Haven't seen any comments on this. It's a glaring coaching error, IMHO.

The fake punt was a high-risk play against and opponent you're trailing by only three points with time running out in the first half, but who gets the ball first in the second half. Failure could (and did) leave the opponent with a pretty decent chance to get three points, maybe seven -- certainly a greater chance than if they'd had a starting position 40 or so yards further back.

Reminded me of the Emsminger (I think it was) call for a pass deep in A&M's territory against Tech in Lubbock in 1995. Corey Pullig throws a pick six to Zach Thomas. Tech wins. The game had been tied -- but it was early in the season and Tech already had a conference loss.

And indeed, Miami did get the FG opportunity. Missed, yeah, because of kicker or wind, but the fact that they were in position to pad the lead and then get the ball first in the second half wasn't smart football on A&M's part.

Agreed on the idea that it was a good call. Worst case it's neutral. Had to try and get something going.

Elko needs to get over himself and hire a special teams coach. He's acting very Jimbo like by refusing to do so.

Okay, too much alcohol and working form memory. Acknowledge score was tied. Sorry.

IMO, probability of failure was higher than probability of success. Others may disagree, but 't;s inarguable that failure sets Miami up for a decent shot at an FG attempt, and we know they'll get the ball first in the second half.

You could easily down by 10 in a low-scoring game with an offense that's not exactly lighting up the scoreboard before you see the ball again.

I'd've punted.

DCC80 said:

---

I'd've punted.

---

Might be why you aren't paid to make the decision.

Sometimes in life you have to roll the dice.

One of my pet peeves in passing, and maybe more here with a non-QB, is failure to use the field smartly to way increase chance of success when receiver has the advantage/step:


Throw more away from the sideline and let receiver run to it. he was already behind tbe defender. if tgat pass was say 5-10 yards more inside, he could have got there first.

Instead they are firced to throw "JUST over" the defender, but inside the sideline- a very high degree of difficulty.

The bigger travesty was forcing a turnover and then doing absolutely nothing.

I didn't understand why the punter threw a longer pass on 4th down than our QB did on any down in the quarter other than 3 passes -- 2 of which were caught for 1st downs.

It was pretty clear they were ready for the fake. Either that, or it developed so slowly and they got ready. Miami's defensive speed was way better than ours (on defense for comparison's sakes, but also where it actually affected us, on offense). Once again, we have an Aggie coach that doesn't put a premium on speed like Alabama and LSU have for decades. We're better than we were under Jimbo, and way better than under previous coaches, but not elite SEC. And that's where we need to be.

Yeah. My first thought was if the punter released that ball .5 seconds sooner its a completion. That D back closed that initial separation wicked fast.

coupland boy said:

---

I didn't mind it. Appreciated the call.

---

Agreed.

It was a great call.

However, the punter's job is to get a first down. Punter thought he needed to throw a touchdown.

Grab the snap. Stride to sell the fake. Then throw it. Bombing it 25 yards downfield allowed Miami to recover.

the killer play was the incompletion prior

should have been an easy 1st down pickup to Smith on 3rd & 4

Because it was well executed and the punter made a good throw that WR had a chance to catch I am ok with it
Shows confidence in the D

The call was acceptable considering how the defense was playing. But why have a punter throw a 20yd pass when you only need 4 yards? Throw a 5 yard pass or run.