make any sense, especially after we get a delay of game penalty. if it had worked, I would have said it wasnt a smart play but we got lucky. i didnt like the call at all. after we got the delay penalty, i thought we should have lined up in FG and punted to try to pin them deep.


Im going to call you a liar on this one.

Had it worked, you wouldnt have been shaking your head...you would have jumped up from your chair and been yelling at your console TV, especially after having to go 7 yards instead of 2 yards.

We will just chalk you up as one of the pinheads. :P

The Maestro
10/5/2010, 07:44 AM
Well, not sure how the "not having anyone deep" could have worked for us...that play only had a shot of "OH, GOD PLEASE LET THAT BALL TRICKLE INTO THE END ZONE!!!" as it did, or it goes dead inside the five and a mad scramble ensues.

Tulsa_Fireman
10/5/2010, 07:57 AM
The worst call was the decision to start a whole brand new thread about this crap.

I'm talking bad call to the point of approaching Oregon onside kick levels of bad call.

TUSooner
10/5/2010, 08:00 AM
I think you should always have someone deep on a kickoff as a safety. It IS a free ball after 10 yards.

And OU 75: We're just having a little conversation about a football game. It's the internet, y'know? Sheesh. Nobody's jumping on or off any bandwagons or threatening to burn down the Wilkinson Center. Get a grip. :rolleyes: :P

Tulsa_Fireman
10/5/2010, 08:02 AM
I disagree. I think the decision is inspired and I would fellate Bob Stoops on Oprah without a safety based strictly on the decision alone.

[/counterargument]

BigTime1
10/5/2010, 08:02 AM
The kickoff return was intended to be that way...Ive used it a few times and it has never failed to work...thats why DM was the deepest on the left and RB on the right there is no possible way a defender can get to that ball when those guys have a 25-30 yd head start. It prevents the team from kicking an actual onside because more people are close to the line it prevents the high and across and leaves the team w/o many options. Notice DM had time to let the ball roll in the end zone with no problem notice the man just in front of him watching the defenders and letting him know how close they are. I think Bob and the Boys have got it under control...I would say dont post if you dont understand the play

texaspokieokie
10/5/2010, 08:05 AM
that would eliminate 80% of all posts.

stoops the eternal pimp
10/5/2010, 08:19 AM
Another poster who knows more than everybody else? interesting

Tulsa_Fireman
10/5/2010, 08:22 AM
I know more than you.

And because I do, I'm gonna make a thread about it.

BigTime1
10/5/2010, 08:28 AM
Maybe I do know more in this case because of teaching and coaching it...experience usually accounts for knowledge

Tulsa_Fireman
10/5/2010, 08:29 AM
And maybe I do know more in this case because of teaching and coaching and playing it...experience usually accounts for knowledge

stoops the eternal pimp
10/5/2010, 08:30 AM
RAWR! He's the coach!

Tulsa_Fireman
10/5/2010, 08:30 AM
http://www.hollywoodchicago.com/uploaded_images/woodcock1.jpg

IT'S A RHETORICAL QUESTION.

Take a lap.

Crucifax Autumn
10/5/2010, 08:32 AM
I'm guessing that big twat has no clue.

BigTime1
10/5/2010, 08:37 AM
teaching and coaching pee wee doesnt count

stoops the eternal pimp
10/5/2010, 08:39 AM
YEAH!

Tulsa_Fireman
10/5/2010, 08:39 AM
I dipped your whistle in the toilet, Woodcock.

stoops the eternal pimp
10/5/2010, 08:39 AM
YOUR NOT LISTENING! I KNOW MORE!

Tulsa_Fireman
10/5/2010, 08:40 AM
Take a lap.

sooneron
10/5/2010, 08:41 AM
hoo boy!

BigTime1
10/5/2010, 08:42 AM
I got a whistle for you...LOL...Im givin it to STEP he knows it all

stoops the eternal pimp
10/5/2010, 08:43 AM
YEAH! I KNOW!

Tulsa_Fireman
10/5/2010, 08:44 AM
He knows.

KNOWLEDGE

C&CDean
10/5/2010, 08:47 AM
Oh for ****s sake.