Has the Hurry Up affected our 4th quarter play?

[soonercastor]

Is there any link between the 2? If not, why are we having a hard time in the fourth quarter. It can't be a coincidence that we "lose" the fourth quarter almost every game.

[OUinFLA]

After Sam went down in the first game last year, I thought, "surely KW will abandon the hurry-up, so the rookie qb can have a bit more time to handle the pressure of being in charge of the offense."

Well, that never happened, and it confused me last year. I think the hurry-up is an incredible weapon, but I also think it takes many many reps to have an offense comfortable with running it Sam was able to do it, but Sam had the benefit of a stable group of players surrounding him who also had many reps of running it.

On the other hand, our hurry-up isn't really a hurry-up. We do hurry-up to the LOS, then we Merkat away 10 or more seconds waiting on the OC to decide what to do once we get there.

I would be more inclined to use the hurry-up as a weapon of opportunity and the conventional offense as a stabilizing factor to allow our guys a chance to figure out what they are going to do on a play.

As to the OP, you may have a point there, could our offense be running out of gas in the 4th?

[Okie35]

No but too many 3 and outs effect the defense.

[Okie35]

Is there any link between the 2? If not, why are we having a hard time in the fourth quarter. It can't be a coincidence that we "lose" the fourth quarter almost every game.

We stopped running the ball. If you throw 3 straight times and they know you're going to then you're screwed.

[JLEW1818]

I can think of many people to blame.

Stoops, Brent, mental mistakes.

Stoops
- you wasted timeouts. you went for 2, when you shouldn't have.

Brent
- was it you were just too lazy to make a single adjustment the entire game?

mental
- redzone turnovers, stupid interceptions. Kickoffs for TD's


We DESERVED to lose that game.

[Okie35]

I can think of many people to blame.

Stoops, Brent, mental mistakes.

Stoops
- you wasted timeouts. you went for 2, when you shouldn't have.

Brent
- was it you were just too lazy to make a single adjustment the entire game?

mental
- redzone turnovers, stupid interceptions. Kickoffs for TD's

The 2 point conversion really didn't matter. If it was converted nobody would've said a thing. It was simply the turnovers.

[cccasooner2]

The sports psycologists that Stoops allegedly hired only covered 3 quarters. Stoops was too cheap to buy the full package. :eek:

[soonercastor]

well I'm not just pointing out at last night's games but the entire season rather.

[JLEW1818]

The logic of going for 2 did matter. And the mental side is hurt.

By not converting the 2, and now, not converting the extra point, Your entire team, and defense who is dog tired, now knows that they must make two 3 and out's.


you kick the ****ING extra point, make a stop and at least you have a chance in 1 possession.


how the **** do people not understand that?

[Okie35]

The logic of going for 2 did matter. And the mental side is hurt.

By not converting the 2, and now, not converting the extra point, Your entire team, and defense who is dog tired, now knows that they must make two 3 and out's.

Yea, IF you don't convert it. If we did then it would be a different story. Which is exactly what I said. Sadly we didn't get it.

[TXBOOMER]

It obviously has an effect on our Defense. We seldom possess the ball more than the other team. Last night we had it for 2 minutes and 8 seconds in the fourth quarter. Every time we play a good team in a close game, we won't have a defense in the fourth quarter. Go ahead and mark it the F down.

[TXBOOMER]

Yea, IF you don't convert it. If we did then it would be a different story. Which is exactly what I said. Sadly we didn't get it.

You kick it the first one and go for two the second one. IT IS A GDMFING NO BRAINER!

[soonercastor]

yeah and sometimes it kills me when we hurry up on 3rd and long

[JLEW1818]

i mean we do all these stupid hurry up plays, but when ever there is a "close call that could be review" it seems we take our time.....

why? I'll never understand that?

[Okie35]

You kick it the first one and go for two the second one. IT IS A GDMFING NO BRAINER!

Yea, it is a no brainer but the fact is he didn't. I don't agree w/ his logic either but my whole point is if we converted it would be a different story. I never said I agreed w/ going for it. Put it this way if they didn't get the KR or we didn't turn the ball over 3 times we'd win. Same thing I'm saying.

[BoulderSooner79]

Yea, it is a no brainer but the fact is he didn't. I don't agree w/ his logic either but my whole point is if we converted it would be a different story. I never said I agreed w/ going for it. Put it this way if they didn't get the KR or we didn't turn the ball over 3 times we'd win. Same thing I'm saying.

Obviously if we get the 2 it's a different story. The point everyone is making is that you're screwed if you don't make it and the odds are around 45-50%. If you don't make it, you're then dependent on getting a 15% success rate on-side kick. You're still very much alive if you make the 99% 1 pointer and your defense is fired up to get that 1 stop they need. But in the end,you'll still need that 2 pointer if all goes well, but the pressure will be on the other guy and by definition, they are on their heels because you just scored on them again.

[nBoSTP]

I honestly believe that non fumble call had a huge impact on the outcome of this game. Oklahoma would have started a dive on their own 45 with a 21-20 lead instead of at their own 20. I know its only 20 yards but I think Oklahoma would have capitalized on the better field position. Just my opinion though.

[BoulderSooner79]

I honestly believe that non fumble call had a huge impact on the outcome of this game. Oklahoma would have started a dive on their own 45 with a 21-20 lead instead of at their own 20. I know its only 20 yards but I think Oklahoma would have capitalized on the better field position. Just my opinion though.

We'll never know, but i can't say it was a bad call, so it was just a break we didn't get. The refs on the field did the proper thing of letting the play continue since it was close. They should always do this unless it is definitive since it will be reviewed. The refs in the booth had perfect camera angles to make the call. It was still extremely close - he caught it, but hard to say he made a football move. I figured it would be a coin toss on how they ruled and we lost the toss.

[OU-HSV]

I don't know the correct answer.
BUT it sure seems like at times this season if I leave the room to take a leak, if I don't pause my dvr when we're snapping on first down. I end up missing a whole series and we've already punted by the time I return.

[Okie35]

Obviously if we get the 2 it's a different story. The point everyone is making is that you're screwed if you don't make it and the odds are around 45-50%. If you don't make it, you're then dependent on getting a 15% success rate on-side kick. You're still very much alive if you make the 99% 1 pointer and your defense is fired up to get that 1 stop they need. But in the end,you'll still need that 2 pointer if all goes well, but the pressure will be on the other guy and by definition, they are on their heels because you just scored on them again.

Yea I know. I personally would've kicked the XP.

[oldkoot]

Could it be that we have no D line and therefore we are getting beat in the fourth q?

[landrun]

The 2 point conversion really didn't matter. If it was converted nobody would've said a thing. It was simply the turnovers.

No. It would have been overlooked but it certainly matters.

You do NOT go for 2 there. If you miss it (which you have about a 50/50 chance you will) you turn it into a 2 possession game. And that changes the way you play rest of the 4th qtr.

If you just get you're extra point you play your standard defense/offense and there is only 1 play that is changed in the 4th qtr. That's the 2 point conversion you try to make at the end of the game.

I hope Stoops thinks about this more and learns from it. If there is any single call that cost us the game last night, this was it.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Could it be that we have no D line and therefore we are getting beat in the fourth q?This is our biggest physical problem, IMO.

[cyclonesooner]

No way you go for two in that situation. Enough said !

[stoopified]

No

[Leroy Lizard]

The hurry-up may be tiring our OL. Toward the end, they may not be getting the push they got in the first half and, all of a sudden, those plays that looked great are no longer working. Also, the opposing DL starts cutting down the time Landry has to find the open receivers down the middle, forcing him to dump the ball off on the screens.

Just a theory.

[tulsaoilerfan]

How many times did we hurry and run a play only to run off tackle or up the middle for no gain? If we are going to hurry up then let's throw the damn ball

[Leroy Lizard]

Brent
- was it you were just too lazy to make a single adjustment the entire game?


When you have a D loaded with freshmen, there are only so many adjustments you can make.

We found out that our team is just too young to go all the way this year. But that's okay; they'll learn.

[tulsaoilerfan]

IMO i think the hurry up is a huge factor in our 4th quarter play; with our young defense wouldn't it be better to try to control the ball and eat some time off the clock? We didn't even run a minute off the clock on our first possession of each half last night and that can't be good for the defense

[Okie35]

Could it be that we have no D line and therefore we are getting beat in the fourth q?

Our d line is one of the better ones in the country. How dare you say that lol


IMO i think the hurry up is a huge factor in our 4th quarter play; with our young defense wouldn't it be better to try to control the ball and eat some time off the clock? We didn't even run a minute off the clock on our first possession of each half last night and that can't be good for the defense

Exactly, the offense needs to stop going 3 and out.

[BoulderSooner79]

IMO i think the hurry up is a huge factor in our 4th quarter play; with our young defense wouldn't it be better to try to control the ball and eat some time off the clock? We didn't even run a minute off the clock on our first possession of each half last night and that can't be good for the defense

This is true, but it has nothing to do with the hurry up. It has to do with not making first downs. I think Curly Bill nailed it in another thread - we have to be willing to throw the ball downfield. Mizzou was stopping the run pretty well and they were creeping in on the short pass and daring us to throw longer. We have the skill players to do it, but we seem to lack the confidence in them when the game is on the line. I'm not talking about throwing bombs, I'm talking medium range 10-20 yard stuff that forces them to back off. Short passes are only effective if they are wide open and that only occurs if they fear something deeper. Also, our running game only seems to be effective when the other guy expects pass because we are moving the ball with it. Mizzou challenged us and we rolled over and showed our belly.

[sooner518]

We'll never know, but i can't say it was a bad call, so it was just a break we didn't get. The refs on the field did the proper thing of letting the play continue since it was close. They should always do this unless it is definitive since it will be reviewed. The refs in the booth had perfect camera angles to make the call. It was still extremely close - he caught it, but hard to say he made a football move. I figured it would be a coin toss on how they ruled and we lost the toss.

I thought that was a crap call, mainly becuase there has to be INDISPUTABLE VIDEO EVIDENCE to overturn the call on the field. I thought it was pretty borderline either way. He caught the ball, got two feet down and turned his head to run. I didnt see anything "conclusive" about the replay at all

[Leroy Lizard]

This is true, but it has nothing to do with the hurry up. It has to do with not making first downs. I think Curly Bill nailed it in another thread - we have to be willing to throw the ball downfield. Mizzou was stopping the run pretty well and they were creeping in on the short pass and daring us to throw longer. We have the skill players to do it, but we seem to lack the confidence in them when the game is on the line. I'm not talking about throwing bombs, I'm talking medium range 10-20 yard stuff that forces them to back off. Short passes are only effective if they are wide open and that only occurs if they fear something deeper. Also, our running game only seems to be effective when the other guy expects pass because we are moving the ball with it. Mizzou challenged us and we rolled over and showed our belly.

KW probably called for a lot of 20-yarders over the middle, but if it's not open the QB is going to dump it off to the RB on the perimeter.

Then fans all over think, "Why did he call that play?"

Also, Landry may be tightening up and not throwing the pass over the middle out of fear of an INT. If so, he just needs to realize that the game is not going to be won or lost on account of a single INT, no matter what some of our idiotic fans may think.

[BoulderSooner79]

KW probably called for a lot of 20-yarders over the middle, but if it's not open the QB is going to dump it off to the RB on the perimeter.

Then fans all over think, "Why did he call that play?"

Also, Landry may be tightening up and not throwing the pass over the middle out of fear of an INT. If so, he just needs to realize that the game is not going to be won or lost on account of a single INT, no matter what some of our idiotic fans may think.

If they are stopping us from running well enough to move the chains and they are covering the short stuff, something has to be open. If not, they are just better than us - checkmate. I don't believe that was true, and I have full faith that one of Broyles/Stills/Kenney could get open if they are crowding them. Mizzou seemed to have full confidence in Gabbert that he could complete something mid range and were not overly concerned about risking an INT. And if they can do it and we can't then again, they are just the better team.

[bluedogok]

I think the hurry-up should be used as a tempo changer, running it all the time seems to only bother the lesser teams but good defenses learn to adjust better to the tempo.

[Leroy Lizard]

If they are stopping us from running well enough to move the chains and they are covering the short stuff, something has to be open. If not, they are just better than us - checkmate. I don't believe that was true, and I have full faith that one of Broyles/Stills/Kenney could get open if they are crowding them. Mizzou seemed to have full confidence in Gabbert that he could complete something mid range and were not overly concerned about risking an INT. And if they can do it and we can't then again, they are just the better team.

If the middle was open, we would have thrown it there.

[BoulderSooner79]

If the middle was open, we would have thrown it there.

We sure as heck were not going to march down the field running or short passing in the 4th as they had clamped down pretty well on those. So if nothing else was open, they were just better than us.

[Leroy Lizard]

We sure as heck were not going to march down the field running or short passing in the 4th as they had clamped down pretty well on those. So if nothing else was open, they were just better than us.

Actually, last night they were. Pure and simple.

[TUSooner]

The logic of going for 2 did matter. And the mental side is hurt.

By not converting the 2, and now, not converting the extra point, Your entire team, and defense who is dog tired, now knows that they must make two 3 and out's.


you kick the ****ING extra point, make a stop and at least you have a chance in 1 possession.


how the **** do people not understand that?
Really!! All the people defending the going for 2 PRESUME that it would not work. If that's the presumption, then why try it at all? Look, you barely have enough time to score once more after that TD, much less twice, this BS about saving some time in case you need 3 scores is brain flatulence. You take the single XP and keep it a 1-score game, and then you score again and either make the 2 or not. Honestly, there is not a crumb of logic in favor of going for 2 right then.

Face it, we lost that game for many reasons - including Mizzou, dont't forget -- and we deserved to lose. But the end-game management was pathetically incompetent. It was worthy of Les Miles. It made no sense to (1) go for 2; (2) punt; and (3) having blown any chance at a miracle finish by way of (1) and (2), to run the toss-it-around-til-somebody-gets-blown-up play. It was just plain stupid, and it's more stupid to cover it up with lame rationalizations. Them's just facts. If Bob & Staff don't realize that, at least privately, then I'll worry about them.

[SoonerNation20]

I don't know the correct answer.
BUT it sure seems like at times this season if I leave the room to take a leak, if I don't pause my dvr when we're snapping on first down. I end up missing a whole series and we've already punted by the time I return.

You must take those Austin Powers, 5 minute pisses.

[aero]

First off, no question should have kicked the extra point. I'm guessing maybe somewhere in the 98 percentile of viewers were wondering wtf when we went for 2. Absolutely changed the game instantly. Went from the high of Madu's return and a td to "oh shat, we've got to score twice now". Can't anybody arguing that was a good call understand that? Went from "yes, we can do this" to "man, ain't no way".
As for the hurry up, I posted before that I think the O line gets wore down early with the hurry up and then doesn't block as well later in the game. Thus, more 3 and outs and the D on the field more with less rest. Adds up to teams coming back to us. In this game it meant Mizzou pulled away just enough. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Mizz shuffling linemen out quite a bit? I don't think we have enough depth on the line. To run the hurry up the entire game effectively we would need quality 2 deep at all line positions except center. So we are essentially left to run 2 schemes. One while we are fresh and one when we start breaking down. Not sure what scheme is the best scheme to run when you are spent and can't block.

[TUSooner]

OK, here's a "crumb" of logic for going for 2: If you don't want OT and you'll go for 2 twice and are willing to risk it all on 1 shot, then you should go for 2. But the risk is still too much, so it's a tiny crumb.

[StoopTroup]

Should we continue to tear down what went wrong or look for things we did right?

I think last nights loss is on the Coaching staff and not just Bob, Kevin and Brent. Example: IMO Josh should have gotten more involved in getting his QB some blocking and as we lost guys to injury it didn't appear we always had guys in there that knew what was going on. Should someone be fired? Ummmm...no. I do think our team needs to shake this off quick and work on getting some more confidence and focus. They have to get used to playing in places like last night. It really seems that we are not onlu unprepared on the field for these type games but our Coaching staff needs to prepare themselves a bit better for away games. We do Pretty good in the South but we've really blown it in the North a few times. I think a bit of it has something to do with not being used to the difference in venues. We could have won that game more than once last night but we seemed to tense up and make mistakes. It wasn't much fun to watch and I haven't even gone back and rewatched the game again yet. I might do it once...usually I'll watch it a couple of times but last nights was fugly.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Is there any link between the 2? If not, why are we having a hard time in the fourth quarter. It can't be a coincidence that we "lose" the fourth quarter almost every game.

I think there is some logic to this...I've said since the Bradford days

When it works its wonderful..When the offense is getting 3 and outs at the speed of light, its horrible for the defense.

[agoo758]

I say huddle up the offense and let the defense call their own plays. Travis lewis will call goal line engage eight every play baby! :D

The first half of this post is a serious one.

[aero]

Should we continue to tear down what went wrong or look for things we did right?

It hasn't seemed like a lot of people have overly bagged on the team or coaches. We didn't see the team quit. There were some bright spots and flashes. We are going to lose sometimes just like everybody else. I think there are some things that are fair game for discussion. The 2 pointer perhaps being the most obvious. I wouldn't trade Stoops for any other coach at this point but these types of things makes you wonder. If they make a call that I think would be fair to say most other coaching staffs would have made differently, and probably without hesitation, how do they handle in-game adjustments? Maybe the two have no relation but its a little perplexing and certainly message board fare. Lots of coaching staffs can look good when your team is superior but the good ones know what to do and how to do it when they are evenly matched. I still believe this team is good and can still have a very good season. Not sure at this point how much of a level of superiority they will reach this year but I think its in their capabilities to be a title contender next year.

[MI Sooner]

No. It would have been overlooked but it certainly matters.

You do NOT go for 2 there. If you miss it (which you have about a 50/50 chance you will) you turn it into a 2 possession game. And that changes the way you play rest of the 4th qtr.

If you just get you're extra point you play your standard defense/offense and there is only 1 play that is changed in the 4th qtr. That's the 2 point conversion you try to make at the end of the game.

I hope Stoops thinks about this more and learns from it. If there is any single call that cost us the game last night, this was it.

While I agree with JLEW that there's an argument based on momentum to not go for two, you've just made the case for the other side. If you miss the two, you need to change the way you play, since you need two more scores, not one. Well, with six minutes left, you still have some opportunity to change the way you play. If you miss the 2-pt conversion at the end of the game, you have very little opportunity to make up for it.

Since most coaches choose to kick in that situation, the consensus is clearly not in Stoop's corner. But if this is video game football, where emotion doesn't matter, I think Stoops was right. It's really tempting to want to kick because you know that if you don't get the 2-pt conversion, you're odds of winning go down substantially. Putting off the possibility of bad news is like not going to the doctor to hear test results or opening a letter from a college you applied to.