…the decision to re-kick to Hill is just as infuriating. I thought the perspective might change with time. But it still seems like gross negligence.
…the decision to re-kick to Hill is just as infuriating. I thought the perspective might change with time. But it still seems like gross negligence.
It was a bad decision. Time to move on...
You know, in hindsight it wasn't a bad decision. All Barnett has to do is kick it anywhere but to the guy. I mean, Kansas had OSewe on the ropes and then kicked off to the same guy.
If Barnett had just kicked it elsewhere. I mean, the one thing that absolutely could not go wrong on that play, and that's what it was. Seems almost like fate, I guess.
The safe decision would have been to not re-kick, but...it could also have been a smart move.
No way! Makes no sense on any basic risk/reward analysis. If you don't rekick, there is absolutely ZERO risk of a return AND you have OSU facing the unenviable task of going 85 yards in one minute with no timeouts. WHY MESS WITH THAT HAND? Makes as much sense as going for four of a kind when dealt three aces and two kings .
It was an absolutely stupid move to re-do the kick. The pokes having the ball 85 yards away with a minute left was one of the better possible outcomes on the play. There were too many things that could go wrong with a re-kick: bad snap, fumbled snap, shank kick, block, long return (well that is what happened).
"To this day, Schnellenberger is not held in high esteem by Sooner fans, in part because he made no secret of his lack of interest in the program's history."
Quote
If God wanted Men to look women in the eyes, He wouldnt have gave em Boobs !
...but I thought people wanted Stoops to be more aggressive? Not kicking would be the conservative thing to do.
It was a gamble that failed. It's done and over with and nothing is going to change that.
Quote
If God wanted Men to look women in the eyes, He wouldnt have gave em Boobs !