FG attempt - end of first half

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
 

rockford

Member
Had the Giphy machine cranked up for "Up Front," so here's a look.

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/IzzjfkVaa7J2Jqif3W" width="480" height="290" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/gopher-football-IzzjfkVaa7J2Jqif3W">via GIPHY</a></p>

Ball lands pretty much on the end line, so it seems likely it would have had to have been fielded at least six yards deep.

JTG
 

GFBfan

Active member
The attempt was well short. It hit in the colored part of the out of bounds endzone coloring. Had Purdue put a returner back there, he could have easily caught and returned it.
No problem trying the attempt. Coaches had to feel he could make it.
Wouldn't have had a problem if they would have thrown a Hail Mary either. But, can Morgan get it that far? :eek: Maybe a good time to put Jacob Clark in to throw that one?
With our WR group, I think we have a better percentage of coming down with it, with either Bateman or Johnson being able to go up and grab it or even be able to tip it to CAB or Douglas.
We really miss Woz in a situation like that!!!
 

WorkingMyTailOff

Active member
It's good that the coaching staff now know's Lantz max is probably around 44 now. Maybe Ryvers gets the try in another game when the distance is great. Having a kicker that can stretch into the low 50's has one the Gophers a game against Purdue before if I recall correctly.
 

Panthadad2

Active member
The probability of making a Hail Mary from 30-39 yards is 17% per this link: https://blog.cougarstats.com/2015/09/10/hail-marys-just-how-improbable-are-they/

Only the coaches and kickers know their probability of 50 yard field goal with a slight tailwind, but let's say it's 40%.

Field goal: 3 points X 40% probability = 1.2 expected points
Hail Mary TD: 7 points X 17% = 1.19 expected points

It's really a wash statistically, so it all gets back to all the other factors a coach's gut tells him.
 

PMWinSTP

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.
I think well short is more accurate than you think. Based on the height of the kick and the crossbar, it probably needed another 10 yards to be good.
 

Spoofin

Active member
Math is not on your side on this one :)
Not all kicks have the same rise and run angle. That was a line drive kick with a low apex and it hit its peak short of the goal-line at a relatively low elevation. 10 might be overstating it, I would say 7 —- would have made it from 44. Not 45. IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

gopherdudepart2

Active member
Kind of flipping a coin

Not all kicks have the same rise and run angle. That was a line drive kick with a low apex and it hit its peak short of the goal-line at a relatively low elevation. 10 might be overstating it, I would say 7 —- would have made it from 44. Not 45. IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think it was flipping a coin by the coaches, with only 2 seconds left and the distance on the field they must have thought the kick was the better gamble. There was risk throwing a hail mary and getting a sack fumble or injury. The kick could have been blocked too as it was hit really low and line drive like.
I guess with 2 seconds left the coaches gambled that Lantz could make the kick. I didn't mind the try at least now they know for sure even with a tailwind the kicker has limitations for distance at this point in time.
 

Mulligan

Active 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
Thanks for stating the obvious. Pretty sure they know what percentage of his kicks have that distance and felt it was worth it.
 

Latest profile posts

Top