what did Austin say to Drew?

Just curious how many other teams give their third string quarterbacks much, if any, game time - other than those who use them for third down sneaks. True, I would have liked to have seen Mathews, our second string QB, get more reps in our blowout games earlier in the season. But I wouldn't have expected to see Harris much at all, and definitely not Masoli, given that he was our fourth stringer hidden on the IR until Collaros replaced him there.

Also, are there any other teams, other than the Als, that have lost their top two QBs at the same time?

Sask Riders ,lost Durant & Glenn.

BC and Sask. In BC's case it has worked out quite well for them because they realized Jennings could play.

Harris wasn't third string in the games that Mathews started. I think there was times that he could have been put in and got some reps. I KNOW there were times when Zach was left in to pad his stats and the game was out of reach when I thought the back-ups could use some reps. It's not rocket scientist stuff to have "insurance". :wink:

You have got to be joking. Seriously it's Austin who needs to get the thicker skin. This guy is a textbook narcissist. How dare anyone even question him for he is Almighty and infallible. A polite person with tact would simply answer the question by explaining his rational to the confused fanbase. It's not like Drew Edwards asked him some personal or irrelevant question. Belittling Drew was completely unwarranted.

Both Austin and Edwards have good points on this one. It's tough after a game like that to face the questions from the media and just as tough to take it in Drew's case.

I'm sure all will be okay by next interview, let cooler heads prevail and concentrate on Winning the game Saturday in Ottawa!!

GO CATS GO!!!

"Mediocre people hate overachievers. Over achievers hate mediocrity "

I have never seen a pro team go for it on 3rd and 9 from their own 10 with 30 seconds left in a half before (down 6 points). Never.
That was, in effect, what Kent chose to do.
If he didn't understand that it was really half time, then that is pretty alarming.

Drew asked a legitimate question and didn't get an answer.

The last time that Austin was that short with Drew that I recall was after the 2013 Grey Cup loss. Austin did however apologize to Drew in front of all the media, a few days later in his post season scrum.

To his credit, I have often thought Austin was much more relaxed with the media in his scrums this season even after a loss and even when Zach was first injured. I do try to watch the daily scrums as well as post game and have seen him often joking with reporters, even when asked obvious questions. Frankly I have been impressed. I do believe that Sunday's curt responses were less characteristic of his relationship with the media this year. I suspect that he was royally ticked with a few things that didn't go well - the officiating, Mathews possible health as well as some of his play, too many missed opportunities, and of course the loss at home.

There is no way that Austin was going to pull Jeff to give Harris a few reps (BTW how many reps are "enough" for him, or any back up, to be ready to start?) when Jeff needed all the reps that he could get. As Austin often says, a QB only gets better by playing and with Jeff's inexperience, he needed to be playing the whole game.

In my eyes, there is no decision here. You have to go for it. I think it's stupid to even suggest otherwise. In Football, it's not only a matter of "You take the points" it's also a matter of "You prevent the likely opposing points"

Here is my methodology and I hope it gives some insight into the term calculated risk.

First off, fumbles in the last 2 minutes when a team in on running/kill the clock mode, punt returns for touchdowns, punt blocks, blocked/missed field goals when in range are all statistically, highly unlikely events. Maybe punt returns are a bit better with Speedy B. but these are all events that no responsible coach will bank on if it can be avoided. These aren't options the can be considered as possible.

In addition, marching the distance of the field from poor yardage and scoring a touchdown is unlikely but not beyond the realm of possibility. However, they become less and less likely the more you are strapped for time. Conversely, scoring a touchdown when in good field position is very likely.

So here are your options.

Option 1 - Kick into a heavy opposing wind - This practically guarantees Ottawa getting 3 points on a field goal and sealing the game with a high likely hood of a touchdown due to great field position. It also guarantees a minute, at best (likely less) left on the clock by the time you get the ball back, limiting your ability to close the gap, to the point of nearly impossible.

Extremely Unlikely Best case Scenario: You lose by 6
Realistic Best case scenario: You lose by 9
Realistic Scenario: You lose by 9 or 13
Worst case scenario: You lose by 13

Option 2 - Take a Safety - You concede 2 points and kick to Ottawa into heavy opposing wind. This gives them nearly two minutes and better then average field position almost already in field goal range and a decent chance for a touchdown. It also guarantees a minute (likely less) at best left on the clock by the time you get the ball back. Assuming you get a 2 and out, your only route to victory is to manage to run multiple successful Hail Mary's (the most desperate play in Football) as you'll only have a minute left on the clock to get a touchdown and then get a 2 point convert to tie the game and go to OT. You also have an unlikely chance of getting into field goal range and reducing the lead to 5.

Extremely Unlikely Best Case scenario: You Tie the game either via a punt return or 1 minute field march and 2pt conversion
Realistic Best Case Scenarios: You lose by 8 or 5
Realistic Scenario: You lose by 8 or 11
Worst case scenario: You lose by 15

Option 3 - Go For it - You go for it on 3rd and 9 which is a risky but not an insurmountable task. If you make it, a wealth of options opens up to you with almost 2 minutes left on the clock. You can march down the field and win by 1 (Unlikely but possible), you can get into field goal range and close the differential down to 3, you can lose by 6 (which is what happened), you can turnover the ball and anything could happen after that. If you don't, you turnover the ball on the 12 yard line, which gives Ottawa a high chance of a touchdown and a certain field goal.

Unlikely Best Case scenario: You win the game by marching down the field with 2 minutes left. Unlikely but possible.
Realistic Best Case Scenarios: You lose by 6 or 3
Realistic Scenarios: Lose by 3, 6 9 or 13
Worst case Scenario: Lose by 13

So looking at those options, Option 1 isn't even a choice. It has all the downsides of 3 with none of the benefits.

So we are down to option 2 and 3

Option 2

  • Your Best Case Scenario is a practical impossibility which is a tie. It practically warrants exclusion
  • Your other potential positive scenario's are losses by 5 and 8 which average to 6.5
  • Realistically, you lose by 8 or 11 or if you average it out, by 9.5
  • Your worst case scenario while unlikely is still possible is a loss by 15 almost certain loss by 11 which averages to 13

Option 3

  • Your Best Case Scenario is unlikely but still possible which is a win by 1
  • Your other potential positive scenarios are losses by 6 or 3 which average to 4.5
  • Realistically lose by 3, 6, 9 or 13 or if you average it out 7.75
  • Your worst case scenario is completely possible which is a loss by 13 with an unlikely chance of 9 which averages to 11

So pretty much, in every circumstance here, option 3 is preferred.

Extreme Best Case - Miracle Tie and OT vs Unlikely Win
Best Case - Lose by avg 6.5 vs Lose by avg 4.5
Realistic Case - Lose by avg 9.5 vs Lose by avg 7.75
Likely Worst Case - Lose by avg 13 vs Lose by avg 11
Extreme Worst Case - Lose by 15 vs Lose by 13

In the end, what happened? Option three was picked, and the Ti-Cats lost by 6 which was better then all of the safety scenarios except the two least likely safety scenarios, one of which would have been a miracle. If we had lost by 13, I still would have backed Austin up. All of the other options the Safety would have offered would have left the Cat behind by more on average with less chance to make up points and prevent additional ones.

Now that all said, the only argument for is as a coach you feel your offense is too bad to convert on a 9 yard throw (which it had done multiple times that day) and your defense is incapable of stopping a 12 yard red zone TD (hard, but Ottawa hadn't scored a single TD that game) and forcing a 9 point field goal, but somehow capable of preventing a TD from then opposing 45 (given the wind conditions and return abilities of Williams) and forcing an 11 point field goal (a worse option then a 9 point field goal and had been done several times before that game).

Given the Ti-Cats red zone defense, I know I'm choosing to go for it, every time.

Hammer, being right after you here, I won't reprint what you wrote, which I think was well thought out and expressed. And that comment comes from someone who thinks the coaching choices made were terrible. So it's a compliment to your effort and thought. I'd like to point out, though, that in your Option 2, you refer to Ottawa having nearly 2 minutes to score when, in fact, the clock read 0:53 when the ball was snapped on 3rd and 9 from the HAM 12 yd. line. Mathews rolled out right, threw an off target incompletion and was hit, immediately thereafter, and forced out of the game. The Roughing the Passer call gave us a 1st down. At that point, the clock read 0:32.

With the latest news, maybe you should redo your analysis with emphasis on which option would most likely have Mathews available to play in the second game. :wink:

I agree 100% with the above. So many 15 yard penalties on weak punts this year! I think teams should be going for it on 3rd down more often in the CFL - especially around the 55 yard line.

Kent acted like a complete ass. Drew asked a legit question, although I agree with Austin's decision to go for it, it still was a credible question considering this scenario with two teams does not arise very often. Athletes/coaches have to deal with dumb questions all the time and they answer them with ease it just isn't hard to be polite and if you have to in a moment of anger just throw a stupid cliché out there. Once again this wasn't even a dumb question though.

Simple response of, "I believe in my offence and would rather be winning the series than worry about being down 9 instead of 6 points.", just simple and for a guy who has been doing pressers for a long time its embarrassing how he handles himself at times.

Drew has every right to post what Kent said, if Kent didn't want it published for the public to see he shouldn't have said it in the first place, of course the Ti-Cats would cut that out but Drew has no reason to watch Austin's back because by calling him out multiple times now Austin has clearly shown that he has no respect for Drew's craft and his credibility in the media world. He really needs to jump off his high horse when it comes to Edwards, he seems to be the one Kent enjoys picking on and calling out the most.

Harris wasn't third string in the games that Mathews started. I think there was times that he could have been put in and got some reps. I KNOW there were times when Zach was left in to pad his stats and the game was out of reach when I thought the back-ups could use some reps. It's not rocket scientist stuff to have "insurance". :wink:
[/quote]
There is no way that Austin was going to pull Jeff to give Harris a few reps (BTW how many reps are "enough" for him, or any back up, to be ready to start?) when Jeff needed all the reps that he could get. As Austin often says, a QB only gets better by playing and with Jeff's inexperience, he needed to be playing the whole game.
[/quote]
On THIS, we will agree. Austin's pass happy I know it all, no looking down the road "ego", wouldn't allow it. :wink: You and I both don't "KNOW, what could have been", because Austin didn't give anyone but his "anointed" a shot! :expressionless:

Autsin Never stays anywhere long ’

Ottawa Renegades (2003) (QB)
Toronto Argonauts (2004–2006) (OC)
Saskatchewan Roughriders (2007)
University of Mississippi (2008-2010) (OC)
Cornell University (2010-2012)
Hamilton Tiger-Cats (2013–present)

I expect him move on from Hamilton with in 1 season or two .

If you look at it though... He left Ottawa for a promotion (QB to OC), left TO for a promotion (OC to HC). He then left the CFL to coach where daughter was going to school. I believe I read somewhere she had a baby and he wanted to be around family? Something along those lines.

So unless he gets a promotion or something comes up regarding his family, I don't see him leaving within a year or two.