PonyFans.com

mrydel wrote: BTW, wasn't that head ref the same little short dude June has had run ins with before. I would have thought we would have asked him to never officiate our games again.***

jj thought it was because Fatterson said he would help us out.

from where I sat (in the corner with SMU driving towards us), it looked like JJ just wanted to feed Zach and run the clock out and get out of Orlando; looked like some "stat" padding to me

I would have preferred seeing some backups to give them some game experience for all the reasons mentioned in the original comment

Line was absolutely gassed in the last 2 minutes! He needed help getting up off the field! It made NO sense to keep him in. What on earth is JJ thinking??

Arkpony wrote:Line was absolutely gassed in the last 2 minutes! He needed help getting up off the field! It made NO sense to keep him in. What on earth is JJ thinking??

"Easiest 10 million dollars ever"

Charleston Pony wrote:from where I sat (in the corner with SMU driving towards us), it looked like JJ just wanted to feed Zach and run the clock out and get out of Orlando; looked like some "stat" padding to me

I would have preferred seeing some backups to give them some game experience for all the reasons mentioned in the original comment

These are my thoughts too. JJ was ready to get the game over. And was probably giving Line some yardage and highlights for the NFL scouts. doesn't help up for later in the year or next year. But as Giddyup always notes, this is JJs MO.

alyssa wrote:I thought he "surrendered" early in the game when he accepted the FG instead of taking a new set of downs. ZL probably would'VE scored a TD running the ball on the new set of downs.

I had the same thought, and in my mind this is where the game officially went down the tubes. You don't think the offense got the message of "I'll take three points because I have no faith in you guys to get us 7" from that move? It was a [deleted] move that clearly served as a gut shot to the team. Hard to stay motivated to play hard for your coach when he so blatantly flips you the bird like that.

RyanSMU98 wrote:

alyssa wrote:I thought he "surrendered" early in the game when he accepted the FG instead of taking a new set of downs. ZL probably would'VE scored a TD running the ball on the new set of downs.

I had the same thought, and in my mind this is where the game officially went down the tubes. You don't think the offense got the message of "I'll take three points because I have no faith in you guys to get us 7" from that move? It was a [deleted] move that clearly served as a gut shot to the team. Hard to stay motivated to play hard for your coach when he so blatantly flips you the bird like that.

so let me get this straight. you would take 3 points off the board and go for it on 4th& 1 or 2 in the first quarter?

Junior wrote:

RyanSMU98 wrote:

alyssa wrote:I thought he "surrendered" early in the game when he accepted the FG instead of taking a new set of downs. ZL probably would'VE scored a TD running the ball on the new set of downs.

I had the same thought, and in my mind this is where the game officially went down the tubes. You don't think the offense got the message of "I'll take three points because I have no faith in you guys to get us 7" from that move? It was a [deleted] move that clearly served as a gut shot to the team. Hard to stay motivated to play hard for your coach when he so blatantly flips you the bird like that.

so let me get this straight. you would take 3 points off the board and go for it on 4th& 1 or 2 in the first quarter?

Please correct me if I'm wrong on this, but don't you get a fresh set of downs for roughing the kicker? That makes it 1st and goal from the 1 or 2, in which case heck yes I roll the dice that Zach can punch it in given three chances. But then again, nobody is paying me $2MM to do jack squat so what do I know?

RyanSMU98 wrote:Please correct me if I'm wrong on this, but don't you get a fresh set of downs for roughing the kicker? That makes it 1st and goal from the 1 or 2, in which case heck yes I roll the dice that Zach can punch it in given three chances. But then again, nobody is paying me $2MM to do jack squat so what do I know?

It was called running into the kicker, not roughing the kicker...5 yrd penalty, still fourth down. Was it a good call...don't know, I didn't see the play.

In as many games as I've played in (football and rugby.. though very diff sub rules in rugby), not once has a coach ever taken out a starter for a second string simply to gain experience when we were losing.. in any situation.

Staying in the game that they lost is important for the players.

skurtn wrote:In as many games as I've played in (football and rugby.. though very diff sub rules in rugby), not once has a coach ever taken out a starter for a second string simply to gain experience when we were losing.. in any situation.

Staying in the game that they lost is important for the players.

I have seen many teams take players out of the games at the end when they were getting beaten badly. Probably to avoid injury.

RyanSMU98 wrote:Please correct me if I'm wrong on this, but don't you get a fresh set of downs for roughing the kicker? That makes it 1st and goal from the 1 or 2, in which case heck yes I roll the dice that Zach can punch it in given three chances. But then again, nobody is paying me $2MM to do jack squat so what do I know?

Yes, for roughing. But it was running into the kicker that was called, not roughing the kicker. Significantly different calls. Running into the kicker is a five yard penalty with no automatic first down. Refer to my earlier explanation to Alyssa's assertion that we basically gave up. It's simply the wrong assertion factually.

jimhagle wrote:Very little makes sense when trying to figure out why JJ does what only he does on offense. If he is still trying to groom this offense 9 games into the season only he can understand why-especially since it is floundering for the most part and pretty much has for most of his 5 years here. And I mean his passing offense.

The comment is sort of an echo to something I remember on the basketball page several years ago in the DOH era. A poster I think was one of the more knowledgable and sincere said he had watched DOH's substitution patterns carefully and failed to find make any sense of what went on.

My point was that Line was worn out..fatigued in a big way..and JJ kept him in.

Many coaches like to leave starters in for conditioning reasons. They fear pulling them out of games early (whether too far up or down) will be a detriment to them in a later, closer game when they need them to play down the stretch.

Also, throwing a QB into a botched situation not his making isn't really doing the player any favors.

Personally, I like to see the young bucks get game experience and I really fear that a worn-out Zach Line is an injury waiting to happen.