3rd and 1

The Star wrote as long a feature as you can ever expect to see on a specific down and distance: third down and one yard to go. How teams approach it, how that's changed over time, and quotes from Dunigan, O'Billovich, Porter, etc.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/football/cfl/article/1039787--cfl-teams-finding-ways-to-gain-the-longest-yard

Our team's approach is ALWAYS the same.

Porter up the gut.

Ben Zambiaisi would have killed him.

Porter never gets low enough and barely (when he does) makes the necessary yard /inches.

So far, it's been working:
Here's a breakdown, including 2nd and 1s and 3rd and 1s.
Week one versus Winnipeg: 3/3

Week two versus Edmonton: 1/1

Week three versus Saskatchewan: 2/2

Week four versus BC: 2/2

Week five versus Montreal: 0/0

Week six versus Calgary: 1/1

Week seven versus Toronto: 6/6

That totals 15 for 15 on the season. If you want to complain that we're too conservative on second and short, maybe you have a case. But when it comes to effectiveness of our QB sneak on short yardage, it's hard to argue with 15 for 15. And as fun as Zambiasi was to watch, Solomon Elimimian would eat him for lunch.

Yeah, Qb sneaks don't seem to be a problem for Hamilton this year. Porter is getting a good push from his line and fighting for the marker even when the initial surge is absent.

I'm not worried about 3rd and 1 at all.

I'd like us to be a little more creative and take some more chances on 2nd and 1.... but 3rd and 1 we go out and move the sticks.

This approach works fine.

Is this a complaint? If so, what would you prefer the Cats to do?

Once in awhile...

SOMETHING different.

Just to keep opposing defences on their toes.

The question is, "When do you do something different?". Do you show your stuff week 8, or do you pull it out when you need it during the playoffs or late in the season. I 'm not a fan of playing poker and some of my cards are already showing. We don't need it now, so don't show it now.

On 2nd and 1, I would totally agree that they should go deep on occasion. But not on 3rd and 1, unless the coaches have seen something that makes it less of a risk.

Because it all comes down to risk management. Not making the 1st down on a 2nd down play isn't as bad as not making it on 3rd down. And with QBs typically having 65-70% completion rates, that means a 30-35% incompletion rate. I'm thinking that's way too high a probability of turning it over on downs. Compare that to the probability of making the 1st down on a QB sneak - 100% so far this year, and typically at least 95%. Sure, there is benefit if you make the deep ball. Enough to counter the high risk of giving up the ball where it is? I don't think so.

Why? Your third-down conversion rate is very good. Why get fancy when 95% of the time, the QB sneak is the better play in a league where defenses line up a yard off the ball?

The past few years, Hamilton has struggled on short-yardage conversions. Now they're executing very well in those situations, yet still some are complaining? :?

Welcome to the wonderful world of Ti-Cat fandom. Where no matter what the team does, there is always someone more than willing to say it's the wrong thing to do.

Oh, believe me, we've got our share of that type of fan on the Alouettes side. :smiley:

Our team has been to the Grey Cup game three times in four years, winning the past two, and yet there are still Als fans who act like the sky is falling whenever the least little thing goes wrong. :lol:

I thinkthat for now, the team should stick with the status quo of running the ball up the middle on third and one.

I agree with the idea of not doing this every time though. On third and one, the entire stadium knows the all too

common play of QB Sneak up the gut.Thinking about this play, the entire defense has an opportunity to stop the

one yard gain and take the ball away from the offense. Occasionally, I would I would prefer one of our running

backs take the ball to the outside and thereby eliminate half the defense who are waiting for the play to evolve

up the middle. I think this would make our offense less predictable. My opinion only. )

I'll take the flag for resurrecting a dead thread just to ask you how liked that "SOMETHING different" last night? That was much better than having Porter put his down and get the first down, eh? :roll:

That was 2nd down.

Porter should have gotten rid of the ball immediately, even if no one was open so that at least it could have been 3rd and short, and continue the drive.

Bonehead play by Porter, being indecisive yet again, and hurting the team. His indecisiveness is his biggest weakness IMO. If he can overcome that, and slow the game down and see it as Glenn does, then I think Porter can be a very good CFL QB.

Gotta disagree with you on this one Captain. I liked the play but not sure I'd have called it in this game, or at that point in this game with the score tied. I expect the call was not Porter's, rather the coach's. Thought he did a good job of making it look like the usual sneak and then rising to throw. The poor execution was on someone (?) else's part allowing Willis, untouched, to very quickly hit Porter from behind. I make my comments on just the one viewing. I'd like to see a replay and wonder if the go to receiver was open.

Oh, I like the call.

And I`d also like to see the replay, but in that situation, with a very short (or nonexistent) drop back, the QB has to get rid of the ball almost immediately.

And given that 2ND AND 1 situation, avoiding a sack must be first priority, not the completion. That way you still have a conventional shortage yardage situation in which to get another first down.

Willis, unblocked from the blind side. Porter had no chance. We're lucky he was able to hold onto the ball.

Agreed!

Hickman blocked air.