|
Replies: 14
| visibility 1,704
|
Walk-On [111]
TigerPulse: 72%
Posts: 16
Joined: 8/10/13
|
Victory formation from the shotgun
Oct 6, 2015, 11:17 AM
|
|
Was the shotgun snap victory formation intentional?and if it was why no back 5 yards deep in case of bad snap?Scared my mule.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [68528]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115705
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Victory formation from the shotgun- I suspect
Oct 6, 2015, 11:22 AM
|
|
the antigun nuts to outlaw shotgun formation very soon. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5776]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7072
Joined: 8/3/05
|
I was not on board with it, but I'm not a coach.
Oct 6, 2015, 11:24 AM
|
|
I prefer: under center, quick snap, take a knee, game over, celebrate with the fans.
But in the end we won.
Perhaps they were afraid of a LB trying to time the snap and hurtle over the line and hit Deshaun. But ND appeared to have conceded the game at that point because they didn't even really try to hit the center.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13061]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22376
Joined: 4/24/04
|
We were probably afraid of Watson trying to handle a
Oct 6, 2015, 11:26 AM
|
|
snap from under center with a soaking wet, slippery ball. It's much easier to handle a shotgun snap - the only thing that can go wrong there is an extremely errant snap that can't be caught. But the odds of recovering a bad shotgun snap are a lot better than a bad snap from under center because those often end up right in the scrum.
Overall, i would say the shotgun snap was safer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5776]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7072
Joined: 8/3/05
|
Except when it is 1st and goal on the one against FSU.
Oct 6, 2015, 11:32 AM
|
|
That didn't go so well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13061]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22376
Joined: 4/24/04
|
Did we lose the ball at FSU? No. As bad as that snap was
Oct 7, 2015, 10:05 AM
|
|
it still would've been good enough to win us the ND game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [0]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4
Joined: 7/19/15
|
Re: Victory formation from the shotgun
Oct 6, 2015, 11:28 AM
|
|
Most likely its because 99% of our snaps are shotgun snaps. Stick with what's comfortable and don't risk a bad exchange on the last play of the game. Maybe a back behind Watson would have been a good idea though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6662]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9535
Joined: 1/16/99
|
Re: Victory formation from the shotgun
Oct 6, 2015, 11:34 AM
|
|
How many bad snaps did we have in this monsoon game compared to the Louisville game? Curious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
Zero against ND***
Oct 6, 2015, 11:43 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
i'd seen that scott was behind dw. if you were watching
Oct 6, 2015, 11:40 AM
|
|
there are only 10 tigers in frame including dw so either someone was behind dw or clemson manned the snap/play one short and i'd hope that wasn't the case.
i liked the shotgun snap there because all dw has to do is fall on it. if you get a bad snap under center, more times than not it's kicked by someone and notre dame is at the clemson ~40 with time for one play after the change of possession.
again, assuming scott or other was in fact behind dw as i've seen reported and based on numbers in frame.
just fall on it if something goes wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 28685
Joined: 8/17/05
|
i'm not sure why Jeff would have been
Oct 6, 2015, 11:44 AM
|
|
on the field with time still on the clock
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
yeah that would be weird...
Oct 6, 2015, 11:47 AM
|
|
maybe they meant pagano?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10920]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13000
Joined: 8/4/14
|
Maybe he meant Artavus?***
Oct 7, 2015, 10:11 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
Artavis?***
Oct 7, 2015, 10:15 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1095]
TigerPulse: 55%
Posts: 3051
Joined: 9/13/13
|
I'm fine with it as long as Norton is not the one snapping the ball***
Oct 6, 2015, 11:50 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 14
| visibility 1,704
|
|
|
50
