Game 9: Toledo

Ringing the Bell on a new era of UM Football.
User avatar
njumass08
Hall of Fame
Posts: 5605
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:06 am

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by njumass08 » Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:07 pm

The MAC East is so down this year that technically we could still win it. BGSU still has to play Akron and Toledo, and Akron lost to Ball State today.
"I just believe in being positive." - Mark Whipple

User avatar
Rolling Ridge
Junior
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:17 pm

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by Rolling Ridge » Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:23 pm

Great game. Sad we lost but I'm not hanging my head in any way. Our guys gave 110%. We came up a little short against a superior foe, but not so superior that given a few turns we couldn't have beaten. This team is on the right track. We need some additional pieces, but given what Whipple has accomplished in one year, I think we have a strong shot at being a threat next year.

Bob McGovern said no moral victories, but I disagree. To me, this was a moral victory for UMass and shows the team is improving substantially on both sides of the ball despite the loss.

69MG
Hall of Fame
Posts: 8677
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 11:07 pm
Location: Western Mass

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by 69MG » Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:00 pm

^ While I can't say I'm happy with a moral victory, this team is so far ahead of the last two years it's beyond description. One more recruiting class (O line, D line, D backs and a kicker) and we're over .500 next year.

User avatar
Old Cage
Hall of Fame
Posts: 5922
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 8:49 pm
Location: The Eastern Provinces

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by Old Cage » Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:57 pm

Whip confirms what a couple of us posted right away when it happened:

Matt Vautour @GazetteUMass · 3 hours ago
Whipple told radio he did let Toledo score to get ball back
"Jack didn’t have any envy in him," Calipari said. "He was the greatest coach to ever coach here."

User avatar
econalum
Senior
Posts: 1907
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2003 10:31 am
Location: Acton, MA

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by econalum » Sat Oct 25, 2014 9:02 pm

69MG wrote:^ While I can't say I'm happy with a moral victory, this team is so far ahead of the last two years it's beyond description. One more recruiting class (O line, D line, D backs and a kicker) and we're over .500 next year.
Well, entertaining game again. Tackling and kicking are weak. There simply has to be a kicker wanting an FBS scholarship.
Feeling entitled is JUST a feeling...

UMass87
Hall of Fame
Posts: 8245
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 9:01 am

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by UMass87 » Sat Oct 25, 2014 9:08 pm

A good punter wouldn't hurt either.

Marshmont_63
Senior
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 3:56 pm
Location: Chestnut Hill

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by Marshmont_63 » Sat Oct 25, 2014 11:36 pm

You know what we should do? We should go recruit a soccer player out of high school that has a great leg. Then, we convince him to come kick field goals...PROBLEM SOLVED. Why bother to recruit subpar kickers? Go recruit a soccer player with a cannon of a leg :D
“When people come to our building we want them to feel the house of P.A.I.N.” -- Chaz Williams

seanc
newbie
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:29 pm

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by seanc » Sun Oct 26, 2014 1:36 am

Marshmont_63 wrote:You know what we should do? We should go recruit a soccer player out of high school that has a great leg. Then, we convince him to come kick field goals...PROBLEM SOLVED. Why bother to recruit subpar kickers? Go recruit a soccer player with a cannon of a leg :D

The talent of the kicker isn't the problem. Lucas, Wylie, Laurent are playing at the FBS level for a reason. Their struggles must be all mental at this point. I've never played kicker before, but I would imagine that missing a few chip shots would really get to your head and hurt your confidence.

Camby4Life
Senior
Posts: 847
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 2:00 am
Location: South Boston

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by Camby4Life » Sun Oct 26, 2014 3:44 am

Old Cage wrote:Whip confirms what a couple of us posted right away when it happened:

Matt Vautour @GazetteUMass · 3 hours ago
Whipple told radio he did let Toledo score to get ball back
I'm really surprised no one is questioning this decision. My first reaction when I saw they let them score was it was a pretty risky play given where Toledo had the ball and the time left on the clock. A 36 yard field goal into a solid wind with the game on the line is no chip shot for a college, Mac, kicker and one could argue it could be in the 50% range. The Toledo kicker was 12-15 on season with a long of 41 and 26-27 on pat's. There was 38 seconds left on the clock, Toledo could have run a few more plays and get into chip shot range, but they also could have turned it over or get called for a hold or another penalty. By giving up the score, we had to go a full field with 30 seconds left and 2 timeouts. If Toledo had it inside the 10, the strategy makes more sense. Also, if you're going to give it up from the 19, it would make more sense if there was a minute+ left on the clock. Making your offense score a td in only 30 seconds is a lot to ask.

Jack
Senior
Posts: 1234
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:14 pm

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by Jack » Sun Oct 26, 2014 8:07 am

Camby4Life wrote:
Old Cage wrote:Whip confirms what a couple of us posted right away when it happened:

Matt Vautour @GazetteUMass · 3 hours ago
Whipple told radio he did let Toledo score to get ball back
I'm really surprised no one is questioning this decision. My first reaction when I saw they let them score was it was a pretty risky play given where Toledo had the ball and the time left on the clock. A 36 yard field goal into a solid wind with the game on the line is no chip shot for a college, Mac, kicker and one could argue it could be in the 50% range. The Toledo kicker was 12-15 on season with a long of 41 and 26-27 on pat's. There was 38 seconds left on the clock, Toledo could have run a few more plays and get into chip shot range, but they also could have turned it over or get called for a hold or another penalty. By giving up the score, we had to go a full field with 30 seconds left and 2 timeouts. If Toledo had it inside the 10, the strategy makes more sense. Also, if you're going to give it up from the 19, it would make more sense if there was a minute+ left on the clock. Making your offense score a td in only 30 seconds is a lot to ask.
It is alot to ask. So is asking your offense to score a game tying FG w/only no seconds left on the clock. Allowing Toledo to run down the clock to 5 seconds and kick for the game winning FG was the other option. Whip made the decision he thought gave the team the best chance to win the game. It didn't work out. Tough call either way and Whip's choice was a reasonable way to go so I'm not going to question/second guess the decision. Chances are you go the other way - Detmer kicks the FG w/no time left.

UMass87
Hall of Fame
Posts: 8245
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 9:01 am

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by UMass87 » Sun Oct 26, 2014 8:29 am

For me, Whip's decision is just one more reason I'm so happy he's the UMass coach. Sure, there was some chance that Toledo missed the field goal but had they made it there was no chance of a UMass win. Whip gambled for the win and I loved it.

User avatar
Rolling Ridge
Junior
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:17 pm

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by Rolling Ridge » Sun Oct 26, 2014 8:40 am

Camby4Life wrote:
Old Cage wrote:Whip confirms what a couple of us posted right away when it happened:

Matt Vautour @GazetteUMass · 3 hours ago
Whipple told radio he did let Toledo score to get ball back
I'm really surprised no one is questioning this decision. My first reaction when I saw they let them score was it was a pretty risky play given where Toledo had the ball and the time left on the clock. A 36 yard field goal into a solid wind with the game on the line is no chip shot for a college, Mac, kicker and one could argue it could be in the 50% range. The Toledo kicker was 12-15 on season with a long of 41 and 26-27 on pat's. There was 38 seconds left on the clock, Toledo could have run a few more plays and get into chip shot range, but they also could have turned it over or get called for a hold or another penalty. By giving up the score, we had to go a full field with 30 seconds left and 2 timeouts. If Toledo had it inside the 10, the strategy makes more sense. Also, if you're going to give it up from the 19, it would make more sense if there was a minute+ left on the clock. Making your offense score a td in only 30 seconds is a lot to ask.
After the 36 yard pass play, Toledo ran only one play that got them to the UMass 19. It was at that point UMass took the timeout and made the decision to let them score, with 38 seconds remaining on the clock before the scoring play ran. So they didn't really have much chance to exercise that option before the play from the 19.

I think our D was gassed and had shown little ability to stop Toledo in the second half. Another play or two and it would likely have been the chip shot from the 10-ish yard line anyway, and we'd have had no time to respond. It was a lousy situation to be in, Whip gambled and lost. But UMass' biggest asset this year is our explosive offense, so better to put it in their hands and hope for a miracle that almost surely lose on chip shot field goal.

It would have been great to have won this one, but I think we gave it all we had. The only thing I'd like back are some of those penalties which I think hurt us in some key situations.

harbo
Hall of Fame
Posts: 2157
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 10:22 pm

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by harbo » Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:04 am

I've got no problem with the decision. Toledo was in FG range. The odds of Toledo fumbling or the the kicker missing a FG were pretty small. The odds of us marching down the field to tie the game (or, who knows, win with a two-point conversion) were equally small. Teams go into prevent defenses in those cases and you can move down the field and potentially get two shots to the end zone. Whipple likes offense and preferred to control his own destiny, so he went with it. If nothing else, they got game practice for any future similar situations.

tdmass
Senior
Posts: 1256
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:40 am
Location: Ormond Beach,Florida

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by tdmass » Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:21 am

Anybody complaining about Whips decision doesn't know him well. This is how he coaches like it or not. To me the offense once again had a chance to win this thing with less than 4 minutes to go(score tied) and couldn't get it done after the defense forced a punt. For all the good the offense and Froh have done, this has happened in every one of the 5 losses . . we can't seem to make that final drive to win it!

Jack
Senior
Posts: 1234
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:14 pm

Re: Game 9: Toledo

Post by Jack » Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:43 am

Toledo is probably the best team in the MAC and UMass nearly beat them on their home field. I'm not satisfied w/losing to good teams b/c Since the arrival of Whip and the installation of Whip's philosophy and approach - this program has now improved to a level where we should expect to beat most MAC teams. On the flip side - if you took the points and the over like I did - you're smiling. 17 points? it was like shooting fish in a barrel. :D

Post Reply