FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[sigma one]

I will take the other side. By kicking on 3rd down, H-SC avoided the possibility of another sack when the Wabash defense was revved up, negated the potential for a demoralizing turnover deep in their own territory,  denied Wabash the chance of an all-out punt block, went away from the tight punt formation that would have been necessary and a potential return when the gunners could not get after the returner.  They gained about 40 yards and took a shaky offense at that point off the field for some recovery time.
     I appreciate the opposite point of view, what with Nance and Walker as that potent a combo.  But all in all I thought it a smart, calculated play.  I didn't, and don't, see it as waiving a white flag or signifying a lack of confidence.  I thought they played the odds--even when taking into account the advantages Wally and Wabco mention.
     As an aside.  I go back far enough to a time when a third down punt in some situations, usually a quick kick, was not all that unusual to turn the field and avoid the punt rush or big return  It is only in relatively (football has been around a long time) recent times when coaches (fans) have taken the third-down punt tactic as a sign of weakness.  Ego has some involvement here, as coaches avoid the "chicken" label, and big-play offenses in the passing game become more prominent.

[Wabash Hokie]

Wabco - I agree with you from a Wabash standpoint.  I saw it as a white flag as well.  Given the plays immediately prior to the down, the HSC o-line was overwhelmed.   What was omitted from the "scenarios" mentioned was a likely safety (either a sack or holding penalty in the end zone) on 3 and forever.  I don't think Nash would have had time to throw it that far down field.  The Wabash guys were simply breathing fire - it was impressive.

However, I think HSC saw an opportunity to get a guaranteed way to get off the field with the best possible outcome given the circumstance and let the defense try to back them up.

[sigma one]

To play this out even more . . .Here is some context on the third-down kick.
     The H-SC previous possession had ended with E. Buresh returning a Nance interception for a TD.  Some momentum to Wabash. 
     The H-SC possession began with a KO-return to only the 10-yard line. More momentum to Wabash.
     First play:  pass for minus 5 yards.  Wabash personal foul moves the ball to the 20.  OOPS.
     Next Play--1st down:  NN sacked for minus 6 yards to H-SC 14.  Wabash taking back momentum.
     2nd down:  NN sacked for loss 10 yards to H-SC 4. Wabash gaining more momentum.
     3rd down:  The kick from Nance, a 49-yard kick with no return.
So, H-SC gains 49 yards on the exchange of possession and gets out of deep hole after two consecutive sacks.
Indeed, Nance could have tried to throw to Walker; that's a legitimate way to look at the options. I still believe that tactically the H-SC coach made a good decision because it is not unusual for H-SC to use Nance as a kicker.  He is not exactly a novice at executing the kick, and last year averaged about 35 yards a punt.  To look ahead:  after the kick, Wabash ended up with the ball just on the Wabash side of the 50.  The Wabash possession resulted in a 39 yard FG by Tutsie.  So, the Tiger defense forced Wabash to kick a fairly long field goal.
     

     

[HCAlum86]

Was at the Hiram vs. Westminster game this weekend. My Terriers overcame a 20+ point deficit in the third quarter to come back and win the game! Could not have been more proud of our offense in the second-half. Partridge and Stamford really do make an excellent pair with the dichotomy of knowledge of the game vs demand of the game. Excellent to see.

Should be an interesting matchup again this weekend. Hopefully Hiram will put the points up to come away with a victory against Denison! Traditionally, Hiram has been able to put up some points against the Big Red, but never made much of a habit of stopping them defensively. I like what I see, and I think we're looking at a 31-28 type of game here.

Proud of the Terriers, can't wait for Saturday.

[smedindy]

The quick kick can be a smart play and I think this one was smart - not a surrender or white flag but good strategy.

[firstdown]

To play this out even more . . .Here is some context on the third-down kick.
     The H-SC previous possession had ended with E. Buresh returning a Nance interception for a TD.  Some momentum to Wabash. 
     The H-SC possession began with a KO-return to only the 10-yard line. More momentum to Wabash.
     First play:  pass for minus 5 yards.  Wabash personal foul moves the ball to the 20.  OOPS.
     Next Play--1st down:  NN sacked for minus 6 yards to H-SC 14.  Wabash taking back momentum.
     2nd down:  NN sacked for loss 10 yards to H-SC 4. Wabash gaining more momentum.
     3rd down:  The kick from Nance, a 49-yard kick with no return.
So, H-SC gains 49 yards on the exchange of possession and gets out of deep hole after two consecutive sacks.
Indeed, Nance could have tried to throw to Walker; that's a legitimate way to look at the options. I still believe that tactically the H-SC coach made a good decision because it is not unusual for H-SC to use Nance as a kicker.  He is not exactly a novice at executing the kick, and last year averaged about 35 yards a punt.  To look ahead:  after the kick, Wabash ended up with the ball just on the Wabash side of the 50.  The Wabash possession resulted in a 39 yard FG by Tutsie.  So, the Tiger defense forced Wabash to kick a fairly long field goal.
     

I agree that this was a smart strategy and certainly no white flag.  Wabash was on fire at that moment and another pick 6 would have meant it was time for Dandy Don to start signing about turning out the lights, the party's over.  The quick kick strategy is akin to a well placed time out when a team is on a run in basketball, and designed to break the negative momentum flow.
   

[bashbrother]

Context of the plays leading up to it does makes it a little more palatable for me.   He simply wanted to get his offense off the field and regroup. I totally get this. But you still have to think that Coach Hammer and the players on defense were pretty satisfied when it occurred.   Now the goal for this defense is to get a team to quick kick on 2nd down. 

[USee]

Wes, isn't 5 man pressure more about whipping people across from you than scheme? Not many schemes work when the other guy beats you

Yes and no. If you're just going to play me straight up as a defense, meaning that you bring dudes in the gaps they line up in, then yes. It's about who's got the bigger stones. But, the more games you use as a defensive front, the less it becomes about that and the more it becomes about exposing schematic weaknesses. Wabash also gets very creative with their games. Lots of slants, angles, and twists with LB blitzes. That's the thing about odd. It's a 3 man front, so your LB blitzes can come from anywhere. It sounds simple to say "well, just block your gap inside out" but that can get tough when you have NO clue where that comes from. Some teams run a very vanilla odd front, which seems like a total waste. Wabash is so good at bringing guys from 2 or even 3 gaps away. Typically you put your least athletic offensive linemen at guard. You want your best athletes at tackle. They have to set the width of the pocket and defend those edge rushers who are basically RB fast anymore. The guards are uncovered vs an odd front, meaning that as a defense, you have the opportunity to make those guys try to make plays in space.

A lot of teams try to pass pro odd with a BOB (big on big) scheme, meaning the tackles lock on to the ends and the center locks on to the nose. Doesn't matter where they go, those guys are man to man with those defenders. Then they leave the guards to pick up any blitzes, typically working inside out. Take any inside blitzer in your area, if one doesn't come, then work out for an edge blitzer. But, then you get in situations like this:


This is a 5 man pressure I've seen from Wabash against these type teams. Center has to work to his left to take the nose. That inside backer to the offense's right hits the B gap hard trying to get the RG to go with him, leaving the A gap wide open for the backside backer. Wabash will figure out how you pass pro, and they will exploit you. It also messes with zone blocking schemes. You've got guys twisting 2 gaps to the zone or away from the zone, which can really confuse a 19 year old kid. Wabash has dudes in that front 7. No doubt about it. But they put those dudes in great situations to succeed schematically. That's the difference.

Wes,

Thanks for the detailed post. Sorry I didn't reply sooner. This scheme isn't uncommon from odd fronts and it's relatively easy to block, assignment wise. It gets back to what I think is our shared view, which is the scheme helps better players beat you more often. In this example, if the LG and C are responsible for the N and B they would bump this but if you have a fast defensive front, this is hard to to as you likely don't get to practice the speed at which this comes at you.

Said more simply, in your diagram, there are 7 players to block 7 players. It doesn't matter what combination comes, but the defensive scheme can create matchup problems that allows your best players to make the most plays.

[wally_wabash]

I can appreciate the strategy of the quick kick in that sequence where it happened.  I think the thing that throws me off the most is that for as fast and progressive and aggressive a reputation as this Hampden-Sydney has, it seemed very out of character. 

[ExTartanPlayer]

Thanks for the detailed post. Sorry I didn't reply sooner. This scheme isn't uncommon from odd fronts and it's relatively easy to block, assignment wise. It gets back to what I think is our shared view, which is the scheme helps better players beat you more often. In this example, if the LG and C are responsible for the N and B they would bump this but if you have a fast defensive front, this is hard to to as you likely don't get to practice the speed at which this comes at you.

Having played a few games on the line in the gradually-getting-more-distant past, I'll just say this: "being relatively easy to block assignment wise" and "executing that at full speed in a game" are two very different things (which you alluded to here, admittedly).  Sometime around the middle of my junior season, with a dozen or so career starts under my belt, I was comfortable picking up stunts like that, but as a freshman/sophomore in my first few starts, that was really tricky to pick up at full speed; by the time I realized I had to pass off the DL slanting across my face and catch the LB looping around him, that LB was already pulling even with me and I had no chance.

Part of that, as you said, is the difficulty of replicating game speed in practice.  It was really easy to walk through blitz pickups and say who got who in individual periods.  But there's just no way to replicate that until you have to do it in a game.

Of course, blitzing to get winnable 1-on-1 matchups is good, but getting a free rusher who does not even have a matchup to win is better.

[Pat Coleman]

I can appreciate the strategy of the quick kick in that sequence where it happened.  I think the thing that throws me off the most is that for as fast and progressive and aggressive a reputation as this Hampden-Sydney has, it seemed very out of character.

It actually is not out of character for Marty Favret's teams.

[wally_wabash]

I can appreciate the strategy of the quick kick in that sequence where it happened.  I think the thing that throws me off the most is that for as fast and progressive and aggressive a reputation as this Hampden-Sydney has, it seemed very out of character.

It actually is not out of character for Marty Favret's teams.

See your fair share of 3rd down quick kicks back at Catholic? 

[wally_wabash]

I don't know about you all, but it's going to be weird for me with Wabash having an off week this week. I'm so used to not having a bye week in season. When was the last time that happened?

It's a first for me, so it has to have been sometime prior to 1996.  Some quick research shows me tha the last time Wabash had a week off during the season was in 1993- the LGs beat RHIT on 10/30/93 and then took a week off before beating DePauw on 11/13/93 in the 100th Monon Bell Classic. 

You know who is really fired up about Wabash getting a week off?  Denison.  They're the lucky team that Wabash gets an extra week to prep for.  Speaking of Denison, there's a fun picture on the cover of the 2014 Media Guide of a Denison player getting tackled by the face mask.  Poor guy. 

[Li'l Giant]

You know who is really fired up about Wabash getting a week off?  Denison.  They're the lucky team that Wabash gets an extra week to prep for.  Speaking of Denison, there's a fun picture on the cover of the 2014 Media Guide of a Denison player getting tackled by the face mask.  Poor guy.

I don't see the ends of those fingers. They just disappear into the facemask opening. It's possible he's being tackled by his tongue.

[bashbrother]

Do you have a Link to the media guide?