FB: GT 38, Duke 31

[devildeac]

Last home game of the year. Anyone have enough energy left to discuss FB? Will we have enough guys healthy to play this game? What do we do to stop their running game? Any updates to what appears to be a significant injury list from yesterday?

[OldPhiKap]

This will be a challenge to state the obvious.

Gotta fight hard, boys. Close the home season off with a win, then take the Heels!

[uh_no]

my favorite halftime stat from last weeks game

passing: 11/22 11+ yds/att
rushing 21 att, 22 yds, 1.0 yds/att

I couldn't watch the game, but am under the impression that the passing numbers contained several drops

but how many drives were wasted rushing 21 times for 22 yds? just boggles my mind.

Again, I have zero confidence in our OC. Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over expecting different results?

when our defense AGAIN turns it on late in the game and starts forcing punts, and we accomplish nothing?

[mkline09]

my favorite halftime stat from last weeks game

passing: 11/22 11+ yds/att
rushing 21 att, 22 yds, 1.0 yds/att

I couldn't watch the game, but am under the impression that the passing numbers contained several drops

but how many drives were wasted rushing 21 times for 22 yds? just boggles my mind.

Again, I have zero confidence in our OC. Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over expecting different results?

when our defense AGAIN turns it on late in the game and starts forcing punts, and we accomplish nothing?

I thought the play calling on the whole was better. Took a lot of shot downfield and moved the ball. However, mistakes killed Duke again. Lots of key drops. Varner had at least three. Helfet had one too. Again it goes without saying missed field goals were bit of a problem. Still you are right running game isn't working. And the kinds of run to me seem to be so generic and pretty much the same play just run to different sides of the line. Seemingly no concept of how to design running plays from my perspective.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

I agree regarding the improved play calling. ..... much better than previous games.

Execution was a central problem as were injuries, both before the game and during it. Injuries played havoc with the OL, defensive side, our runners and some of the receivers. The team finally has enough depth that those injuries didn't cause the team to quit. Before anyone jumps on that comment about depth, my point is that it's much better than we've had in quite a while.

[Bob Green]

Anyone have enough energy left to discuss FB?

Yes! I have the energy so a big thank you to DD for starting this thread.


I agree regarding the improved play calling. ..... much better than previous games.

I also agree the play calling was improved. We just made too many mistakes to overcome:

1. Sean Renfree throws a Pick 6 interception when he is under duress because our left tackle Jacoby Cofield (playing due an injury to Kyle Hill) cannot handle Virginia's defensive end.
2. Donovan Varner drops two passes, which could have resulted in touchdowns.
3. Brandon Braxton drops a pass, which could have resulted in a touchdown.
4. Will Snyderwine has a field goal blocked and misses a second one.

Our Red Zone offense is pathetic and a major contributing factor is the inability to run the football. The injury list will probably be ugly this Thursday.

[uh_no]

I thought the play calling on the whole was better. Took a lot of shot downfield and moved the ball. However, mistakes killed Duke again. Lots of key drops. Varner had at least three. Helfet had one too. Again it goes without saying missed field goals were bit of a problem. Still you are right running game isn't working. And the kinds of run to me seem to be so generic and pretty much the same play just run to different sides of the line. Seemingly no concept of how to design running plays from my perspective.

I think in the end you have to ask, is calling these running plays allowing us to open up the passing game? So in essence, would we be more or less successful on the whole if we had useed those 21 downs to throw instead? Obviously the defense could drop more into coverage, and this would likely lessen our yds/att, but with 22 extra attempts could we make up that difference? Obviously that's an extreme case, and like anything else, its likely a parabolic curve at which there is a given run/pass ratio that maximizes yards/play and I think our current ratio is non-optimal....that more passes would do better in the end, especially seeing as the runs are so enormously futile.

Mistakes are obviously a huge problem...and I think the dropped passes indicate even MORE that we should passing more than running.....(and that our receivers shouldn't be dropping the ball)....Either way, even if the playcalling HAS gotten better lately, it shouldn't take 10 games into the season to realize how to gameplan for a given team...

[-bdbd]

Sigh....

Got to watch the whole thing on TV here in Northern VA. Keep in mind that this is a really improved UVA team this year who really took it to Miami in Miami. They will very possibly be in a 1 game "playoff" with VPI to determine the winner of their division. So a 10-point loss, on the road to a Division leader is nothing to be down about, especially given all of the injuries.

A few loose thoughts:
1. Wow - look at all of those injuriues. They were just dropping like flies! I don't know what was said between the two head coaches at mid-field after the game,in a reportedly heated exchange, but I'm guessing it had something to do with that topic and whether UVA was trying to play "overly aggressive" or injure.
2. Why does it seem to take about 40 minutes each game for the D to get it in gear? They seem like they are capable of playing well for 4 whole quarters.
3. Renfree wasn't without fault, but the receivers have GOT to make plays when given the chance. WAAAAY too many dropped balls, even if some of them were tough catch opportunities (though to be fair a WR has a much better chance of catching a ball thrown hard into his bread basket than one through high and well ahead for a receiver crossing the middle.....).
4. Given all of the injuries, for the last two games, do we play some of the redshirts, or let em hang on to the extra year of eligibility and build for the long-term?
5. Is it just me or do we still seem undermanned on the two front lines? The D line doesn't seem to get nearly enough penetration on runs or passes. And the O line can't assert itself even on very short-yardage situations - hence tons of "bubble screens" out into the flat, etc. I know we have had some OL recruiting success recently, and am guessing we have some help coming next year from current red-shirts. But what is that picture like on the D-line side? Any hope, especially given that our star there is a senior?

[Bob Green]

5. Is it just me or do we still seem undermanned on the two front lines? The D line doesn't seem to get nearly enough penetration on runs or passes. And the O line can't assert itself even on very short-yardage situations - hence tons of "bubble screens" out into the flat, etc. I know we have had some OL recruiting success recently, and am guessing we have some help coming next year from current red-shirts. But what is that picture like on the D-line side?

We have had significant success with OL recruiting and currently have some potential studs red-shirting this season. The situation with DL recruiting isn't as clear.

[devildeac]

my favorite halftime stat from last weeks game

passing: 11/22 11+ yds/att
rushing 21 att, 22 yds, 1.0 yds/att

I couldn't watch the game, but am under the impression that the passing numbers contained several drops

but how many drives were wasted rushing 21 times for 22 yds? just boggles my mind.

Again, I have zero confidence in our OC. Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over expecting different results?

when our defense AGAIN turns it on late in the game and starts forcing punts, and we accomplish nothing?

Our "rushing game" improved in the 2nd half if those 1st half stats are correct (and I believe you) as we rushed 8 times for 12 yards, improving our average that half to 1.5 yds/carry:rolleyes:. Our final game stats were 29 rushes for 34 yds, working out to a 1.2 yards/carry average. Yea, I know Sean was 7 for -13 so that affects the calculations but so does the 64 yd TD grab and 2 other receptions of 40+ yds when figuring yds/catch or yds/attempt. There were also a bunch of "screen" that gained little to no yardage. So, to be clear, I am really not arguing with you. Play calling was better but still mind boggling at times as several (many?) of us in chat screamed at our keyboards, monitors and TV screens. Several key drops, routes run too short to get the 1st downs, the pick 6, multiple injuries and missed tackles and FG all contributed to yet another gut-busting loss. Cut was visibly disturbed (and audibly, too, I'd bet:rolleyes:) on multiple occasions yesterday at our players, the refs and, at the end, at London, who continued to shout at Cut as he was escorted away. I'd love to know what that was about.

[uh_no]

Several key drops, routes run too short to get the 1st downs, the pick 6, multiple injuries and missed tackles and FG all contributed to yet another gut-busting loss.

Pretty much sums it up. I partially think the OC is just an easy target, and though I generally try to be as objective as possible, eventually I want to blame someone. I don't know how to fix dropped passes (having never played fball) but the running routes short of teh first down seems to be something that hurts us all the time and seems to be something so easy to fix....is the OC calling plays with routes short hoping to pick up YAC (and honestly, how often do we pick up 5 YAC?....40-50 yd catches aside...) or are the receivers just not running the routes far enough? I have no idea....I kind of miss when cut had film sessions with students so you could ask questions like that....and get honest reasonable responses. Now (and maybe its because i'm not on campus anymore) it seems that we have this issues, but no concept of what's being done to address them.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I thought the play calling on the whole was better.
Our theory was that the team had tied Roper up in a closet somewhere and he had escaped after halftime.

[uh_no]

Our theory was that the team had tied Roper up in a closet somewhere and he had escaped after halftime.

they had roper roped up?

[mkline09]

Our theory was that the team had tied Roper up in a closet somewhere and he had escaped after halftime.

Well that certainly makes more sense. Why else would the guy who basically failed to do what Duke does best offensively change his ways in the third to the last game? Makes sense to me. :)

[devildeac]

Preliminary forecast: 64 and sunny :D

[Acymetric]

Hope I can get off work in time...would like to be at the last home game this year even if I'm pretty much out of real enthusiasm for the season.

[killerleft]

How many of you are taking advantage of the two free tickets for season ticketholders deal for this game? I'd love to, but have run out of friends that I can even dream might go to the game.

email:

"As a sincere thank you to all of our season ticket holders, Duke Athletics will be celebrating "Season Ticket Holder Appreciation" by offering (2) two additional complimentary general admission (GA) tickets to the Georgia Tech football game on November 19 for each season ticket account holder.

Season ticket holders are encouraged to use these two tickets to help create a new Blue Devil fan out of family, friends and neighbors. Let them come enjoy a great afternoon of football at Wallace Wade Stadium!

To order your complimentary tickets, please call the Ticket Office at (919) 668-9235. Complimentary "Season Ticket Holder Appreciation" tickets must be ordered no later than Thursday, November 17 at 4:30 p.m. The tickets can be picked up on the day of the game at the Will Call line at the North Gate of Wallace Wade designated as "Season Ticket Holder Appreciation."

On second thought, I'll canvas the usual suspects again, our team certainly deserves much more support than they get.

[Acymetric]

*sigh*

Don't really like what it says about our program that we're having to give away tickets and beg people to come to the final home game of the year.

[Olympic Fan]

We have had significant success with OL recruiting and currently have some potential studs red-shirting this season. The situation with DL recruiting isn't as clear.

Cut has had some terrible luck recruiting the DL -- how different would our D-line look with junior John Drew alongside Charlie Hatcher at DT and with a healthy Kenny Annunike at DE (and throw in Trent Mackey as a fourth year starter at LB and Brandon Putnam as redshirt soph at DE ... those knuckleheads!)?

As it is, I give them credit for redshirting everybody they've recruited up front -- that's where the extra year pays off. Aside from Hatcher, Sarmiento and Foxx -- and Sarmiento and Foxx are just redshirt sophomores -- we're playing with a bunch of redshirt freshmen up front. Sure they're getting pushed around. But I think they showed against Virginia Tech that they do have potential. It would be great if Cut could recruit the kind of guys K gets in basketball -- kids who can be studs from day one -- but that's not going to happen very often in football (Drew was that kind of kid). We're going to have to be patient -- but kids like Bruce, Sink, Dez Johnson, Jamal Wallace and Jordan DeWalt-Ondijo will get bigger and stronger as they get older.

I thought the OL was ahead of the DL. We went into the season with seven ACC-quality OL -- only Hill and Moore were upperclassmen and Moore was hurt most of the year ... now Hill is gone. That leaves three quality redshirt sophomores -- Harding, Simmons and Coleman (still waiting on Finison) and two quality redshirt freshmen -- Tomlinson and Cofield. It doesn't help that Cofield and Harding are playing hurt.

We do have four redshirt freshmen with GREAT potential. Lucas Patrick is going to be a great one. Marcus Apahamin and Cody Robinson are huge tackle prospects. Matt Skura will be our 2013 starter at center.

If our injury problems (beyond Moore) on the OL had come up earlier, I think we'd see Patrick, at least, in action this year. But not this late. Duke can't salvage a bowl ... save them or next year. We lose Hill on the OL and return six quality veterans. We add four very promising redshirt freshmen (plus Finison may grow into it). We'll have better depth -- and the best thing is that Brian Moore will be on the only senior.

[duke09hms]

*sigh*

Don't really like what it says about our program that we're having to give away tickets and beg people to come to the final home game of the year.

We're 3-7 with so many self-inflicted mistakes and penalties, plus we killed any forward momentum of hooking in new fans at the start of the season with the Richmond loss.
I don't like it either, but honestly should anyone be surprised?

[awhom111]

Here are the tv listings for the game:
http://www.theacc.com/live/2011-acc-football-match-center-georgia-tech-at-duke.html

Most of the stations are the same as the last few weeks as they are pretty much fixed this late in the season. I would take a look just to make sure the channel has not been changed in your area.

[killerleft]

*sigh*

Don't really like what it says about our program that we're having to give away tickets and beg people to come to the final home game of the year.

Agreed. Since more fans = better home environment and, presumably, a better chance at winning, I don't think it says much about Duke fans, either. The students aren't even part of the equation anymore.

But maybe the offer will put a few extra fans in Wally Wade.

[CameronBlue]

they had roper roped up?

Yup. They roped the dope.

[Dev11]

our left tackle Jacoby Cofield

No worries, just making sure we know who the kid is. He and Laken Tomlinson are projected to be anchoring the OL for a few years moving forward.

Still looking for that upset win we've been craving all year. Not sure what is going to change this week, but I remain optimistic that it will. Let's go DUKE!

[Bob Green]

No worries, just making sure we know who the kid is. He and Laken Tomlinson are projected to be anchoring the OL for a few years moving forward.

Thanks for the correction! I believe it is very important to get the players names correct.

[Richard Berg]

Injury report for this week?

[NovaScotian]

hi folks,
this will be my first football game since graduation - can someone tell me how adult tailgating works? is there a specific section for tailgaters? must i bring only canned beer, or are bottles ok? how early should i arrive? must every drink be in a coozie (sp?)? how acceptable is tossing the football around? when my little brother passes out, will there be conveniently located port-a-potties for me to shove him in? can i buy a bloomin onion outside of the stadium, or must i wait until the game begins? thanks!
ns

[chrishoke]

We are Duke.

[CameronBornAndBred]

hi folks,
this will be my first football game since graduation - can someone tell me how adult tailgating works? is there a specific section for tailgaters? must i bring only canned beer, or are bottles ok? how early should i arrive? must every drink be in a coozie (sp?)? how acceptable is tossing the football around? when my little brother passes out, will there be conveniently located port-a-potties for me to shove him in? can i buy a bloomin onion outside of the stadium, or must i wait until the game begins? thanks!
ns
You are welcome to come join us on Devil's Alley, we'll be closing out the year in fine fashion with oysters, seafood, chili, and breakfast foods. (And beer, some with or without Koozies.)
We even get cool celebrities, like Bob Green on the left in this picture. :D

2133

[NovaScotian]

You are welcome to come join us on Devil's Alley, we'll be closing out the year in fine fashion with oysters, seafood, chili, and breakfast foods. (And beer, some with or without Koozies.)
We even get cool celebrities, like Bob Green on the left in this picture. :D

2133

thank you for the invitation! is there anyway to park in the blue zone without an iron dukes pass? if i park on central and bring my beer and cole slaw to the blue zone myself, will i be able to bring my thermos and football into ww? sorry to be so inquisitive, i just want to make sure this will be fun.

[devildeac]

thank you for the invitation! is there anyway to park in the blue zone without an iron dukes pass? if i park on central and bring my beer and cole slaw to the blue zone myself, will i be able to bring my thermos and football into ww? sorry to be so inquisitive, i just want to make sure this will be fun.

No outside food or beverages allowed in WW. We take care of all our consumption at our tent before, during the half and after the game. We'll help you with the beer and slaw:D. Our tent is along the sidewalk in the Card Gym lot along Blue Devil Alley. I don't think they allow you to park in the Blue Zone anymore for public parking. PM CB&B, Ozzie or me for more details.

Now who is that tall guy in the picture shaking Bob Green's hand? He looks familiar, too...

[devildeac]

Maybe something like this might help our placekickers' confidence on Saturday:

http://mail.aol.com/34561-111/aol-6/en-us/mail/get-attachment.aspx?uid=27701962&folder=Deleted&partId=3

[Bob Green]

Injury report for this week?

Duke Football Injury Report

November 17, 2011

vs. Georgia Tech



WR Brandon Braxton (upper body) Probable

OT Takoby Cofield (upper body) Probable

CB Zach Greene (leg) Probable

WR Conner Vernon (leg) Probable



LB Kelby Brown (leg) Questionable

WR Jamison Crowder (leg) Questionable

WR Tyree Watkins (leg) Questionable



DE Justin Foxx (leg) Doubtful

LB C.J. France (upper body) Doubtful

LB Kevin Rojas (lower body) Doubtful

CB Johnny Williams (upper body) Doubtful



S Lee Butler (leg) OUT

QB Brandon Connette (upper body) OUT

DE Jordan DeWalt-Ondijo (leg) OUT

C Brian Moore (upper body) OUT



DE Kenny Anunike (leg) OUT FOR SEASON

TE Jack Farrell (leg) OUT FOR SEASON

OT Kyle Hill (shoulder) OUT FOR SEASON

[OldPhiKap]

Glad to hear that Connor is probable.

Beat Tech, beat the Heels, finish strong and proud!

[Reilly]

CV's probable w/ a leg? Thought he had badly bruised ribs last week ....

[OldPhiKap]

CV's probable w/ a leg? Thought he had badly bruised ribs last week ....

"Shake it off, Connor."

[devildeac]

Duke Football Injury Report

November 17, 2011

vs. Georgia Tech



WR Brandon Braxton (upper body) Probable

OT Takoby Cofield (upper body) Probable

CB Zach Greene (leg) Probable

WR Conner Vernon (leg) Probable



LB Kelby Brown (leg) Questionable

WR Jamison Crowder (leg) Questionable

WR Tyree Watkins (leg) Questionable



DE Justin Foxx (leg) Doubtful

LB C.J. France (upper body) Doubtful

LB Kevin Rojas (lower body) Doubtful

CB Johnny Williams (upper body) Doubtful



S Lee Butler (leg) OUT

QB Brandon Connette (upper body) OUT

DE Jordan DeWalt-Ondijo (leg) OUT

C Brian Moore (upper body) OUT



DE Kenny Anunike (leg) OUT FOR SEASON

TE Jack Farrell (leg) OUT FOR SEASON

OT Kyle Hill (shoulder) OUT FOR SEASON

Holy (injury) sheet! That's the longest injury list I have seen in a long time. That's 18 players if my weary eyes counted correctly or just over 20% of our 85 scholarship players. Just imagine how many more injuries we'll have once GT chop blocks us to death for 3 hours.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc. GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTh.
GTHc, GTH.

Ozzie, OPK, Jim Sumner and I might have to suit up the following Saturday.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Holy (injury) sheet! That's the longest injury list I have seen in a long time. That's 18 players if my weary eyes counted correctly or just over 20% of our 85 scholarship players. Just imagine how many more injuries we'll have once GT chop blocks us to death for 3 hours.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc. GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTH.
GTHc, GTh.
GTHc, GTH.

Ozzie, OPK, Jim Sumner and I might have to suit up the following Saturday.
I'm ready coach! Put me in! A lot at running back, a little at Will or DE (3 steps, stay home and contain - I remember what Coach John Lanier said in HS, even though I didn't play the position then, only for the Club Football team at Duke). :cool:

And, oh yeah, let me tell Sean what plays to call! :eek:

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Speaking of calling plays, Mike O'Cain did a pretty good job last night for VA Tech.

[chrishoke]

Speaking of calling plays, Mike O'Cain did a pretty good job last night for VA Tech.

Yes he did. I have always like Mike.

[mkline09]

After watching or listening to every game this year I am more convinced than ever that Conner Vernon cannot be hurt. He is just that tough. Amazing player and despite the win-loss record I can say I believe we are all fortuante to watch him as a player. He is special. That isn't to downplay the contributions of other players on the team, football is a team game, but Vernon is just on a different level.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

I told assistant coach Ron Middleton what play to run on our first play from scrimmage on Saturday, with a request he pass it on to Coach Cut. I can assure you it was neither a run up the middle nor a lateral pass out to the flat, what they call a "bubble pass". We'll see if they take my advice.

[CameronBornAndBred]

After watching or listening to every game this year I am more convinced than ever that Conner Vernon cannot be hurt. He is just that tough. Amazing player and despite the win-loss record I can say I believe we are all fortuante to watch him as a player. He is special. That isn't to downplay the contributions of other players on the team, football is a team game, but Vernon is just on a different level.
If Conner Vernon and Patrick Davidson were locked in a room and told only one man could come out alive, would the universe survive?

[OldPhiKap]

I told assistant coach Ron Middleton what play to run on our first play from scrimmage on Saturday, with a request he pass it on to Coach Cut. I can assure you it was neither a run up the middle nor a lateral pass out to the flat, what they call a "bubble pass". We'll see if they take my advice.

Does that kind of make you like Richard Nixon? And by that I mean the football-watching, Elvis-watching Nixon and not the paranoid crooked Nixon.

Didn't his play lose 7 yards or so?

[davekay1971]

If Conner Vernon and Patrick Davidson were locked in a room and told only one man could come out alive, would the universe survive?

Yes...but only because the universe would be too afraid of making Nate James angry!

[grossbus]

Should have stopped the game after we scored.

Rapidly heading for ugly.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Is the option really an option for us? I mean, they should learn how to run it if they're going to use it. I still don't understand the Boone package. When is the last time it worked?

[mkline09]

If Conner Vernon and Patrick Davidson were locked in a room and told only one man could come out alive, would the universe survive?

Yes but there would be a significant tear in the space time continuum.

[juise]

Killer penalty as Duke crossed into GT territory looking to tie the game. Interception on the next play. Looks like another heart breaker.

[Bob Green]

It was an entertaining game to watch but in the end another disappointing loss. The defense gave up too many explosive plays for 20+ yards, while the offense committed critical penalties that squelched the potential game tying drive late in the 4th quarter. The team is a lot better and competing for 60 minutes but the losses continue to mount. Frustrating! Now we must go to Chapel Hill and beat the Tar Heels to avoid a second straight 3-9 season. While 3-9 is better than 1-11 or 0-12, 3-9 is already old.

[grossbus]

"The defense gave up too many explosive plays for 20+ yards"

the long pass plays drove me nuts.

[loran16]

Let's be clear here....this game wasn't lost by any particular group. The Refs stunk, giving GT a phantom TD by refusing to overturn a clear down player at the end of the first half. The D stunk. Renfree was overpassing receivers like crazy, especially after the first drive.

But there were a few coaching mistakes that drove me mad.

#1: End of First Half, 2:30 left, 1st and Goal for Georgia Tech. We have 3 time outs left, GT has 1 or 2. GT runs down the clock and gets the TD....and DUKE ENDS THE HALF WITHOUT USING ANY OF ITS TIMEOUTS.
---Seriously, WHAT THE HELL CUT?! At that point in the game, time DOES NOT MATTER to Georgia Tech. They have a TO and can run 4 plays without running out of time; in fact they can do so exactly in a manner to use ALL of the time. So there is nearly NO downside (unless you expect us to commit a personal foul, DPI, or have an offensive turnover - but these are ridiculous things to be worried about) to calling your time-outs and giving your offense time to work before the half was over. Instead.....

#2: Duke calls timeout to avoid a delay of game as part of a long drive on 2nd down or so and brings in Boone....who throws an incomplete. All momentum is lost. Duke kicks a FG.

Just....sooo dumb. WHY?! TELL ME WHY!

[Gthoma2a]

It is disappointing to see all of these good teams we can play on the level with, but we have failed to beat any of them. We have a very good team, but our W-L just isn't showing it. Hopefully we learn how to get over the hump.

[uh_no]

Let's be clear here....this game wasn't lost by any particular group. The Refs stunk, giving GT a phantom TD by refusing to overturn a clear down player at the end of the first half. The D stunk. Renfree was overpassing receivers like crazy, especially after the first drive.

But there were a few coaching mistakes that drove me mad.

#1: End of First Half, 2:30 left, 1st and Goal for Georgia Tech. We have 3 time outs left, GT has 1 or 2. GT runs down the clock and gets the TD....and DUKE ENDS THE HALF WITHOUT USING ANY OF ITS TIMEOUTS.
---Seriously, WHAT THE HELL CUT?! At that point in the game, time DOES NOT MATTER to Georgia Tech. They have a TO and can run 4 plays without running out of time; in fact they can do so exactly in a manner to use ALL of the time. So there is nearly NO downside (unless you expect us to commit a personal foul, DPI, or have an offensive turnover - but these are ridiculous things to be worried about) to calling your time-outs and giving your offense time to work before the half was over. Instead.....

#2: Duke calls timeout to avoid a delay of game as part of a long drive on 2nd down or so and brings in Boone....who throws an incomplete. All momentum is lost. Duke kicks a FG.

Just....sooo dumb. WHY?! TELL ME WHY!

I think you're second guessing a bit here. It doesn't mean you're necessarily wrong, just that the decisions the coaches made here were certainly justifiable and imo, the coaches had a pretty good game. They can't make renfree overthrow receivers.....but we passed about 66% of the time (rough guess) much more than, say last week. and you know what? when we did run it, we had decent success....imagine that...

[Bob Green]

.....but we passed about 66% of the time (rough guess) much more than, say last week. and you know what? when we did run it, we had decent success....imagine that...

Well I will agree we ran the ball with success in the 1st half. Overall, we rushed 24 times for 101 yards, but considering we had 95 yards rushing at halftime, we did not have "decent success" in the 2nd half.

We passed 44 times so that is 64.7%, which makes your rough guess of 66% pretty darn close.

[loran16]

I think you're second guessing a bit here. It doesn't mean you're necessarily wrong, just that the decisions the coaches made here were certainly justifiable and imo, the coaches had a pretty good game. They can't make renfree overthrow receivers.....but we passed about 66% of the time (rough guess) much more than, say last week. and you know what? when we did run it, we had decent success....imagine that...

Please justify the avoiding time out decision. Seriously, try to do it.

(And as I said before, I didn't say the coaches lost this game. But those decisions were insanely stupid at the TIME. And in no way was any of it second guessing.)

[TheDevilMadeMeDoIt]

I came to this thread wondering how much griping there would be about the coaches. I was glad the answer was not too much. Some complaining about Renfree, but hey, he threw 4 touchdown passes. And give the Coaches credit for a great call on the 4th and 2 touchdown to Helfet. That was a great call and great execution. I believe these close losses are setting the stage for some good stuff next year. If we can beat the Heels, this will have been an okay year considering how many youngsters we played plus all the bad injuries. I believe we had the fewest noncompetitive games his year that I can remember in a long time. Before you can pass someone, you first have to get close, and we are getting closer every game. Go Devils!

[mkline09]

Really proud of the way the team came out and played. I was expecting a blow out but they fought hard and had a chance to win. I'm not going to go into all the reasons I think Duke lost but right now in honor of the seniors I want to tip my cap to them. They and everyone else could have mailed it in today but they didn't. They played their butts off. Hard to do when all you are playing for is pride. Glad they gave us some excitment against a quality opponent though I'd rather they have won. Hopefully they can go out and beat the heels and avoid the second strait 3 win season.

[uh_no]

Please justify the avoiding time out decision. Seriously, try to do it.

(And as I said before, I didn't say the coaches lost this game. But those decisions were insanely stupid at the TIME. And in no way was any of it second guessing.)

Okay....we call timeouts....then GT doesn't use theirs.....and ensures the clock runs out either way....

[loran16]

Okay....we call timeouts....then GT doesn't use theirs.....and ensures the clock runs out either way....

Nope. 2:30 left, they had first and goal. We call time outs, GT can't run out the clock without a penalty giving them a new set of downs.

GT only used its two timeouts to avoid delays of game, after running the play clock down to 0, not to save itself from running out of time.

And even if your situation was true, the downside of using TOs would still be 0, so it'd still be a wrong decision. But it's not the case.

[Bob Green]

On a positive note, David Helton (#47) a freshman linebacker and Jamal Wallace (#95) a redshift feshman defensive lineman both played really good games today. Redshift freshman defensive lineman Dez Johnson (#42) is another youngster on the defensive side of the ball who stood out today.

[uh_no]

Nope. 2:30 left, they had first and goal. We call time outs, GT can't run out the clock without a penalty giving them a new set of downs.

GT only used its two timeouts to avoid delays of game, after running the play clock down to 0, not to save itself from running out of time.

And even if your situation was true, the downside of using TOs would still be 0, so it'd still be a wrong decision. But it's not the case.

Okay

5 of our drives resulted in scores
4 of our drives were punts
1 of our drives was an interception

Seeing as we'd have to go the entire length of the field in <1 minute without any timeouts, we'd be passing down field and to the sidelines on every play. That being the case, our chances of actually scoring are pretty slim (well below the 50% of the rest of the game). Given that GT would pretty much know it was a pass to the sidelines on every down, the odds of an interception go way up (probably further increased by the fact that we have to rush the plays). In the end, the coaches decided that it probably wasn't worth it. I think there's nothing wrong with that.

Might another coach have wanted to take a shot? sure. but maybe coach wanted to get the team off the field and prepare for the second half rather than making an almost assuredly futile attempt at a last minute drive.

[Acymetric]

Okay

5 of our drives resulted in scores
4 of our drives were punts
1 of our drives was an interception

Seeing as we'd have to go the entire length of the field in <1 minute without any timeouts, we'd be passing down field and to the sidelines on every play. That being the case, our chances of actually scoring are pretty slim (well below the 50% of the rest of the game). Given that GT would pretty much know it was a pass to the sidelines on every down, the odds of an interception go way up (probably further increased by the fact that we have to rush the plays). In the end, the coaches decided that it probably wasn't worth it. I think there's nothing wrong with that.

Might another coach have wanted to take a shot? sure. but maybe coach wanted to get the team off the field and prepare for the second half rather than making an almost assuredly futile attempt at a last minute drive.

If we're talking about avoiding almost assuredly futile attempts why stop at going for a quick TD at the end of a half? Extrapolate that attitude further and we might not even suit up. You play because you have a shot (however slim for a given game) to win. You go for a TD at the end of a half because you've been suffering all season (and for half a century worth of seasons before that) and need to go for the win. Give the offense a shot at the hurry up in the 1st half. It was pretty clear we were going to need all the points we could get today...what if we had gotten a score there? No way to know, but it isn't just hindsight, I felt this way at the game too.

[loran16]

Okay

5 of our drives resulted in scores
4 of our drives were punts
1 of our drives was an interception

Seeing as we'd have to go the entire length of the field in <1 minute without any timeouts, we'd be passing down field and to the sidelines on every play. That being the case, our chances of actually scoring are pretty slim (well below the 50% of the rest of the game). Given that GT would pretty much know it was a pass to the sidelines on every down, the odds of an interception go way up (probably further increased by the fact that we have to rush the plays). In the end, the coaches decided that it probably wasn't worth it. I think there's nothing wrong with that.

Might another coach have wanted to take a shot? sure. but maybe coach wanted to get the team off the field and prepare for the second half rather than making an almost assuredly futile attempt at a last minute drive.

This is a team that is worse than most opponents. In order to win such games, you have to take risks. And it's not assuredly futile....we specialize in pass offense. Sure our odds of scoring are nil, but the odds of a costly turnover are near as low if played right. This is a low risk move.

The team CANNOT afford to be so conservative if it wants to win against better opponents. And yet it is. But this wasn't even conservative. This was GIVING UP on the half and praying things worked out in the second.

Just terrible. To quote Herm Edwards, you PLAY TO WIN THE GAME. Cutcliffe's strategy is often NOT TO LOSE. Which is incorrect.

[uh_no]

Just terrible. To quote Herm Edwards, you PLAY TO WIN THE GAME. Cutcliffe's strategy is often NOT TO LOSE. Which is incorrect.

I agree in principle, but quoting a guy who went 56-78 in the league for advice on how to win football games may not be the best idea :P

[loran16]

I agree in principle, but quoting a guy who went 56-78 in the league for advice on how to win football games may not be the best idea :P

Hey just because he was inept at actually doing what he said, doesn't make it a bad idea! (As a Jet fan, I agree). Also, 56-78 roughly translates to an average schedule of 5-7....which would be better than this season :-P (Different games, just playing with ya)

[arnie]

On the radio show, Kevin White said the football program was in great shape, on a solid foundation; now the team needed to catch up. Thought that was an interesting perspective - not sure if there was a "hidden" meaing or if its just AD speak.

[devildeac]

Let's be clear here....this game wasn't lost by any particular group. The Refs stunk, giving GT a phantom TD by refusing to overturn a clear down player at the end of the first half. The D stunk. Renfree was overpassing receivers like crazy, especially after the first drive.

But there were a few coaching mistakes that drove me mad.

#1: End of First Half, 2:30 left, 1st and Goal for Georgia Tech. We have 3 time outs left, GT has 1 or 2. GT runs down the clock and gets the TD....and DUKE ENDS THE HALF WITHOUT USING ANY OF ITS TIMEOUTS.
---Seriously, WHAT THE HELL CUT?! At that point in the game, time DOES NOT MATTER to Georgia Tech. They have a TO and can run 4 plays without running out of time; in fact they can do so exactly in a manner to use ALL of the time. So there is nearly NO downside (unless you expect us to commit a personal foul, DPI, or have an offensive turnover - but these are ridiculous things to be worried about) to calling your time-outs and giving your offense time to work before the half was over. Instead.....

#2: Duke calls timeout to avoid a delay of game as part of a long drive on 2nd down or so and brings in Boone....who throws an incomplete. All momentum is lost. Duke kicks a FG.

Just....sooo dumb. WHY?! TELL ME WHY!

Thank you for answering my question in advance/before we returned home from the game about the GT TD at the end of the 1st half:mad:.

[bluepenguin]

On the radio show, Kevin White said the football program was in great shape, on a solid foundation; now the team needed to catch up. Thought that was an interesting perspective - not sure if there was a "hidden" meaing or if its just AD speak.I am so tired of hearing that. Seems like every season we hear the team is on solid ground heading in the right direction! Maybe they should try heading in the wrong direction and see if that helps! ;)

[uh_no]

I am so tired of hearing that. Seems like every season we hear the team is on solid ground heading in the right direction! Maybe they should try heading in the wrong direction and see if that helps! ;)

Well, after before the VT game, I would have agreed. I thought that while we had improved over roof (obviously) we hadn't improved year to year under cut. What I saw against Vt though was incredible. We hung tough with a team we had absolutely no business being near. We did it again today. My duke football memory is short (doesn't it have to be if your a duke fball fan?) so someone let know if i'm wrong, but I can't remember a time over cuts tenure until this year that we have been in the game (and i mean...really in the game) against two teams we had absolutely no business being in the game with. Yeah we're still losing the close games...pretty much all of them and losing to teams we should beat.....but if the performances against stanford in the first half, VT and GT don't show that this team actually is better, then nothing but wins will. We've also been absolutely ravaged by injury....horribly...the o line, the defense....everywhere....and I think that lack of continuity is partially responsible for us not winning one or two more games.

The real question is, who is gonna kick next year :)

[Bob Green]

The real question is, who is gonna kick next year :)

Ross Martin.

[El_Diablo]

Okay

5 of our drives resulted in scores
4 of our drives were punts
1 of our drives was an interception

Seeing as we'd have to go the entire length of the field in <1 minute without any timeouts, we'd be passing down field and to the sidelines on every play. That being the case, our chances of actually scoring are pretty slim (well below the 50% of the rest of the game). Given that GT would pretty much know it was a pass to the sidelines on every down, the odds of an interception go way up (probably further increased by the fact that we have to rush the plays). In the end, the coaches decided that it probably wasn't worth it. I think there's nothing wrong with that.

Might another coach have wanted to take a shot? sure. but maybe coach wanted to get the team off the field and prepare for the second half rather than making an almost assuredly futile attempt at a last minute drive.

But even assuming that GT runs the same plays to burn as much time as possible and they use all four downs, we'd be able to stop the clock immediately after each one, so we should still have over 2 minutes left with fourth and goal. GT scores (either TD or FG), the clock stops again, they kick off, and we return it. So we have no timeouts, but still have about two minutes and only 60-80 yards to go, depending on how our return goes. That's plenty of time to get into FG range. And that's all true only if the coaches knew in advance that GT would take all four plays to score...but what if they had punched it in on 2nd or 3rd down? Then we'd have a little more time and 1-2 timeouts. Even better.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I just don't get it.

[DownEastDevil]

Proud to be one of the Duke fans in Wallace Wade today. I thought the guys left it all the field and competed even with all the injuries. Now let's go to Chapel Hill and stomp the Heels!

[OZZIE4DUKE]

On the radio show, Kevin White said the football program was in great shape, on a solid foundation; now the team needed to catch up. Thought that was an interesting perspective - not sure if there was a "hidden" meaing or if its just AD speak.
Last night, Michael Krzyzewski thanked Tom Butters for giving him the time to build his program. In basktetball, with only 5 players on the court, 7 - 8 playing and 12 on the team, that can be done in 4 to 5 years and one or two superstars. In football, with 11 players on the field, 22 to 30 and maybe 40 playing with subs and special teams, it takes longer. A lot longer - I'd say 6 to 7 years, such that when your third (preferably your fourth) recruiting class is your senior (redshirt senior) class and your fourth or fifth recruiting class is in their third (or fourth year) in the program, either as a redshirt sophomore or as a junior. Then you have your guys, mature physically and experienced on a par with the other top teams in the league and the country. When you are starting as the worst Division One football team in the country, you can't build it in four years. Just can't be done. You can't compare us to Stanford just because of the academics. It's not a fair comparison.

As was said just above, we are significantly better than we were four years ago. Losing hurts. Losing really stinks. Losing these close games hurts really bad and is frustrating to me, to you and even more so to the players and coaches, but it IS SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS FROM WHERE WE WERE. When Franks and Roof were the coach, we lamented, "why can't we field a competitive team?" Now, we are. They are just not quite good enough to win. They don't know how to win. They create their own bad luck, they make dumb mistakes at the worst time, they can't catch a break from the refs or the replay officials, the ball bounces the other teams' way every time, and we lose by 1, 3, 4 or 7 points (instead of by 10 or 20 or 30 points). But do you realize that we could have 7 wins right now? We don't, but realistically, if every possible break had gone our way, we could be 7 - 4. But "what could have been, was"*, and we're 3 - 8. But we are oh so close to being a winning team.

Have a little faith. Even a little optimism. And give Coach Cut the time it takes to do the job. And yes, it's another 3 years to do it completely.

*This is my favorite line from the book Semi-Tough. They left it out of the movie, which really ticked me off.

[OldPhiKap]

Last night, Michael Krzyzewski thanked Tom Butters for giving him the time to build his program. In basktetball, with only 5 players on the court, 7 - 8 playing and 12 on the team, that can be done in 4 to 5 years and one or two superstars. In football, with 11 players on the field, 22 to 30 and maybe 40 playing with subs and special teams, it takes longer. A lot longer - I'd say 6 to 7 years, such that when your third (preferably your fourth) recruiting class is your senior (redshirt senior) class and your fourth or fifth recruiting class is in their third (or fourth year) in the program, either as a redshirt sophomore or as a junior. Then you have your guys, mature physically and experienced on a par with the other top teams in the league and the country. When you are starting as the worst Division One football team in the country, you can't build it in four years. Just can't be done. You can't compare us to Stanford just because of the academics. It's not a fair comparison.

As was said just above, we are significantly better than we were four years ago. Losing hurts. Losing really stinks. Losing these close games hurts really bad and is frustrating to me, to you and even more so to the players and coaches, but it IS SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS FROM WHERE WE WERE. When Franks and Roof were the coach, we lamented, "why can't we field a competitive team?" Now, we are. They are just not quite good enough to win. They don't know how to win. They create their own bad luck, they make dumb mistakes at the worst time, they can't catch a break from the refs or the replay officials, the ball bounces the other teams' way every time, and we lose by 1, 3, 4 or 7 points (instead of by 10 or 20 or 30 points). But do you realize that we could have 7 wins right now? We don't, but realistically, if every possible break had gone our way, we could be 7 - 4. But "what could have been, was"*, and we're 3 - 8. But we are oh so close to being a winning team.

Have a little faith. Even a little optimism. And give Coach Cut the time it takes to do the job. And yes, it's another 3 years to do it completely.

*This is my favorite line from the book Semi-Tough. They left it out of the movie, which really ticked me off.


Preach it, Ozzie! This is exactly right.

[Olympic Fan]

I told assistant coach Ron Middleton what play to run on our first play from scrimmage on Saturday, with a request he pass it on to Coach Cut. I can assure you it was neither a run up the middle nor a lateral pass out to the flat, what they call a "bubble pass". We'll see if they take my advice.

So Ozzie ... I'm still not clear, did Cut run your play?

The first play of the game -- the end around to Donovan Varner --went for 39 yards and set up Duke's first TD.

Another heartbreaking loss -- we've had more of those than the Brooklyn Dodgers. But, hey, 1955 finally came for the Bums ... maybe 2012 will be the year for Duke.

I'm not ready to give up on Cut. He mentioned today that this senior class will be the winningest class at Duke since the 1995 seniors. That's progress. It's not enough and not where we want to be, but it's a step forward from where we were before he got here. Now the team has to take the next step and start winning its share of these close games.

I know the loser's battlecry is "Wait 'til next year" but we do return the great bulk of our team next year. We lose a great player in Matt Daniels and two good ones in Donovan Varner and Charlie Hatcher. Our young linemen will be bigger and stronger and older. Hopefully we won't be as wracked by injuries as we were this year.

I know I'm an optimist, but I'm willing to make next year Cut's put up or shut up year. I think he can end our bowl drought in 2012. If not, I'll join the chorus of those asking Kevin White to move on ... we'll thank Cut from lifting our program from the grave and try to find the guy to take it another step forward. But please hold your disappointment until next year.

Of course, it wouldn't hurt to end this season with a victory over the Evil Empire (I feel that way about their corrupt footbal program ... not so much about their basketball program).

[uh_no]

... maybe 2012 will be the year for Duke.


Throw out the record...forget about the losses......BRING HOME THE VICTORY BELL!!!

9F9F9F

[Bob Green]

I know I'm an optimist, but I'm willing to make next year Cut's put up or shut up year. I think he can end our bowl drought in 2012. If not, I'll join the chorus of those asking Kevin White to move on ... we'll thank Cut from lifting our program from the grave and try to find the guy to take it another step forward. But please hold your disappointment until next year.

Is five years enough? Considering where the program was, 4-42 over the four years preceding Coach Cutcliffe's arrival and 17-97 over the preceding ten years, perhaps Cutcliffe deserves a full seven years to turn things around. He has won 15 games in four years, which is 3.75 wins per season. With a win over Carolina next week, Coach Cutcliffe could improve to 4 wins per year. That's pretty good (but I agree not good enough) when compared to a 1.7 wins per year benchmark.

I am also concerned about who we could entice to come take his place. I don't want Duke to make the same mistake NCSU made when they drove Herb Sendek to Arizona State and ended up with Sidney Lowe as their coach because every qualified coach told them "No, thanks".

[jimsumner]

So Ozzie ... I'm still not clear, did Cut run your play?

I know the loser's battlecry is "Wait 'til next year" but we do return the great bulk of our team next year. We lose a great player in Matt Daniels and two good ones in Donovan Varner and Charlie Hatcher. Our young linemen will be bigger and stronger and older. Hopefully we won't be as wracked by injuries as we were this year.

).

I've addressed this before but I think it's a great point that can use some elaboration. In addition to the three players mentioned, we could add Helfet, Hill and Snyderwine to the senior list. Alex King, also. He's become an asset. That's about it. Guys like Jay Hollingsworth, Johnny Williams and Danny Parker gave it their all and represented Duke with class and dignity but they are all replaceable.

Duke returns every offensive lineman who played except Kyle Hill. Every wide out except Varner. Every running back except Hollingsworth, with Snead coming back. Every QB, including Renfree, who could challenge for 10,000 career passing yards; 9,000 is a lock, barring injury. Someone--Deaver, maybe Reeves has to take over at TE.

On D, Duke returns every DL except Hatcher, who I think might be Duke's most underrated player. Every LB of consequence. Most of the DBs, Daniels being the major loss.

Some question marks. I understand Lee Butler is expected to come back. Will Blakeney? TBD. Can Kenny Anunike recover from another knee surgery? Can Monday and Martin handle the kicking?

Duke redshirted the bulk of the freshmen class, including every lineman. Reeves, Kyler Brown, Lucas Patrick, Will Monday, Marcus Aprahamian and others are considered pretty good prospects. But Duke didn't panic. They're in this for the long haul.

Duke should be deeper next season, with more quality seniors and more quality juniors than before under Cut. Speed is being upgraded. Renfree and Vernon are going to be challenging some pretty impressive career marks, Duke and ACC.

So, yes, I'm a glass half-full guy. Another 3-9, 4-8 and I agree, we need to start having that conversation. Every player on the team is someone Cut and his staff recruited. The infrastructure improvements aren't a mirage, there have been real salary upgrades. I'm optimistic that this program is heading in the right direction and I fully expect that to be evident in the 2012 bottom line.

[Indoor66]

I've addressed this before but I think it's a great point that can use some elaboration. In addition to the three players mentioned, we could add Helfet, Hill and Snyderwine to the senior list. Alex King, also. He's become an asset. That's about it. Guys like Jay Hollingsworth, Johnny Williams and Danny Parker gave it their all and represented Duke with class and dignity but they are all replaceable.

Duke returns every offensive lineman who played except Kyle Hill. Every wide out except Varner. Every running back except Hollingsworth, with Snead coming back. Every QB, including Renfree, who could challenge for 10,000 career passing yards; 9,000 is a lock, barring injury. Someone--Deaver, maybe Reeves has to take over at TE.

On D, Duke returns every DL except Hatcher, who I think might be Duke's most underrated player. Every LB of consequence. Most of the DBs, Daniels being the major loss.

Some question marks. I understand Lee Butler is expected to come back. Will Blakeney? TBD. Can Kenny Anunike recover from another knee surgery? Can Monday and Martin handle the kicking?

Duke redshirted the bulk of the freshmen class, including every lineman. Reeves, Kyler Brown, Lucas Patrick, Will Monday, Marcus Aprahamian and others are considered pretty good prospects. But Duke didn't panic. They're in this for the long haul.

Duke should be deeper next season, with more quality seniors and more quality juniors than before under Cut. Speed is being upgraded. Renfree and Vernon are going to be challenging some pretty impressive career marks, Duke and ACC.

So, yes, I'm a glass half-full guy. Another 3-9, 4-8 and I agree, we need to start having that conversation. Every player on the team is someone Cut and his staff recruited. The infrastructure improvements aren't a mirage, there have been real salary upgrades. I'm optimistic that this program is heading in the right direction and I fully expect that to be evident in the 2012 bottom line.

You state well a point I tried to make in another thread. Football teams have to go at least three deep at each position to succeed over a season. It must be quality depth - almost no fall off in substitutions. It takes years to build this type of continuum of talent. I see Cut building to this but it will take several more years to reach that level of program wide talent. You don't win in football with 22 good players!

[Reilly]

.... Now the team has to take the next step and start winning its share of these close games.....

+21 Tulane
+04 @FIU
+01 @BC
-01 WFU
-02 UR
-04 VT
-07 GT
-10 @VA
-25 FSU
-30 Stanford
-35 @Miami

We're 2-4 in one score games. Our share presumably would be 3-3. We were predicted as a 4-win team w/ a shot at 6 ... and that's what we've played like .... w/ a bit of bad luck and injury and under-peformance and whatnot so that we may well end up as a 3-win team ... we're still basically on the right path ... couple breaks or bit more better play, and we'd be further down that path ... but still on that path ... our record's no better than '08, '09, '10 ... but we'll have more coming back next year than we had in those other years ... 7/11 of our games this year have been wins or close losses ... that number was 58% for 2008-2010 ... could be 8/12 after next week ... win next week and it would do a *world* of good, in my opinion ....

[ArkieDukie]

I told assistant coach Ron Middleton what play to run on our first play from scrimmage on Saturday, with a request he pass it on to Coach Cut. I can assure you it was neither a run up the middle nor a lateral pass out to the flat, what they call a "bubble pass". We'll see if they take my advice.

Ironically, Ozzie, I was wondering in chat if you had locked Coach Roper away somewhere and were acting as offensive coordinator during our first possession. Did they run your play?

[killerleft]

This is a team that is worse than most opponents. In order to win such games, you have to take risks. And it's not assuredly futile....we specialize in pass offense. Sure our odds of scoring are nil, but the odds of a costly turnover are near as low if played right. This is a low risk move.

The team CANNOT afford to be so conservative if it wants to win against better opponents. And yet it is. But this wasn't even conservative. This was GIVING UP on the half and praying things worked out in the second.

Just terrible. To quote Herm Edwards, you PLAY TO WIN THE GAME. Cutcliffe's strategy is often NOT TO LOSE. Which is incorrect.

Ok, here's your reasons for not stopping the clock, and then please quit the silliness!

1) We call the timeouts, get the ball with 2:10 left from inside the 5, because we stopped them on 4 downs. GT (which didn't have to use its timeouts since we so nicely called the wonderful things for them) then can stop us on downs and get the ball back in our territory with time to score. Not enough to change your mind?

2) We get the ball back after stopping them on downs on our one, GT makes a defensive play for a safety and 2 points! Not enough to change your mind?

3) GT scores on any down, we receive the ball but can't move it, GT uses their timeouts (or our incomplete passes as we try to score stops it for them) to get the ball and scores again! Still not feeling queasy about your great decision to use those timeouts? Well...

4) As you mentioned, any penalty that gives GT a new first down now leaves them with extra time to score. Still not happy?

5) The odds of scoring if we stop them inside the 5 are much lower than the odds that we'll either not score or throw an interception or fumble the ball.

Again, what are the great advantages to using all our timeouts? Go ahead, let us know what they are again. Remember, you can't just I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. because we lost the game. You have to be able to justify your actions. Anything can happen. But it is pretty clear (at least to me) that only if GT scores a touchdown do we get the ball back with any real chance to score. And even then, the odds are better that GT will SCORE AGAIN, not that we will retaliate!

Game, set, and match to not calling timeouts!! Class dismissed.

[Acymetric]

Ok, here's your reasons for not stopping the clock, and then please quit the silliness!

1) We call the timeouts, get the ball with 2:10 left from inside the 5, because we stopped them on 4 downs. GT (which didn't have to use its timeouts since we so nicely called the wonderful things for them) then can stop us on downs and get the ball back in our territory with time to score. Not enough to change your mind?

2) We get the ball back after stopping them on downs on our one, GT makes a defensive play for a safety and 2 points! Not enough to change your mind?

3) GT scores on any down, we receive the ball but can't move it, GT uses their timeouts (or our incomplete passes as we try to score stops it for them) to get the ball and scores again! Still not feeling queasy about your great decision to use those timeouts? Well...

4) As you mentioned, any penalty that gives GT a new first down now leaves them with extra time to score. Still not happy?

5) The odds of scoring if we stop them inside the 5 are much lower than the odds that we'll either not score or throw an interception or fumble the ball.

Again, what are the great advantages to using all our timeouts? Go ahead, let us know what they are again. Remember, you can't just I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this. because we lost the game. You have to be able to justify your actions. Anything can happen. But it is pretty clear (at least to me) that only if GT scores a touchdown do we get the ball back with any real chance to score. And even then, the odds are better that GT will SCORE AGAIN, not that we will retaliate!

Game, set, and match to not calling timeouts!! Class dismissed.

All of your scenarios imply the same thing: we aren't competent enough to play either offense or defense when it counts. If that's really the case, and neither our offense nor our defense can be trusted I wish the coaches would have told me before the game so I could have slept in and stayed warm rather than showing up for the devil walk. This is more of the same, playing not to lose. We were going to lose, that was clear after GT was on their way to their 2nd TD with no real resistance. How could we win? Take chances, high risk high reward. We went low ristk/low reward and our low reward wasn't enough to win. Maybe if we called the game like winners our players would play that way. Our coaches have a habit of throwing in the towel at the end of the 2nd quarter rather than try to put up points, and nobody will ever be able to convince me that there isn't a negative effect on team mentality because of that.

[Olympic Fan]

+21 Tulane
+04 @FIU
+01 @BC
-01 WFU
-02 UR
-04 VT
-07 GT
-10 @VA
-25 FSU
-30 Stanford
-35 @Miami

We're 2-4 in one score games. Our share presumably would be 3-3. We were predicted as a 4-win team w/ a shot at 6 ... and that's what we've played like .... w/ a bit of bad luck and injury and under-peformance and whatnot so that we may well end up as a 3-win team ... we're still basically on the right path ... couple breaks or bit more better play, and we'd be further down that path ... but still on that path ... our record's no better than '08, '09, '10 ... but we'll have more coming back next year than we had in those other years ... 7/11 of our games this year have been wins or close losses ... that number was 58% for 2008-2010 ... could be 8/12 after next week ... win next week and it would do a *world* of good, in my opinion ....

technically you are right ... but there's more to it than that.

We were darned lucky to win the Boston College game when a game-winning field goal clanked off the upright. But the way Duke dominatedf the second half, it should not have come down to that field goal -- Duke should have won going away. The same is true of the Wake game that we lost -- we gave up one first down in the second half and lost.

I know you can't win every close game, but when I look at the Richmond game, the Wake game, the Virginia Tech game, the Virginia game and the Georgia Tech game -- coupled with the FIU game that did deserve to be a close game, I think Duke should have won 2 or 3 more games than they did. And the same is true of last year when he could have/should have won the Wake game, the Maryland game (which should not have been close), the Georgia Tech game, the Boston College game and the UNC game. We did win a close game against Virginia that WAS close, but we also won a close game against Navy that shouldn't have been close.

All I'm saying is that as bad as the record looks, Duke is not that far away from being a competitive football team. In my more giddy moments, I imagine winning every game this year that we could have, should have won -- Richmond, Wake, Virginia Tech, Virginia and Georgia Tech. Do that and we're 8-3 and 5-2 ACC and playing UNC to win a spot in the ACC championship game (we'd have the tiebreaker on 5-2 Virginia Tech).

Now, I know that's not realistic, but I think if this team had done a reasonable job of converting its performance into victories, we'd be talking about which bowl we were going to.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

So Ozzie ... I'm still not clear, did Cut run your play?

The first play of the game -- the end around to Donovan Varner --went for 39 yards and set up Duke's first TD.


Of course, it wouldn't hurt to end this season with a victory over the Evil Empire (I feel that way about their corrupt football program ... not so much about their basketball program).
No, but we did in the 4th quarter! Essentially, I was pleading for a mid-range passing game, passes/patterns long enough (usually) to get a first down before the run, in the 12 - 18 yard range. Specifically, I asked for a 15 yard pass play. When we had 2nd and 20 in the 4th quarter, I said we need to get 15 back, and Renfree threw to Vernon for exactly 15! Then we got 8 on the next pass for the first down!

We actually discovered this tactic today! Renfree repeatedly threw mid-range passes today, especially in the second half! It only took us 11 damn games! If only we had done this in September... or better yet, August!

As for the first play, the end around to Varner, I approve. It was something creatively different! It wasn't a run up the middle or a bubble pass to the flats! Of course, the next half dozen times we tried to run it (mostly with Vernon) it went for essentially no gain. Maybe we need to add a reverse to the playbook next week...

Next week? YES! Let's beat those cheatin' sumI'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.es! Bring home that Bell! :cool:

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Ironically, Ozzie, I was wondering in chat if you had locked Coach Roper away somewhere and were acting as offensive coordinator during our first possession. Did they run your play?
Obviously not to your first question, but see my post above as to your second!

[sagegrouse]

Or did it fade away when Gabby Hayes died?

If not, the touchdown call at the end of the first half was the most lily-livered, yellow-bellied, cowardly call I have ever seen in college football. It was absolutely clear from the end-zone shot that Tech's Emery Peeples had his knee on the ground at the two-yard line. Ergo, the ball could not have been in the end zone.

The play on the field was cowardly, in that the linesman assumed that he was gonna score, saw him slide into the pylon, and called a TD. The failure to overturn in the booth was not only cowardly, but dastardly. It was a call that reeked an attitude of, "Duke's gonna lose; let's don't upset the applecart. The Georgia Tech fans will scream bloody murder; the Duke fans will just put their heads down and shuffle away."

The game announcers and the studio host (Terry Bowden) were not afraid to call it the way they saw it. It was just the impartial arbiters on the field and in the booth that failed the test.

sagegrouse

[killerleft]

All of your scenarios imply the same thing: we aren't competent enough to play either offense or defense when it counts. If that's really the case, and neither our offense nor our defense can be trusted I wish the coaches would have told me before the game so I could have slept in and stayed warm rather than showing up for the devil walk. This is more of the same, playing not to lose. We were going to lose, that was clear after GT was on their way to their 2nd TD with no real resistance. How could we win? Take chances, high risk high reward. We went low ristk/low reward and our low reward wasn't enough to win. Maybe if we called the game like winners our players would play that way. Our coaches have a habit of throwing in the towel at the end of the 2nd quarter rather than try to put up points, and nobody will ever be able to convince me that there isn't a negative effect on team mentality because of that.

Um-hmm. So you would take the ball on the one with 99 yards to go with two minutes left in the half rather than go to the locker room not having to deal with that? Not many teams would. You can rah-rah all you want, but we don't have an offense set up to batter the opponent's defensive line with three safe runs to get a first down. Brave and aggressive had an almost certain three point downside to it there. Add in that we're gonna have to probably try a pass or two and the odds of disaster go up accordingly. This was the end of the first half, not the game. OF COURSE we might have gone the 99 yards, but the risk was way too large that, at best, we make a first down without any use of timeouts, and try a Hail Mary pass from our own 15.

High risk from inside your ten (I couldn't tell at the time, but some have said we should have gotten the ball back just outside our goal line according to the review of the TD play) is only for end of game situations, when there is no choice. As the game played out, Duke had a chance to tie or win. What would have been the cost if we had been the architects of our own ruin at the end of the half?

[killerleft]

Or did it fade away when Gabby Hayes died?

If not, the touchdown call at the end of the first half was the most lily-livered, yellow-bellied, cowardly call I have ever seen in college football. It was absolutely clear from the end-zone shot that Tech's Emery Peeples had his knee on the ground at the two-yard line. Ergo, the ball could not have been in the end zone.

The play on the field was cowardly, in that the linesman assumed that he was gonna score, saw him slide into the pylon, and called a TD. The failure to overturn in the booth was not only cowardly, but dastardly. It was a call that reeked an attitude of, "Duke's gonna lose; let's don't upset the applecart. The Georgia Tech fans will scream bloody murder; the Duke fans will just put their heads down and shuffle away."

The game announcers and the studio host (Terry Bowden) were not afraid to call it the way they saw it. It was just the impartial arbiters on the field and in the booth that failed the test.

sagegrouse

I don't know about any referee bias, but I believe you are correct that the replay refs didn't fully analyze the info available from the replays. Though no angle gave a clear-cut view of the knee-down and arm-reach of the runner, by comparing the two best replays it is obvious that the ball had not been reached out far enough to allow the guy to score before his knee touched the ground. His arms were only half-extended when his knee touched. Only the full extension allowed him to brush the pylon on his way out of bounds.

[Reilly]

technically you are right ... but there's more to it than that.

We were darned lucky to win the Boston College game when a game-winning field goal clanked off the upright. But the way Duke dominatedf the second half, it should not have come down to that field goal -- Duke should have won going away. The same is true of the Wake game that we lost -- we gave up one first down in the second half and lost.

I know you can't win every close game, but when I look at the Richmond game, the Wake game, the Virginia Tech game, the Virginia game and the Georgia Tech game -- coupled with the FIU game that did deserve to be a close game, I think Duke should have won 2 or 3 more games than they did. And the same is true of last year when he could have/should have won the Wake game, the Maryland game (which should not have been close), the Georgia Tech game, the Boston College game and the UNC game. We did win a close game against Virginia that WAS close, but we also won a close game against Navy that shouldn't have been close.

All I'm saying is that as bad as the record looks, Duke is not that far away from being a competitive football team. In my more giddy moments, I imagine winning every game this year that we could have, should have won -- Richmond, Wake, Virginia Tech, Virginia and Georgia Tech. Do that and we're 8-3 and 5-2 ACC and playing UNC to win a spot in the ACC championship game (we'd have the tiebreaker on 5-2 Virginia Tech).

Now, I know that's not realistic, but I think if this team had done a reasonable job of converting its performance into victories, we'd be talking about which bowl we were going to.

Gregg Easterbrook (espn's Tuesday Morning QB) had a column a couple weeks ago that touches on some of your post -- he takes to task fans who blame the team for "blowing a lead". When we fans say Duke "should" have won easily, we're engaging in the same sort of analysis that Easterbrook would fault.

http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/story/_/id/7056133/tmq-says-nfl-comebacks-losing-team-lost-lead

As the title says, victories, even comebacks, are earned. I would say close losses, even ones where we played really well for certain stretches, are equally earned. The game is 60 minutes. Against WFU, we didn't punch it in on the goal line, and then we didn't tackle a WR and allowed a 66-yd catch and run. We earned that close loss.

We could easily be -- not should be, but could be -- 1-10 right now: BC makes an extra point, basically, and JDO doesn't get a paw on the ball at FIU, and we're sitting at 1-10.

On the other hand, we could be -- not should be, but could be -- 6-5 or 8-3 right now, if we'd just done a few more things, or a few more things went our way. So, 1-10 or 8-3.

We are what we should be: 3-8. 3-8 teams turn the ball over twice in their own territory and miss short FGs against mediocre I-AA teams and lose ... 3-8 teams don't punch it in on the goal line and give up long TD passes instead of breaking an 11-year losing streak ... 3-8 teams get the dropsies in Charlottesville ... 3-8 teams allow option QBs to run to the short side of the field, through nearly every defender, and scamper to the endzone.

All that being said, I agree with your bottom line analysis: "All I'm saying is that as bad as the record looks, Duke is not that far away from being a competitive football team." In fact, I'll go you one better: we *are* a competitive football team. If we can beat UNC or lose by 1 score or less, then 8 of our 12 games will have been either a win or a 1-score or less loss this year (67%). Each of the past 3 years, we had 7 of 12 as a win or close loss (58% over the 3-years). In the 3 years before Cut, only 25% of our games were a win or a close loss. We've gone from having a chance 1 out of 4 Saturdays to having a chance 2 out of every 3 Saturdays. Massive improvement. Looking at wins + close losses percentage allows us to take into account the vagaries of the game, the bad bounces, the dumb luck.

In the end, I'm in the tank for Cut ... I'm on the bus ... I believe we *are* a competitve team ... and I *also* believe we have won our fair share (or nearly our fair share) of our close games this year and that we have earned our record.