Advertisement

Advertisement

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Game balls and Gassers

Advertisement

Audio clips

2007 KU-Texas A&M Football

Podcast episode

Spodcasters

Chewing up the turf

Ryan Greene, Ryan Wood and Tom Keegan discuss how KU was able to get the best of Texas A&M the old-fashioned way - both stopping the run and moving the ball on the ground themselves.

Download podcast

Candidates for Game balls

¢ Brandon McAnderson: Rushed for 183 yards and two touchdowns on 21 carries. Had a 36-yard touchdown called back on Derek Fine's holding penalty.

¢ Kendrick Harper: Hard-hitting cornerback had seven tackles, two for a loss.

¢ Aqib Talib: As did Harper, Talib had a strong game covering and tackling.

¢ James Holt: Flew to the ball with 10 tackles.

Candidates for Gassers

¢ Scott Webb: Normally reliable kicker missed three field-goal attempts, one of which was blocked, and they all were less than 35 yards.

¢ Anthony Webb: Still needs to learn that he doesn't have to try to return every punt. Needs to do his gassers holding his right arm up to signal for a fair catch.

Comments

seattlehawk_78 6 years, 6 months ago

I'm going to have to side with loudog on the 2 point conversion. Unless you're behind I think you go with the highest percentage play. Over the course of a game those 1 and 3 extra points add up. Unfortunately we missed too many of the 3 point variety.

0

perryn07 6 years, 6 months ago

Derek Fine gets a gasser. Huge holding penalty on a play that should have iced the game, when all he had to do was push the defender out and B-Mac still cuts in and scores. Fine also had a huge drop AGAIN that killed a drive that was headed deep into Aggie territory.

0

loudog 6 years, 6 months ago

Ross, I felt at the time it was happening that the two point conversion was the wrong decision; it's just the endgame that vindicated my feelings... I'm not sure of the percentages, but my guess is that the PAT is a MUCH higher percentage "shot" than the 2 point conversion. I would argue that the team that's winning should always go for the higher percentage PAT rather than potentially leaving points on the field - unless it's late in the game and the 2 point conversion is needed to keep the winning team ahead by 3 points.

I don't remember the exact circumstances, but I felt that the week before at CU we shouldn't have gone for the 2 point conversion either. In both games taking the higher percentage PAT would have made the final drives by both teams a moot point rather than requiring a huge defensive stand by the 'Hawks.

That being said, I'm not sure last year's defense could have made those stops, and I couldn't be happier with this year's coaching staff, especially Coach Young. If Mangino doesn't at least get considered for Coach of the Year, I'm going to lose what little respect I have left for those post-season "awards"

0

actorman 6 years, 6 months ago

I agree with Ross and disagree with loudog and troutsee. I thought going for two was the right move at the time (although I didn't particularly like the play selection). But I agree that the play-calling in the red zone left something to be desired.

0

troutsee 6 years, 6 months ago

A great win but not kicking the point was stupid and I said so at the time. Also, with 4 minutes to go in the game, we were in the red zone and inexplicably threw the ball, two incompletions, which stopped the clock. Had we run the ball, there would have not been enough time left for A & M to make us all sweat. Still, kudos to the coaches and the players. We have the best coaching staff in the B-12.

0

Lonnie Ross Dillon 6 years, 6 months ago

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. At the time we were up 19-0. A 2pt conversion would require aTm to go for 2 at least once out of 3 touchdowns. By missing, it still required them to go for 2 twice...it was the right call given the options and the situation at the time.

More importantly, it shouldn't have been necessary because we left a ton of points on the field. Two missed FG (don't count the blocked one); and why did we stop going to B-Mac in the red zone when it was obvious they couldn't stop him?

0

loudog 6 years, 6 months ago

Unfortunately, Display, no halo rule anymore... but I do agree, at least he's catching and holding on to the ball. As a gasser, I would add Coach Mangino's decision to go for the two point conversion after they were up 19-0. A PAT would have made the score 20-0 with the defense playing really well. And that extra point would have made aTm's last ditch effort for a TD and PAT pointless.

0

Displayhawk 6 years, 6 months ago

Tony Blevins used to catch and run on every kick too, and sometimes he would get the halo penalty called against the kicking team. So I don't have a problem with that ........as long as he catches the ball! It seems as though Webb is concentrating only on catching the ball, and not worrying about having to try to figure out whether to call a fair catch or not! Plus, Texas A&M has a good punter who was booming most of his punts on a windy night!

0

actorman 6 years, 6 months ago

As long as Webb isn't dropping the ball, I don't mind him trying to return every punt. You never know when he might be able to slip a few tackles and have a big return, even when it seems obvious that he'll be tackled right away.

On the other hand, if he ever fumbles in that situation I would feel differently.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.