14-18-2 The Holtz "play not to lose" FALICY

Go back and read the game threads. Every Tech fan in the world knows when the game is lost, no matter what the score is. There's a shift in the wind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Historian

Two things have happened: 1) At key moments in certain big games we've gone into a shell - afraid not to lose.
2) Decision making that's directly cost us games, most of which the coaching staff would love to have back.

---

Exhibit A: The S. Carolina game. After playing a very good game, we played "not to lose" prevent defense for just the final 47 seconds and it cost us the win. By contrast, we never rushed less than 4 men vs SMU (even when we were up by 41 points) and absolutely destroyed them. This is just one of several examples.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iaxrUndZSg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DogsWin

Exhibit A: The S. Carolina game. After playing a very good game, we played "not to lose" prevent defense for just the final 47 seconds and it cost us the win. By contrast, we never rushed less than 4 men vs SMU (even when we were up by 41 points) and absolutely destroyed them. This is just one of several examples.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iaxrUndZSg

---

And as I've said before, that's what makes it hard to bear. Holtz has proven that he can choose to call a certain way, with a favorable outcome. It's not that we're just plain bad (though thats an option). It's choices that stand between us and glory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Dawg

Go back and read the game threads. Every Tech fan in the world knows when the game is lost, no matter what the score is.
There's a shift in the wind.

---

And it smells like somebody tooted in JAS when it happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Houston Techsan

His reasoning was that he didn't think we could continue to score every time and we couldn't stop them. It was the right decision. Of course Hawaii went on to get donkey stomped by Georgia in the Sugar Bowl. Their play against us (I think we went 4-8 that year) convinced me that would happen.

---

That was his reason, yes. I didn't second guess him then, and am not now.

I was at the game too. Truthfully, Hawaii was over-rated, we were every bit as good as them...practically. They had a great year, made plays when needed to win some close games. Not taking anything away from them. But that night in Ruston, the Dawgs stood toe-to-toe with them and had the same chance to win that game as they did. That's why the game went into OT, and why we were mere inches from pulling it out.

I thought it was the right call at that time. I remember that being the first home game on that ugly gray looking field turf. It looked terrible in person, and even worse on TV. Thankfully what we have now is much, much, much better.

The first Field Turf looked fine until they turned on the lights. It really looked silver with the lights on. I'm pretty sure they had to replace it under warranty or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Houston Techsan

The first Field Turf looked fine until they turned on the lights. It really looked silver with the lights on. I'm pretty sure they had to replace it under warranty or something.

---

Yes, but not because of the shine when lit. It was coming apart. The replacement field also came apart and it was replaced last year when the DAC was built. Our AD kept talking about all the new field turf like it was his accomplishment. The football field turf was the second replacement under warranty. The baseball and Title IX field were done though private donations that our AD had nothing to do with. Reckon the new field turf is on his resume?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

we were mere inches from pulling it out.

---

TWSS

Honi soit qui mal y pense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Champ967

ahem ... "fallacy"

---

Thank you. That had to be said...