More Mullin Time Management 17up

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

Why go for 2? Why burn a TO to go for 2? No reason not to have 3 TO for the last few minutes of the game.

Same ole “pretty good but not great” coach.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

I understand going for 2, but not a timeout. I missed the timeout call

 

[natchezdawg]

My guess is he was going to go for 2 at some point..

with no intention of going to OT. Liked his chances then.

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

with no intention of going to OT. Liked his chances then.

That makes no sense. Instead of having the ball with a minute to play you play for no OT down 14

 

[Lawdawg.sixpack]

And if you don’t get it the first time, you can still get it the second for the tie. I like that call instead of kicking first, then going all or nothing.

But if he spent a timeout to do it, he’s a dubmass.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

Their defense was gassed and Bama has the better rushing game. Huge advantage for Bama in OT

 

[Drebin]

I understand going for 2, but not a timeout. I missed the timeout call

The decision to go for two in that situation is one of the most baffling coaching decisions in the history of organized football. Seriously.

Lucky for Florida they got it. Unfortunately they had to burn a TO.

Mullen did a lot of things well and I miss him here at times, but good Lord, I sure don't miss inexplicable garbage like that.

 

[FlotownDawg]

It’s analytics. It makes sense if you think about it. You go for two to try and get where a TD and extra point win the game because you don’t want OT. But even if you miss it, you still get another chance to go for two and tie the game after your next touchdown. If you’re planning on going for two at some point, you might as well go for it after the first TD. However, wasting a timeout in that situation was inexcusable. Mullen should have known he was going for two and had a play call ready.

 

[8dog]

The entire game of football is moving towards going for 2 there. Calling TO to do it is dumb

 

[ronpolk]

Why go for 2? Why burn a TO to go for 2? No reason not to have 3 TO for the last few minutes of the game.

Same ole “pretty good but not great” coach.

Dan Mullen lives rent free in a lot of heads on this board. For the life of me, I’ll never understand why some on here dislike him so much (as a coach, I get why you dislike his personality).

 

[ronpolk]

The entire game of football is moving towards going for 2 there. Calling TO to do it is dumb

Yeah, you’re seeing that more and more now. I thought in Florida’s case it made sense because the only chance they had to win the game was by not letting bama back on offense. Get the 2 and an onside kick was their best path to win

 

[Drebin]

It’s analytics. It makes sense if you think about it. You go for two to try and get where a TD and extra point win the game because you don’t want OT. But even if you miss it, you still get another chance to go for two and tie the game after your next touchdown. If you’re planning on going for two at some point, you might as well go for it after the first TD. However, wasting a timeout in that situation was inexcusable. Mullen should have known he was going for two and had a play call ready.

It doesn't make sense at all. It's remedial math. It ended up not mattering so we're probably just wasting time, but imagine your team going for two in that situation and not making it. Then getting another score and needing the two JUST TO TIE THE GAME. Against Alabama. After you were unsuccessful the last time.

It was an indefensibly idiotic decision. Any analytic that suggests it's a good idea is garbage. But like I said, it ended up not mattering anyway, so Mullen probably doesn't have to worry about getting asked what the hell he was thinking about it.

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

Yeah, you’re seeing that more and more now. I thought in Florida’s case it made sense because the only chance they had to win the game was by not letting bama back on offense. Get the 2 and an onside kick was their best path to win

Not at the expense of 45
Seconds

 

[jethreauxdawg]

I’m guessing the thought process was getting another score is a very remote chance, and if by some miracle that happens, we won’t have enough gas for OT. Let’s take our chances now. If we get stopped and still get another score, we can try again. With a team that is moving the ball they were, converting 1/2 was gonna happen, if you get the first, you can win with a xp next time. Not much of a downside for them. But wasting a TO was inexcusable

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

“We just needed a little more time there at the end”

-Dan Mullin

 

[DoggieDaddy13]

For the life of me, I’ll never understand why some on here dislike him so much (as a coach, I get why you dislike his personality).

He's like the girlfriend you once had that was pretty hot but always looking for another guy and finally ran off with one. It's a very real psychological phenomenon. Some folks can never really let it go. EVER....

Dan is a strong coach, really moved the MSU program forward, but he really should have left a couple of years earlier. We'd all be better off.

 

[SyonaraStanz]

Why is no one talking about his idiotic clock management at the end of the first half? They were snapping the ball with 20+ seconds on the play clock and scoring, leaving Bammer enough time to get a score before the half. Milk the clock, dumbass.

 

[Msubulldogfan1]

Dan Mullen lives rent free in a lot of heads on this board. For the life of me, I’ll never understand why some on here dislike him so much (as a coach, I get why you dislike his personality).

Well, it’s an easy thing to understand really. They’re mad he left us and will always be jealous when he’s successful at other places.

Personally, I’m at a point when I’m just 17ing grateful he was here for 9 years and what he did. Of course, they’re were certainly times he pissed me off and didn’t do the right thing imo. Like the 14 EB loss.

 

[Russ Wheeler]

He will never take the next step as a coach until he turns loose of the playcalling so he can focus on the general duties of the game. Of course, he does so many things well that it is easy to focus on his shortcomings, as they are usually on display at big moments in big games. Just a few tweaks here and there would turn him into an elite level coach but he’s just so stubborn.

 

[djt159]

It doesn't make sense at all. It's remedial math. It ended up not mattering so we're probably just wasting time, but imagine your team going for two in that situation and not making it. Then getting another score and needing the two JUST TO TIE THE GAME. Against Alabama. After you were unsuccessful the last time.

It was an indefensibly idiotic decision. Any analytic that suggests it's a good idea is garbage. But like I said, it ended up not mattering anyway, so Mullen probably doesn't have to worry about getting asked what the hell he was thinking about it.

This is the most idiotic spit in the face of "remedial" that i have ever seen. You, sir, do not know math. At freaking all.

Lets take basic probability here. Say Florida has a 50% chance of getting the 2 pt and a 50% chance of winning the game in OT if it goes there. And for convenience sake we will say 100% chance of making the XP there to make the math even more remedial for you.

So we take your method. 100% XP 1. 100% XP 2. 50% OT win. Your method gets a 50% Win chance.

Now we take the 2 point method. 50% good. 100% XP 2. 50% of the time win in regulation.

Then 50% miss 2 pt. 50% make 2pt 2. 50% win in OT. 12.5% of the time win in OT. That means a total winning percentage of 62.5%. 62.5% > 50%. Go for 2.

The only way you do NOT go for two is if. your OT win % >>>> you 2 point conversion percentage. Which, let's face it, there should be no reason you think your OT win % is higher in this scenario than your ability to get 3 yards on your best play. If there is then you are overestimating your win % in OT. Period.

 

[ronpolk]

Not at the expense of 45
Seconds

I do agree with that. Taking the time out there was terrible. Certainly changed the way that last drive played out.

 

[ronpolk]

He will never take the next step as a coach until he turns loose of the playcalling so he can focus on the general duties of the game. Of course, he does so many things well that it is easy to focus on his shortcomings, as they are usually on display at big moments in big games. Just a few tweaks here and there would turn him into an elite level coach but he’s just so stubborn.

I don’t disagree with any of that. But I can understand why he wants play calling, it’s certainly what he does best. But he would be better off to focus on other aspects of the game.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

Or stick to what he does best and let someone else manage timeouts and remind him how a clock works. That’s the easy part. Why is he so bad at that?

 

[tcdog70]

Before the game starts a good coach already knows what his “go for 2” play is. Calling a timeout is just stupid. What else is stupid is leaving time on the clock at just before half. That is the decision that lost the game. Dan is going to Dan.

 

[Russ Wheeler]

I don’t disagree with any of that. But I can understand why he wants play calling, it’s certainly what he does best. But he would be better off to focus on other aspects of the game.

Dude Mullen wasn’t a great playcaller. Not awful, but not great. He was an excellent game planner and organizer.

He’s micromanaging.

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

Before the game starts a good coach already knows what his “go for 2” play is. Calling a timeout is just stupid. What else is stupid is leaving time on the clock at just before half. That is the decision that lost the game. Dan is going to Dan.

Again he’s arrogant and lazy - smartest
Guy in the room according the him. Don’t question the great hunchback.

If he was a great coach with a great system,
Read saban, then he would have an OC to work
On that plan. Instead he’s arrogant and believes everyone else are morons. This is the reason he can’t keep
A DC

 

[Msubulldogfan1]

This is the most idiotic spit in the face of "remedial" that i have ever seen. You, sir, do not know math. At freaking all.

Lets take basic probability here. Say Florida has a 50% chance of getting the 2 pt and a 50% chance of winning the game in OT if it goes there. And for convenience sake we will say 100% chance of making the XP there to make the math even more remedial for you.

So we take your method. 100% XP 1. 100% XP 2. 50% OT win. Your method gets a 50% Win chance.

Now we take the 2 point method. 50% good. 100% XP 2. 50% of the time win in regulation.

Then 50% miss 2 pt. 50% make 2pt 2. 50% win in OT. 12.5% of the time win in OT. That means a total winning percentage of 62.5%. 62.5% > 50%. Go for 2.

The only way you do NOT go for two is if. your OT win % >>>> you 2 point conversion percentage. Which, let's face it, there should be no reason you think your OT win % is higher in this scenario than your ability to get 3 yards on your best play. If there is then you are overestimating your win % in OT. Period.

But to me, it’s a little more complicated than that.

What is UFs 2 point conversion % this year? Do they have a good play? What has Bamas defense done against 2 point conversions?

 

[Lawdawg.sixpack]

It doesn't make sense at all. It's remedial math. It ended up not mattering so we're probably just wasting time, but imagine your team going for two in that situation and not making it. Then getting another score and needing the two JUST TO TIE THE GAME. Against Alabama. After you were unsuccessful the last time.

You’re missing the main premise - that Dan intended to go for 2 for the win, had he scored 2 TDs. If you go for 2 on the second TD and don’t get it, you’re done. But if you go for it on the first one and don’t get it, you can still at least get to OT if you get it on the second.

Obviously, if you’re playing for OT, then it makes no sense to go for 2 either time. And you certainly can’t use a timeout there.

 

[Apoplectic_Objurgator]

You’re missing the main premise - that Dan intended to go for 2 for the win, had he scored 2 TDs. If you go for 2 on the second TD and don’t get it, you’re done. But if you go for it on the first one and don’t get it, you can still at least get to OT if you get it on the second.

Obviously, if you’re playing for OT, then it makes no sense to go for 2 either time. And you certainly can’t use a timeout there.

Yep 2 pt plan makes sense. Certainly a coaching failure on the 2 pt plan. They should be practicing their 2 pt plays every day