Q & A with Todd Fitch

[mikebeau]

I didn't say they were a sure thing but we were inside their 40 6 times and came away with 3 points.

the other 5 possessions ended with a missed field goal(took a sack on that one at their 24 yard line), 2 interceptions(inside their 30 and 1 was on a first down) and 2 punts.

I'm not against passing completely but I think it's dumb for our coaches to call risky pass plays inside our 30 or inside our opponents 30. I'm fine with the bubble screens but putting it up for grabs in scoring range on either side of the field and with our personnel is dumb.

i wouldnt consider "inside the 40" as a credible stat for an opportunity to score.  The red zone is a little more viable. Also, should we be setting ourself up for field goals with short runs or go for the gusto with some passes?  Safe is death

[Triple B]

Safe is death

Reminds me of a little blurb I read today about Torts spraying water on an opposing fan last year and throwing the bottle at him .... 

[Bull94]

I didn't say they were a sure thing but we were inside their 40 6 times and came away with 3 points.

the other 5 possessions ended with a missed field goal(took a sack on that one at their 24 yard line), 2 interceptions(inside their 30 and 1 was on a first down) and 2 punts.

I'm not against passing completely but I think it's dumb for our coaches to call risky pass plays inside our 30 or inside our opponents 30. I'm fine with the bubble screens but putting it up for grabs in scoring range on either side of the field and with our personnel is dumb.

i wouldnt consider "inside the 40" as a credible stat for an opportunity to score.  The red zone is a little more viable. Also, should we be setting ourself up for field goals with short runs or go for the gusto with some passes?  Safe is death

the sack and the 2 picks happened inside the 30. that's field goal range. in a 4 point loss, that's big. and yes in a game that close we should be setting ourselves up for scores whether they are field goals or not. we shouldn't risk turnovers.

[mikebeau]

I didn't say they were a sure thing but we were inside their 40 6 times and came away with 3 points.

the other 5 possessions ended with a missed field goal(took a sack on that one at their 24 yard line), 2 interceptions(inside their 30 and 1 was on a first down) and 2 punts.

I'm not against passing completely but I think it's dumb for our coaches to call risky pass plays inside our 30 or inside our opponents 30. I'm fine with the bubble screens but putting it up for grabs in scoring range on either side of the field and with our personnel is dumb.

i wouldnt consider "inside the 40" as a credible stat for an opportunity to score.  The red zone is a little more viable. Also, should we be setting ourself up for field goals with short runs or go for the gusto with some passes?  Safe is death

the sack and the 2 picks happened inside the 30. that's field goal range. in a 4 point loss, that's big. and yes in a game that close we should be setting ourselves up for scores whether they are field goals or not. we shouldn't risk turnovers.

if BJ played well its a 3 td game with the gameplan in place.  if he plays average its at least a ten pt game

[Bull94]

I didn't say they were a sure thing but we were inside their 40 6 times and came away with 3 points.

the other 5 possessions ended with a missed field goal(took a sack on that one at their 24 yard line), 2 interceptions(inside their 30 and 1 was on a first down) and 2 punts.

I'm not against passing completely but I think it's dumb for our coaches to call risky pass plays inside our 30 or inside our opponents 30. I'm fine with the bubble screens but putting it up for grabs in scoring range on either side of the field and with our personnel is dumb.

i wouldnt consider "inside the 40" as a credible stat for an opportunity to score.  The red zone is a little more viable. Also, should we be setting ourself up for field goals with short runs or go for the gusto with some passes?  Safe is death

the sack and the 2 picks happened inside the 30. that's field goal range. in a 4 point loss, that's big. and yes in a game that close we should be setting ourselves up for scores whether they are field goals or not. we shouldn't risk turnovers.

if BJ played well its a 3 td game with the gameplan in place.  if he plays average its at least a ten pt game

I can't argue with that.

if the coaches realize his limitations we win that game and possibly WVU game.

[Bull Dozer]

I didn't say they were a sure thing but we were inside their 40 6 times and came away with 3 points.

the other 5 possessions ended with a missed field goal(took a sack on that one at their 24 yard line), 2 interceptions(inside their 30 and 1 was on a first down) and 2 punts.

I'm not against passing completely but I think it's dumb for our coaches to call risky pass plays inside our 30 or inside our opponents 30. I'm fine with the bubble screens but putting it up for grabs in scoring range on either side of the field and with our personnel is dumb.

i wouldnt consider "inside the 40" as a credible stat for an opportunity to score.  The red zone is a little more viable. Also, should we be setting ourself up for field goals with short runs or go for the gusto with some passes?  Safe is death

the sack and the 2 picks happened inside the 30. that's field goal range. in a 4 point loss, that's big. and yes in a game that close we should be setting ourselves up for scores whether they are field goals or not. we shouldn't risk turnovers.

if BJ played well its a 3 td game with the gameplan in place.  if he plays average its at least a ten pt game

And if Nassib hits the 2 or 3 wideopen WR's he missed they could have beat us by much more than 4.  That's the thing about the what if game, it has to work both ways or it just uncovers bias.  Either way the ole what if game is utterly useless.