Does Hawk change his style of game management this year?

[sackman]

In year one, he would often go for it on 4th down just to instil a sense of pride in the players. He would do odd things that were aimed more at changing the mindset of the players than at actually winning the game. Year two, he goes for it on his own 40 yard line in Ames, and the wheels totally fall off.

So with a lot of pressure on him to win, and win now, and with his own stated goal of 10 wins, does he back off that stuff and coach the game a little more straight up this year?

 

[dio]

I doubt he changes his style, but I would prefer it if we smarten up just a tad. I like the recklessness to some degree... but there are times when it is okay to punt on 4th and 1 :lol:

 

[96 Buff]

Was he this aggressive/reckless/whatever during his later years at Boise? I'm curious if his aggressiveness has to do with the available talent.

 

[sackman]

I doubt he changes his style, but I would prefer it if we smarten up just a tad. I like the recklessness to some degree... but there are times when it is okay to punt on 4th and 1 :lol:

You know something? I don't think Hawk will EVER live that down. Ever. And he shouldn't. It's like calling a fake punt from your own 30 yard line in the Big 12 championship game when you're up by 17 points. You just don't do it. And you wonder what in the hell got in to him in the first place to think it was a good idea. It's like going for two in the second quarter. You just don't do it - ever. And yet there are coaches out there who do this stuff all the time. :huh:

 

[Duff Man]

The one that really sticks out to me aside from the ISU game is the KSU game a couple years ago in Manhattan. We were playing from behind pretty much the entire game, but were still within striking distance (one possession) near halftime. He decided to go for it on 4th down inside our own territory instead of punting it and pinning KSU deep, thus forcing KSU to run out the clock and go into the locker room up 7. We could not convert and they take over, eventually making a FG to end the half up by 10. That was pretty much the ballgame as we got worked over in the second half.:huh:

 

[B1Buff]

He was agressive at Boise too.

 

[sackman]

The one that really sticks out to me aside from the ISU game is the KSU game a couple years ago in Manhattan. We were playing from behind pretty much the entire game, but were still within striking distance (one possession) near halftime. He decided to go for it on 4th down inside our own territory instead of punting it and pinning KSU deep, thus forcing KSU to run out the clock and go into the locker room up 7. We could not convert and they take over, eventually making a FG to end the half up by 10. That was pretty much the ballgame as we got worked over in the second half.:huh:

Yes, I remember that, too. What I don't remember is whether CU was going to get the ball to start the 2nd half or not. If CU was going to get the ball at the beginning of the 2nd half, then the move was insane. If KSU was going to get the ball, then it might have been somewhat justified.

Coaching at CU isn't like coaching at Boise. It's a different ball game. It's D-1 football. It's the Big 12. There's a difference between being aggressive and being reckless. You can get away with being reckless at Boise because nobody expects anything from you. At CU, the expectations are much different. We have to try to compete with the likes of Texas and Oklahoma and 3-4 other top 25 teams in the conference. Boise doesn't have to deal with that.

 

[Duff Man]

Yes, I remember that, too. What I don't remember is whether CU was going to get the ball to start the 2nd half or not. If CU was going to get the ball at the beginning of the 2nd half, then the move was insane. If KSU was going to get the ball, then it might have been somewhat justified.

Coaching at CU isn't like coaching at Boise. It's a different ball game. It's D-1 football. It's the Big 12. There's a difference between being aggressive and being reckless. You can get away with being reckless at Boise because nobody expects anything from you. At CU, the expectations are much different. We have to try to compete with the likes of Texas and Oklahoma and 3-4 other top 25 teams in the conference. Boise doesn't have to deal with that.

I looked it up. We got the ball first in the second half and had a nice drive going until... we got stopped on 4th down just inside KSU territory.:wow:

 

[B1Buff]

does anybody complain about the calls when we get the 1st. its a damned if you do, damned if you dont situation. I like his aggressiveness, although I would agree that sometimes it is reckless, he definately needs to back it off a bit.

 

[Dorn09]

not being behind in every game will change your game management!

 

[Chilly]

Yes, I remember that, too. What I don't remember is whether CU was going to get the ball to start the 2nd half or not. If CU was going to get the ball at the beginning of the 2nd half, then the move was insane. If KSU was going to get the ball, then it might have been somewhat justified.

Coaching at CU isn't like coaching at Boise. It's a different ball game. It's D-1 football. It's the Big 12. There's a difference between being aggressive and being reckless. You can get away with being reckless at Boise because nobody expects anything from you. At CU, the expectations are much different. We have to try to compete with the likes of Texas and Oklahoma and 3-4 other top 25 teams in the conference. Boise doesn't have to deal with that.

Having lived in Boise at the same time Hawkins was coaching there I can tell you that the expectations fro that program were very high.

 

[BuffsRising]

I like the aggressiveness, even though he overdoes it sometimes. McCartney and Neuheisel were pretty aggressive too, but they had an awful lot of speed, speed, speed. Its easier to be justify being aggressive when you have speed on offense to make it really pay off and the speed on defense to cover up when it doesn't.

But, yeah, that KSU and ISU games were over the top. And we weren't exactly dripping with speed.

 

[LaserDeathHawk]

I say **** the critics Hawk...attack, always attack.

 

[InTheBuff]

Mark my words. Sometime this season CU will have a 4th & short & Scott will
be back as the punter and he will try to run for the 1st down.

 

[Mick Ronson]

In year one, he would often go for it on 4th down just to instil a sense of pride in the players. He would do odd things that were aimed more at changing the mindset of the players than at actually winning the game.

not sure i can totally agree with that. he was trying a little too hard to win.....installing confidence is what you say when it doesn't work and you go 2-10.

you can turn it around and say "well, it shows he doesn't trust his D"....when the conventional wisdom is to punt.

and the ISU punt was a blunder. even he admitted it.

 

[96 Buff]

Trying to hard to win? What the mother**** does that mean?

 

[Mick Ronson]

Trying to hard to win? What the mother**** does that mean?

not well said by me, but meaning in distinction to the post i quoted about putting confidence ahead of "winning". my point is that, like others have said, being reckless or (IMO in year 1) thinking he could outsmart/outgamble teams while underestimating the level of competition.

trying too hard to win games on one play or one gamble when conventional wisdom says punt the ball. Missouri, UGA come to mind.

 

[CarolinaBuff]

does anybody complain about the calls when we get the 1st. its a damned if you do, damned if you dont situation. I like his aggressiveness, although I would agree that sometimes it is reckless, he definately needs to back it off a bit.

Just because you make it sometimes doesn't mean it was the right decision, sometimes you just beat the odds. There's certainly plenty of situations where going for it on 4th down makes sense, but most of those scenarios don't include being in your own half of the field. :huh:

 

[buffsroam]

You could argue this about any coach and team. They all take a shot (gamble) sometimes.

If Hawk takes fewer gambles in the future, the same people would complain that he is to conservative. Some "fans" will never be satisfied no matter what happens on the field.

I say get a bowl this year and compete for the B12 championship in 2010. From there, build a top 10 program.

 

[BeachBronco]

He may not have to change his style, we should have the offensive line and runningbacks to be able to go for it on 4th down.

 

[The Monk]

I've generally liked his 4th down calls, it's down one through three where it's suspect.

 

[jjbuffs13]

Does changing the game management also mean that we will no longer call PA Pass calls on 3rd and 15 ala the end of the ****braska game?

I also dont have a problem with the 4th down calls (most of the time) sometimes thats what you have to do to give confidence in your offfense. But at the same time you run the risk of not converting and then decreasing confidence as well

 

[DBT]

I think what people forget is that we were down and Hawk was trying to instill a level of confidence in the players. So, he may have felt that going for it on fourth down had a better than 50/50 chance and, if sucsessful, would have a positive effect on the team. He also sent a message that "I believe in you." You see it all the time in baseball when a coach goes to the mound in the 8th inning of a close game and tells the pitcher, "You have to get this guy." He leaves him in because he is trying to send a message, "I believe in you."

 

[77buff]

In year one, he would often go for it on 4th down just to instil a sense of pride in the players. He would do odd things that were aimed more at changing the mindset of the players than at actually winning the game. Year two, he goes for it on his own 40 yard line in Ames, and the wheels totally fall off.

So with a lot of pressure on him to win, and win now, and with his own stated goal of 10 wins, does he back off that stuff and coach the game a little more straight up this year?

Oh brother - where art thou?

 

[Mick Ronson]

I think what people forget is that we were down and Hawk was trying to instill a level of confidence in the players. So, he may have felt that going for it on fourth down had a better than 50/50 chance and, if sucsessful, would have a positive effect on the team. He also sent a message that "I believe in you." You see it all the time in baseball when a coach goes to the mound in the 8th inning of a close game and tells the pitcher, "You have to get this guy." He leaves him in because he is trying to send a message, "I believe in you."

i understand the "vote of confidence" play, but the ISU game was year 2 and a terrible call--ISU hasn't moved the ball or scored and we are up 2 scores....punt the ball and let the D handle things until they SHOW they can go the length of the field. like i said before, sometimes you give your D a vote of confidence that says....you give us 3 and out and we're in better field position. UGA and Missouri in year 1 were relatively early in the season.

as far as being "down", there were problems and gaps in the depth chart (OL!) and even as badly as the Cox/White/BJax thing played out....you go back most people expected 6-7, maybe 8 wins with the new "Boise Playbook" and Hawk talking up special teams and "mojo" and all that.

in hindsight, we were down, but to say it's all "confidence building" post facto rings a little like revisionism.

jmo.

 

[LaserDeathHawk]

We are building the program to support the mentality...attack, relentless attack.

 

[Mick Ronson]

We are building the program to support the mentality...attack, relentless attack.

that's exactly how we defended Chase Daniel. attack. have you watched us get into 3rd and long situations. is that "attacking". we haven't been a very good football team the last 3 years.

all those words sound great together, but it sounds hollow until we have a 7-8 win season with this schedule. MU, KU, NU at home.

 

[SJBuff]

I like the aggressiveness, even though he overdoes it sometimes. McCartney and Neuheisel were pretty aggressive too, but they had an awful lot of speed, speed, speed. Its easier to be justify being aggressive when you have speed on offense to make it really pay off and the speed on defense to cover up when it doesn't.

But, yeah, that KSU and ISU games were over the top. And we weren't exactly dripping with speed.

:yeahthat:
I didn't mind Mac and Neu being a little more aggressive on 4th downs because even if things went bad, back then, we had "big play making" talent on the team. In those days if a 4th and short went against us and the other team got a short field and a quick score, we could make up that deficit quickly with a big play from Hagan/Bienemy/Pritchard/Kordell/CJohnson/Westbrook.

If you're style is to play it fast and loose then you need to have the big play horses on your team to make up for when those gamble plays don't go your way. We haven't really had that kind of big play making "change the momentum of the game in one play" kind of talent the last three years. We are closer, but I haven't really seen it on the field yet.

 

[LincolnBuff]

In year one, he would often go for it on 4th down just to instil a sense of pride in the players. He would do odd things that were aimed more at changing the mindset of the players than at actually winning the game. Year two, he goes for it on his own 40 yard line in Ames, and the wheels totally fall off.

So with a lot of pressure on him to win, and win now, and with his own stated goal of 10 wins, does he back off that stuff and coach the game a little more straight up this year?

I agree with all that and have always liked his aggressive style and risk taking but there is a fine line between aggressive and stupid. He needs to just line it up and play now.

I was at that ISU game and CU had that game in hand until that, after that it was if the flood gates had opened and it was all ISU after that.

 

[nosejob]

Hawk is running out of excuses. He already wore out the injury excuse last year, this season he needs to win at least 8, otherwise he's on his way out.