FG attempt - end of first half

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Apologies if this has already been discussed, but I wanted to throw it out to the board if it hadn't. What was the staff thinking trotting Lantz out there to attempt that kick? Just based on everything I've read and heard, it seemed pretty obvious that he doesn't have the leg to get it that far. I've been happy with Lantz's kicking (at distances he can actually make), but what was the point of having him kick a FG that he cannot possibly make? Why not send out Ryerse, or Walker, or someone on the squad who has the leg to kick it 51 yards? I get that Lantz has been far more accurate, but it was a waste of time even having him attempt it.

Thoughts?
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon

Active member
He didn't have the leg?

On TV I thought it was enough "leg", or at least close.

I thought it was worth a try.

I'm not sure it makes sense to deploy different kickers at different times for FGs.
 

Spoofin

Active member
He didn't have the leg?

On TV I thought it was enough "leg", or at least close.

I thought it was worth a try.

I'm not sure it makes sense to deploy different kickers at different times for FGs.
It was well short. Not even close.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin

Active member
I agree with DPO here. At the time I said to my mates that there was a better chance of Purdue getting points off of that FG attempt than the Gophers. In fact, big mistake by Brohm not putting someone back there to “field” that miss.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

salzie

Active member
I didn't mind the FGA to be honest

But if you know their range is less than that, it's ok to trot out one of our kickers with a bigger leg
 

topos

Member
It wasn’t even close... it was accurate, but way short. I agree with dpoll. There is absolutely no need to risk shaking the young man’s confidence. There wasn’t a lot of upside with that call. I was actually nervous that Purdue might block it and house it...
 

die hard gopher

Active member
He made a 50 yard FG in high school. So while he doesn't have the strongest leg, he has shown he can hit from that type of distance, at least occasionally. Maybe has has hit those in practice before.

It's a no lose situation. You get to see what you have in your kicker in an in game situation. Worst case, he misses and you go in the half with a big lead, best case you build some confidence for your kicker, get some more practice and put 3 points on the board. You also get to amend what happened last FG with the block.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon

Active member
It wasn’t even close... it was accurate, but way short. I agree with dpoll. There is absolutely no need to risk shaking the young man’s confidence. There wasn’t a lot of upside with that call. I was actually nervous that Purdue might block it and house it...
Was his confidance shaken for trying something?

If the guy can't handle a low percentage attempt ... gonna have a bad time generally.
 

CurveballJesus

Active member
Apologies if this has already been discussed, but I wanted to throw it out to the board if it hadn't. What was the staff thinking trotting Lantz out there to attempt that kick? Just based on everything I've read and heard, it seemed pretty obvious that he doesn't have the leg to get it that far. I've been happy with Lantz's kicking (at distances he can actually make), but what was the point of having him kick a FG that he cannot possibly make? Why not send out Ryerse, or Walker, or someone on the squad who has the leg to kick it 51 yards? I get that Lantz has been far more accurate, but it was a waste of time even having him attempt it.

Thoughts?
Agreed. Or in another alternative if you really don't trust Ryerse to try the long one, why not run BSF88, SG17 and HVD83 run down in a trips formation for a jump ball? Probably lower odds that something catastrophic like a blocked kick happens.
 

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
He didn't have the leg?

On TV I thought it was enough "leg", or at least close.
It landed right next to the ref standing underneath the crossbar, meaning it would've needed at least another 5-7 yards of distance to even have the height to clear the crossbar. And, to further bolster the point, it appeared from the flags on top of the uprights that the wind was at his back. So, even with a tailwind, he was still well short.

I thought it was worth a try.
To be clear, attempting the FG in and of itself was a no-brainer. My quibble is with sending someone out there for whom it is humanly possible to make the kick.

I'm not sure it makes sense to deploy different kickers at different times for FGs.
Sure it does. Lantz seems pretty clearly to be the most accurate FG kicker from 40 yards and in. But for rare/emergency situations (long FG attempts at the end of a half or a game), you have to have someone who can kick it long assuming that your primary FG kicker can't do so. Maybe we just don't have anyone on the roster who can placekick a 51-yarder, but I highly doubt it. I realize that kicking off a tee is different than a held kick, but Ryerse routinely kicks it 70 yards or longer on kickoffs.
 
Apologies if this has already been discussed, but I wanted to throw it out to the board if it hadn't. What was the staff thinking trotting Lantz out there to attempt that kick? Just based on everything I've read and heard, it seemed pretty obvious that he doesn't have the leg to get it that far. I've been happy with Lantz's kicking (at distances he can actually make), but what was the point of having him kick a FG that he cannot possibly make? Why not send out Ryerse, or Walker, or someone on the squad who has the leg to kick it 51 yards? I get that Lantz has been far more accurate, but it was a waste of time even having him attempt it.

Thoughts?
I thought the same thing at the time. Ryerse has the leg to get it there.
 

RememberMurray

Active member
Here's the replay of the game. Fast forward to approx. 1:14:00 or so for the FG attempt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDb9Y-RLbzA

The ball lands on the back line of the end zone. I don't know if that qualifies as "well short" — sounds a little hyperbolic to me — but it definitely wasn't returnable. In order to catch it you'd have to be standing out of the end zone.

A 51-yard FG attempt with 2 seconds left is absolutely the correct coaching decision. We're not talking about 60+ yards here. He came fairly close to making it.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon

Active member
Agreed. Or in another alternative if you really don't trust Ryerse to try the long one, why not run BSF88, SG17 and HVD83 run down in a trips formation for a jump ball? Probably lower odds that something catastrophic like a blocked kick happens.
I'm not convinced our OL can hold up for a real hail mary type situation. I feel like we'd have to load up for pass protection and we'd be outnumbered on the other end of the field even more dramatically than a regular hail mary.
 

swingman

Active member
he hit from 50 three times in high school. i'm sure he has shown he can hit from 52 in practice...maybe even in warm-ups that day?
 

Sparlimb

Active member
Well the question is whether a hail mary was a higher percentage call. I don't mind trying the field goal to give him a chance in a real game to see if he can make it, but taking a chance on a hail mary maybe had slightly better odds.
 

Panthadad2

Active member
The ball bounced right on the back of the end zone line, so it was probably about 3-4 yards short. Good kick. There was a light tailwind. I thought it was a smart play. It might be that other kickers with potentially more leg don't kick the ball high enough to avoid the block. Who knows. A hail mary pass has a chance to get intercepted or fumbled and returned too.
 

die hard gopher

Active member
He made a 50 yard FG in high school. So while he doesn't have the strongest leg, he has shown he can hit from that type of distance, at least occasionally. Maybe has has hit those in practice before.

It's a no lose situation. You get to see what you have in your kicker in an in game situation. Worst case, he misses and you go in the half with a big lead, best case you build some confidence for your kicker, get some more practice and put 3 points on the board. You also get to amend what happened last FG with the block.
Also, to elaborate on this, maybe Lantz was too focused on accuracy when he should have focused more on getting it there.

Sometimes when your golfing and you need to drive the fairway, you may just try to let the club swing as opposed to trying to hammer the ball and hit it as hard as you can. Because sometimes if you do it hit has hard as you can, you know it may end up 2 fairways away from the hole you're playing. If you swing more gently, at least for me, I get a lot more accurate but can't drive it as far. Maybe thats what happened here?
 

Schnauzer

Pretty Sure You are Wrong
I agree with the OP. It made no sense to try that kick with that kicker. Everyone in the stadium (and my living room) knew it was going to be short. At the time, I tried to give the benefit of the doubt, wondering out loud if kicks at that distance had been made in pregame warm ups, if there was a sudden 30 mph tailwind, etc. I think he is an accurate kicker but simply doesn't have the leg to kick at that distance. And for those saying there was no harm in trying... thankfully there wasn't, but there very much could have been. If I had been Purdue I would have put a returner back there to give it a shot. It is very hard to cover a returner with a field goal unit at midfield (just ask Alabama about that). Poor coaching on both sides: Gophers shouldn't have attempted that kick and Purdue should have put a return guy in the end zone.
 

RememberMurray

Active member
Also, to elaborate on this, maybe Lantz was too focused on accuracy when he should have focused more on getting it there.

Sometimes when your golfing and you need to drive the fairway, you may just try to let the club swing as opposed to trying to hammer the ball and hit it as hard as you can. Because sometimes if you do it hit has hard as you can, you know it may end up 2 fairways away from the hole you're playing. If you swing more gently, at least for me, I get a lot more accurate but can't drive it as far. Maybe thats what happened here?
Hmmmm... have you been watching me play golf? That's an eerily accurate picture.
 

Spoofin

Active member
Here's the replay of the game. Fast forward to approx. 1:14:00 or so for the FG attempt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDb9Y-RLbzA

The ball lands on the back line of the end zone. I don't know if that qualifies as "well short" — sounds a little hyperbolic to me — but it definitely wasn't returnable. In order to catch it you'd have to be standing out of the end zone.
It landed on the back line, but you would have to be standing out of the end-zone to catch it? Do they have to catch it with their feet in that case?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

RememberMurray

Active member
It landed on the back line, but you would have to be standing out of the end-zone to catch it? Do they have to catch it with their feet in that case?
You'd be standing awfully close to the back line, since, well, y'know... that's where the ball actually landed.

Just to be (crystal) clear: the attempt was definitely, positively, without question NOT "well short"... and it was not a poor coaching decision.

Once again: it was 51 yards, not 60. I'd wager the kid would make close to 50% from there. I like those odds far better than a Hail Mary.
 

Face The Facts

Fleck Superfan
A) If he's hitting 50-52 yarders in practice with 50% success, I have no problem with him taking it at the end of the half. Seems like many GH'ers know this was outside of his range. Not sure how they know that.

B) Ball landing on the end line, depending on trajectory is probably 3-5 yards short. From watching it, I didn't see a side angle to determine the trajectory.

C) People catch the ball usually about 2-3 feet above the ground, possibly 5-6 feet above the ground. IMO, the ball could have been caught and return attempted.

D) With all of that said, a hail mary might have been a higher percentage play, depending on what his practice percentage is from that range. But I think the FG was probably still the higher percentage play, even though Purdue showed to be ineffective at stopping our passing game.

E) Worse case scenario on that play was not simply a missed FG, but rather a return, or a block and return for TD. (See Georgia State game... (yes, Georgia State)).
 

Vandy

Active member
I agree with the OP. It made no sense to try that kick with that kicker. Everyone in the stadium (and my living room) knew it was going to be short. At the time, I tried to give the benefit of the doubt, wondering out loud if kicks at that distance had been made in pregame warm ups, if there was a sudden 30 mph tailwind, etc. I think he is an accurate kicker but simply doesn't have the leg to kick at that distance. And for those saying there was no harm in trying... thankfully there wasn't, but there very much could have been. If I had been Purdue I would have put a returner back there to give it a shot. It is very hard to cover a returner with a field goal unit at midfield (just ask Alabama about that). Poor coaching on both sides: Gophers shouldn't have attempted that kick and Purdue should have put a return guy in the end zone.
I received a B- in college statistics 35+ years ago, so I am no expert, but I'd have to believe that the odds were better that if Purdue tries to field that FG attempt off the end line, it is more likely that a muff in the end zone or around the goal line leads to points for us, vs. a 105+ year TD return for them.... Particularly given the fact that media darling Rondale Moore was out of the game.
 

UpAndUnder43

Active member
High school kick ranges are sometimes irrelevant because some states have high school kids kick off a tee for field goals and extra points. (this may be all high schools/states, I honestly don't know)

I think had he kept it towards the left upright (his left) and hit it a little bit better, he could have made it. The distance of kicking from where he did and it going towards the further upright was a problem.

Also, I would think the coaching staff thought he could make it and have seen him make similar kicks in practice. Fleck doesn't seem like the type to put kids in a guaranteed to fail situation, especially in a game.
 
Last edited:

Spoofin

Active member
You'd be standing awfully close to the back line, since, well, y'know... that's where the ball actually landed.

Just to be (crystal) clear: the attempt was definitely, positively, without question NOT "well short"... and it was not a poor coaching decision.

Once again: it was 51 yards, not 60. I'd wager the kid would make close to 50% from there. I like those odds far better than a Hail Mary.
Well, I was sitting 20-rows up at the 15-yard line where it was kicked. I can tell you definitely, positively, without question that it was well short. Based on its height and trajectory, it was 100% obvious that it had no chance when it went by me.

I can also tell you definitely, positively, without question that a returner could have easily caught it when in bounds. Zero doubt what-so-ever.

I think Brohm messed up not having a returner back there. Every Gopher and Boilermaker fan around me agreed. Both before and after the kick.

I have no clue what % he has made in practice. Never commented on that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

rockford

Member
I have no problem with the kick, or who kicked it.

The toughest part of being a fan is we don't get to see what happens in practice everyday. So while it's always fun to second-guess the coaching staff, we're doing so with a tiny fraction of the familiarity the staff has with the players. I can't imagine the staff was standing around at halftime going, "Hell, we should've had Big Leg Larry kick that one. What were we thinking?"

You gotta believe they're simulating that exact situation in practice every week, if not every day. Which would lead me to believe they're putting the kicker out there who has shown to have the best chance of making that kick.

No harm in speculating, though. That's part of the fun.

JTG
 

DarrenTheGreek

Gov. Victory Bell Ringer
A) If he's hitting 50-52 yarders in practice with 50% success, I have no problem with him taking it at the end of the half. Seems like many GH'ers know this was outside of his range. Not sure how they know that.

B) Ball landing on the end line, depending on trajectory is probably 3-5 yards short. From watching it, I didn't see a side angle to determine the trajectory.

C) People catch the ball usually about 2-3 feet above the ground, possibly 5-6 feet above the ground. IMO, the ball could have been caught and return attempted.

D) With all of that said, a hail mary might have been a higher percentage play, depending on what his practice percentage is from that range. But I think the FG was probably still the higher percentage play, even though Purdue showed to be ineffective at stopping our passing game.

E) Worse case scenario on that play was not simply a missed FG, but rather a return, or a block and return for TD. (See Georgia State game... (yes, Georgia State)).
To me, this is the most frustrating thing on this thread. How do people now realize that a ball landing on the back line is DEFINITELY catchable? It's not like guys catch the ball with their shoelaces.

For the record, I have no problem with the attempt, nor would I have had a problem if they had Ryerse give it a shot.
 
Apologies if this has already been discussed, but I wanted to throw it out to the board if it hadn't. What was the staff thinking trotting Lantz out there to attempt that kick? Just based on everything I've read and heard, it seemed pretty obvious that he doesn't have the leg to get it that far. I've been happy with Lantz's kicking (at distances he can actually make), but what was the point of having him kick a FG that he cannot possibly make? Why not send out Ryerse, or Walker, or someone on the squad who has the leg to kick it 51 yards? I get that Lantz has been far more accurate, but it was a waste of time even having him attempt it.

Thoughts?
I agree. Awfully risky to have it blocked given the lower trajectory with Lantz limited leg. Not a bad opportunity to try out one of the bigger legs in a game situation. Never know when that could be a game ending situation down the road.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Top