Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

I know most everyone here was ready to lynch Brandon after the opening kickoff stunt, but let me present an opposing thought.

Remember the setting for the game - winner takes commanding control of the MAC East. Solich has had two weeks to prepare. He's already proven he can get his team ready for the big upset (granted, Pitt has turned out to be a patsy, but...). The Bobcats will be totally fired up to knock off the much-hyped Falcons. After a nice Homecoming crowd, the Falcons are faced with a home game during Fall Break, likely meaning a small student crowd and not much noise from the stands.

So he pulls out some "trickeration." If it works, the Falcons bust off a long return, possibly a TD. This would take all the wind out of the Bobcats sails and set the tone for the evening, leaving Ohio dazed, confused and wondering what will happen next.

Yes, it blew up and was almost a disaster. But it was a calculated risk, one that could have created enough momentum to end the game before the first quarter expired.

Just a thought ...

I was thinking the same thing. A lot of the fickle posters on here would have been calling him a genious if it had worked.

Can someone describe in detail for me what we attempted? Or at least point me to another post that does. All I saw was the end result on silly game cast.

--MH

BGFan wrote:I was thinking the same thing. A lot of the fickle posters on here would have been calling him a genious if it had worked.

not me, no tricks until you can do the basics, and we can't even execute a punt, field goal, kick return, kick coverage yet.

I don't like trick plays, and have made it known for years here. I only see the need if you are inferior talentwise and need something like that for a prayer, then fine, but I don't like them when you're the better team.

I see that it was a calculated risk, I just don't agree that the risk was worth any potential reward, but I do see your point '87.

The worst thing about it was the execution. We seem to have real trouble executing things on STs...perhaps we need a dedicated ST's coach? I'd be curious how many times they had practiced that exchange on a kickoff return?

My take is that we showed little respect for Ohio in that we would open with this trick play. This was further emphasized by the fact that we "practiced" running the ball for much of the game. It was obvious that we could throw when we need to make points.

Ohio was only in the game due to three blunders in special teams play.

Our defense owned them.

BG EV wrote:My take is that we showed little respect for Ohio in that we would open with this trick play. This was further emphasized by the fact that we "practiced" running the ball for much of the game. It was obvious that we could throw when we need to make points.

Ohio was only in the game due to three blunders in special teams play.

Our defense owned them.

3 blunders, you are being nice

04forheisman wrote:

BG EV wrote:My take is that we showed little respect for Ohio in that we would open with this trick play. This was further emphasized by the fact that we "practiced" running the ball for much of the game. It was obvious that we could throw when we need to make points.

Ohio was only in the game due to three blunders in special teams play.

Our defense owned them.

3 blunders, you are being nice

"It's nice to be nice to the nice."

Name that classic TV show and character!

How about instead of a trick play, we try some different players on the return. No knock against BJ, but he has yet to break one for a long one this year. Why not try the other guys? We continually start at the 20 and less and it was quite obvious in the Boise game how much this did not help our offense. We never could get a field position that put us in control. How about getting rid of the tricks and running someone else straight up in there between the blocks?

I have no problem with running the trick play, heck we could have made Sports Center if we pulled off a long TD run. . .

. . . my only problem with the play was that our second string, steal from Big Ten schools, stud back up QB was the trigger man on the play.

Dayons_Den wrote:. . . my only problem with the play was that our second string, steal from Big Ten schools, stud back up QB was the trigger man on the play.

But, but, but... they probably *need* him for that play, if it's a throw back, as we seem to suspect. (I missed that play Saturday).

OK.......here is the scoop. We botched it intentionally, so teams have to prepare for all different kinds of variations from it, to the extent that our normal, return will work like a clock and we will score TD's against Toledo on returns. It was the only way we could do it unless we just cut out a portion of the film (ie UT vs EMU) so we did it this way!!!

factman wrote:OK.......here is the scoop. We botched it intentionally, so teams have to prepare for all different kinds of variations from it, to the extent that our normal, return will work like a clock and we will score TD's against Toledo on returns. It was the only way we could do it unless we just cut out a portion of the film (ie UT vs EMU) so we did it this way!!!

HAHA! If that's the case then it's brilliant!

hammb wrote:

factman wrote:OK.......here is the scoop. We botched it intentionally, so teams have to prepare for all different kinds of variations from it, to the extent that our normal, return will work like a clock and we will score TD's against Toledo on returns. It was the only way we could do it unless we just cut out a portion of the film (ie UT vs EMU) so we did it this way!!!

HAHA! If that's the case then it's brilliant!

Botched intentially to put the pipe to UT? BRILLIANT

I'll leave it to someone else to correct me because I watched it as I was striding to my seat (Iwas whooping it up with freaak at the tunnel entrance when the team came out) and well, I pounded a couple of Falcon Club tent beers in short fashion.

The kickoff went to one of the typical guys standing at the goal line who ran it out to someone at about the 15. Now this guy was completing turned around, facing the end zone, probably to disguise where the ball was, and he was probably supposed to then hand it off to someone else...kind of like an end around reverse.

The play collapsed when the guy at the 15 (Anthony Turner) got plowed into from behind and fumbled the ball which was recovered at the 4 by OU.

I was safely in my seat at the 5 yd line when 4 plays later the FG clanked off of the upright.....talk about special teams failure to convert...that was a significant momentum changer for the first phase of the game