Cornell-Brown varsity football 10/26/24

[ugarte]

Brown running pretty effectively and gets the ball to the 16 with 25 seconds to go.

[ugarte]

You people are nuts. You can't eat clock on offense in a one-score game when your defense isn't doing anything. If Brown scores here, the clock you're wasting is your own! At least Al was making an argument about the wind, which I disagree with but is debatable.

Not late in the third period with a three and then two-score lead.

The most time you could have wasted there was ~30 seconds with 15 minutes to play. You're the only person thinking that's a clock management decision.

No, you're the only person in the world who'd rather punt and pass into a strong wind rather than with it at your back.  Context, man, don't they teach that in law school? I was posting that THEN, not now.

I already said that the wind explanation made sense, even if I disagree because it doesn't actually seem to be affecting anything!

[ugarte]

Almost a pick in the end zone AND almost a touchdown but it's incomplete, then a run up the middle and Brown almost forgets to call time out before the clock expires lol.

Well, one second left and an attempt from 29... and Cornell tries to ice the kicker again... good and Brown is rushing the field for some reason. Homecoming, I guess?

[ugarte]

This was a very winnable game but Wang's passing touch is ... I don't know where. Not great. His receivers and tight ends are so good, too.

[Al DeFlorio]

You people are nuts. You can't eat clock on offense in a one-score game when your defense isn't doing anything. If Brown scores here, the clock you're wasting is your own! At least Al was making an argument about the wind, which I disagree with but is debatable.

Not late in the third period with a three and then two-score lead.

The most time you could have wasted there was ~30 seconds with 15 minutes to play. You're the only person thinking that's a clock management decision.

No, you're the only person in the world who'd rather punt and pass into a strong wind rather than with it at your back.  Context, man, don't they teach that in law school? I was posting that THEN, not now.

I already said that the wind explanation made sense, even if I disagree because it doesn't actually seem to be affecting anything!

Did you know it wasn't affecting anything with minutes left in the third quarter?  It sure affected the two Cornell punts that put Brown on Cornell's side of the 50.

[mike1960]

A very disappointing loss. Our run defense has been a problem all year. We're getting moved off the line of scrimmage way too often.

[David Harding]

This was a very winnable game but Wang's passing touch is ... I don't know where. Not great. His receivers and tight ends are so good, too.

It couldn't have anything to do with the oft-mentioned wind, could it?

[Scersk '97]

You people are nuts. You can't eat clock on offense in a one-score game when your defense isn't doing anything. If Brown scores here, the clock you're wasting is your own! At least Al was making an argument about the wind, which I disagree with but is debatable.

Wow the penalty on the 2-point conversion really a big deal as the Cornell defense sort of holds and it's 21-20 with ~5 minutes left in the game. Need to eat clock but reallllly need to convert some first downs and make Brown use their time outs.

Of course, a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

1) You don't think the game circumstances are different? 2) the decision to sort of run clock in the abstract pales in comparison to the need to actually get first downs, which i think i said pretty clearly. the ineffective running by Cornell burned about a minute of clock and Brown still has plenty of time as long as they can move the ball.

There's a difference between looking backwards and thinking that wasting more time would have been good (after all of the passes fall incomplete) or whether it is strategically wise to run ineffectively a couple of times when your defense still has to hold for the majority of the 4th quarter.

My point is that if you waste time the first time you have the chance, Brown has far less time at the end of the game to march down the field for a winning field goal.

Or, perhaps Brown goes for it on 4th and 5 (due to time pressure) instead of kicking the first (of the last two) field goals and blows it.

Either way, we lost the game because we can't run the ball and Brown can. That's what has to change.

[ugarte]

You people are nuts. You can't eat clock on offense in a one-score game when your defense isn't doing anything. If Brown scores here, the clock you're wasting is your own! At least Al was making an argument about the wind, which I disagree with but is debatable.

Wow the penalty on the 2-point conversion really a big deal as the Cornell defense sort of holds and it's 21-20 with ~5 minutes left in the game. Need to eat clock but reallllly need to convert some first downs and make Brown use their time outs.

Of course, a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

1) You don't think the game circumstances are different? 2) the decision to sort of run clock in the abstract pales in comparison to the need to actually get first downs, which i think i said pretty clearly. the ineffective running by Cornell burned about a minute of clock and Brown still has plenty of time as long as they can move the ball.

There's a difference between looking backwards and thinking that wasting more time would have been good (after all of the passes fall incomplete) or whether it is strategically wise to run ineffectively a couple of times when your defense still has to hold for the majority of the 4th quarter.

My point is that if you waste time the first time you have the chance, Brown has far less time at the end of the game to march down the field for a winning field goal.

Or, perhaps Brown goes for it on 4th and 5 (due to time pressure) instead of kicking the first (of the last two) field goals and blows it.

Either way, we lost the game because we can't run the ball and Brown can. That's what has to change.

Butterfly flapping it's wings, man. You don't waste time when you don't know what it means.

As for Wang's passing, if the coaches thought the wind was a problem they probably would have stopped dialing up plays that required 20 yard throws. He was just spraying the ball. Willcox certainly didn't have a problem hitting  his receivers and he was the one throwing into the problematic wind.

[Scersk '97]

My point is that if you waste time the first time you have the chance, Brown has far less time at the end of the game to march down the field for a winning field goal.

Or, perhaps Brown goes for it on 4th and 5 (due to time pressure) instead of kicking the first (of the last two) field goals and blows it.

Either way, we lost the game because we can't run the ball and Brown can. That's what has to change.

Butterfly flapping it's wings, man. You don't waste time when you don't know what it means.

Perhaps valid early, but I think in the 4th you know what time means already. If you're ahead, you burn clock; in this particular case, you burn clock because you're ahead and Brown is mostly depending on the run.

Exactly zero of these games will (or should) turn into an ACC-style (or old Pac-12 After Dark-style) score-fest, because our team doesn't have the offensive skill to trade scores.

[Ken711]

In my view the two weak areas are a running game and DL line play, Cornell needs develop a somewhat balanced running game which they appear to be addressing with some potentially impactful RBs in this years recruiting class.  They have the smallest DL in the Ivy League by far, and again assuming they can keep the recruits they have on this years recruiting class list committed, they have some big DL recruits coming in as well.

[upprdeck]

I think letting Brown run a 100 plays with the offense playing so poorly in the 2nd half led to the D failing down the stretch

[scoop85]

In my view the two weak areas are a running game and DL line play, Cornell needs develop a somewhat balanced running game which they appear to be addressing with some potentially impactful RBs in this years recruiting class.  They have the smallest DL in the Ivy League by far, and again assuming they can keep the recruits they have on this years recruiting class list committed, they have some big DL recruits coming in as well.

Yeah, that's pretty much how I see it. Pope won't scare anyone, and I'm surprised we don't have a better option. The DL does get pushed back on pretty much any running play. But for today's game, I think the play calling in the fourth Q got away from what had been working, and our execution was just a bit off. No other way to say it but it was a blown opportunity.

[ugarte]

You people are nuts. You can't eat clock on offense in a one-score game when your defense isn't doing anything. If Brown scores here, the clock you're wasting is your own! At least Al was making an argument about the wind, which I disagree with but is debatable.

Not late in the third period with a three and then two-score lead.

The most time you could have wasted there was ~30 seconds with 15 minutes to play. You're the only person thinking that's a clock management decision.

No, you're the only person in the world who'd rather punt and pass into a strong wind rather than with it at your back.  Context, man, don't they teach that in law school? I was posting that THEN, not now.

I already said that the wind explanation made sense, even if I disagree because it doesn't actually seem to be affecting anything!

Did you know it wasn't affecting anything with minutes left in the third quarter?  It sure affected the two Cornell punts that put Brown on Cornell's side of the 50.

Yes, the two punts that were probably affected by the wind were from the shadow of the end zone. On the other hand, attached are the two drives to close the quarter. The Cornell drive that you think should have been more time consuming started with 2:20 left. After the receivers were let down by their quarterback, we had to punt from around midfield. Our punter dropped a beauty, the ball checked up inside the 10 and was downed on the 2. Brown had the wind for :59. They ran once, passed once (a near safety, a wobbly ball, but complete anyway for 27 yards). Then they ran again.

I'm apparently not the only one who wasn't all that concerned with the direction of the wind at that point in the game.

[rss77]

Watching the game-some observations:

It all comes down to execution-the missed pass on the 4th and 1 in the 1st qtr, the off target passes in the 2nd half-if the had pulled those off Cornell wins the game (IMO).
Also-the one overturned call-should that at least been defensive holding?  Also-there were a couple of borderline horse collar tackles on Wang (How do the officials define a horse collar tackle?)
Offensive Line could not create openings on traditional run plays and would not have mattered who carried the ball. Looked at total yardage and time of possession for Brown-the 4th quarter definitely a killer.