CKD Tendency Of Close Games

[BAMARICH]

One of the things that concerned me when Kalen Deboer took over as head coach was going back and reviewing his tenure at Washington. In CKD's last year at UW, and especially in the second half of the schedule, UW had a tendency of allowing teams to stay in games well into the 4th quarter. That's understandable against teams like Oregon, Texas, and Oregon State (all games that came down to the wire). However, games against a 3-9 Arizona State team, 3-9 Stanford, and 5-7 Washington State followed the same script. Some of this was seen the year prior also, but these examples suffice.

Fast forward to this year, and this tendency is again obvious. Against UGA the game was 24-21 UA the entire 4th quarter... with UGA turning the ball over on downs at the UA 8-yard line with 13:20 to go. In the Vandy game, it was 20-14 UA with 4:07 in the 4th quarter (UA kicks FG to go up 9). Against Missouri, we were only up 20-17 at the 3:17 mark in the 4th before scoring a TD and allow Mizzou to draw it to 3 with 1:40 to go. And against Oklahoma, the game stayed 23-21 OK during the entire 4th quarter. Obviously, we can understand all the close games against these teams - they're all top 20 squads.

However... against South Carolina we go into the 4th down 22-14 and take a 29-22 lead with 34 seconds to go. Against LSU we allow them to close it to an 8-point game (17-9) with 10:28 to go before going up 11 at the 4:25 mark. Then in the game against Auburn it's tied 20-20 for most of the 4th quarter until we score a TD on 4th down with 3:50 left to go... and fortunately get a TO with them driving on our 27 yard line at 33 seconds.

We could go back to 2024 and see some of the same tendencies at times, but not like this year and 2023 UW. IMO, when there's this much evidence, it's clear our staff plans and maybe even wants to "win" in the 4th quarter... even against the teams that have no business playing with us that late in the games. A few observations after writing all this. One, this strategy puts a LOT of pressure on your offense to deliver in crunch time. A great example is Ty's pass from the 6 vs. Auburn... it could have just as easily been an incompletion as it was a TD. You also have to be perfect on defense in these types of games... one fluke play and you're tied or even down a score. Second, if this is a strategy (and I think it clearly is), I'd feel better IF we have a more dominant running game. It's one thing to lean on a team with the running game in the 4th quarter like we often did in the Saban years when you've got dominant OL/RB groups. It's another thing when you have a mediocre running attack like this year (I feel like Grubb made a mistake of relying on it against Oklahoma in the 4th). Third, this is what we can expect with CKD IMO. If you enjoyed the "cushy victories" under Saban against less talented teams (and often good teams too), there's not going to be many of them on a yearly basis - and when it happens, it's an anomaly.

 

[crimsonaudio]

NIL induced competitive balance is a thing.

 

[rolltide_21]

NIL induced competitive balance is a thing.

The fact CKD took UW to the national championship is proof of your point. They’re occasionally pretty good but for the most part an 8-9 win program. Add in NIL they brought in a QB and some WRs. Poof, national championship contender.

 

[BAMARICH]

NIL induced competitive balance is a thing.

Thanks for deleting the duplicate. I didn't do a deeper dive into it, but anecdotally looking at the way Grubb calls games offensively in the 2nd half, it appears to be more strategic than due to competition. A good example was this year's Oklahoma game. In the last drive we had the ball, it seemed obvious we weren't just trying to score... we were trying to score WHILE milking the clock. If OU had a terrific offense or we had a terrible defense, I understand the strategy. However, IMO we should have tried to score as quickly as possible in that situation (Simpson torched them the whole game)... but that wasn't the strategy. This strategy is going to get you beat at times - and the Vandy and UT games last year possibly add to these examples.

 

[crimsonaudio]

I'm not sure last year's games point to this as an issue for CKD:

 

[Power Eye]

I understand the point, and think that the style of offense lends itself to closer games, but the SEC in general is becoming a one score league. I don't know the numbers, but I would imagine about half the SEC games were one score games. Of our 8 games, 5 were one score finishes, so I don't know that our results are materially different from the other teams at the top of the league, much less the rest of the conference.

 

[crimsonaudio]

I understand the point, and think that the style of offense lends itself to closer games, but the SEC in general is becoming a one score league. I don't know the numbers, but I would imagine about half the SEC games were one score games. Of our 8 games, 5 were one score finishes, so I don't know that our results are materially different from the other teams at the top of the league, much less the rest of the conference.

IIRC, about 40% of SEC matchups were one-score (8 points or fewer) games in 2025.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

DeBoer is now 6-4 in one-score games. Saban had a period of time (documented below) after his team was built as a monster where he was 7-5 in one-score games, and Saban wasn't dealing with how NIL has shuffled the deck.



=========================
In the 2009 Iron Bowl, Alabama beat Auburn with the toss to Roy Upchurch in the dying moments of the game and prevailed, 26-21.

The Tide roughed it out and scored 10 points in the fourth quarter to beat the late Ryan Mallet and Arkansas in 2010 by four points.

Alabama then lost four of the next five one-score games we played, the sole victory the infamous AJ to TJ toss against LSU in 2012. We then beat UGA in the SECCG - largely because of a seemingly insane at the time two-point conversion early on that meant UGA couldn't tie it with a FG.

We were then 7-5 in one-score games from 2013-2016, basically a game above .500 (switch one and it's even).

We were then 5-2 from 2017-2020, although of course that time frame includes the blowout loss to Clemson in the NCG.

We then sort of hit our stride and went 11-4 in Saban's last 3 years here.

Hmmm.......

2010-2020 - 16-11 in 27 one-score games

NIL Legalized: 1 July 2021

2021-23 - 11-4 in 15 one-score games


Now...I understand that one-score games can be a misleading stat. After all, a team might score on the final play to close it OR (such as the 2021 title game vs UGA), we might be down by one score and throw a pick six that makes it look more decisive than it was. But generally speaking those even out. For example, the infamous "Colt McCoy game" is a blowout on the scoreboard, but if you remember, we only led, 24-21, with 3:05 left when they got the ball with a chance to win the game.

We only had one other one-score game in 2009, Mount Cody's Rocky Block. Now....2008 is a different animal altogether with 3 wins, but that was also a team still being built and suffering the years of sanctions, too.

 

[CrimsonBloodn62]

I'm not sure last year's games point to this as an issue for CKD:

View attachment 54522

Thanks a lot, CA. Trying hard to erase the 2024 football season from my memory.

 

[bamajas]

Thanks for deleting the duplicate. I didn't do a deeper dive into it, but anecdotally looking at the way Grubb calls games offensively in the 2nd half, it appears to be more strategic than due to competition. A good example was this year's Oklahoma game. In the last drive we had the ball, it seemed obvious we weren't just trying to score... we were trying to score WHILE milking the clock. If OU had a terrific offense or we had a terrible defense, I understand the strategy. However, IMO we should have tried to score as quickly as possible in that situation (Simpson torched them the whole game)... but that wasn't the strategy. This strategy is going to get you beat at times - and the Vandy and UT games last year possibly add to these examples.

I think this is likely the strongest factor. It would connect to the "using the pass to as an extension of the run game" tendency, too

A couple of questions I've had about the same topic (but not sure how we'd find the answers):

1 - Does the 2nd half of the season pattern suggest other teams are adjusting to what we're doing and we're not countering as well? ie, would the Wisconsin game have been closer in November than in September?

2 - And is year 2 enough for us (or even himself) to know that this is how he wants it to be? He's not been a FBS HC anywhere for longer than 2 years. Might just be overly-optimistic, but is there a possibilty it gets better in years 3-4 as he builds the OL and full offense like he perfers?

And during games, part of me wants to say we "lack a killer instinct to put teams away" but then they're so clutch on 4th down and at the end of the game, so that's clearly "killer instinct" ... hard to rationalize it all

 

[Bamabuzzard]

In my opinion, what contributes to a lot of our "close game" issues is the OC not fully taking advantage of windows of time during games to put the game away. When everything is going our way, the defense has yet to stop what has gotten us to that point, we will completely waste multiple series. Then, as games usually do, the flow or "momentum" changes, the windows where everything was going our way closes and the game is still in a competitive balance. It has been an obvious pattern all season long. If we could have punch one more touchdown in to go up 24-0 Saturday, when everything was flowing our way, that game would have been over. But, the playcalling changed, we went away from what got us the 17-0 lead and wasted multiple series before halftime.

 

[92tide]

In my opinion, what contributes to a lot of our "close game" issues is the OC not fully taking advantage of windows of time during games to put the game away. When everything is going our way, the defense has yet to stop what has gotten us to that point, we will completely waste multiple series. Then, as games usually do, the flow or "momentum" changes, the windows where everything was going our way closes and the game is still in a competitive balance. It has been an obvious pattern all season long. If we could have punch one more touchdown in to go up 24-0 Saturday, when everything was flowing our way, that game would have been over. But, the playcalling changed, we went away from what got us the 17-0 lead and wasted multiple series before halftime.

i believe if we wouldn’t have shanked the punt when up 17-0, this would have ended up a much more comfortable win

 

[arthurdawg]

That seems to the thing that bugs me most about Grubbs... We are tearing the opposition up and he suddenly completely changes things and we flounder.

And he isn't changing it because they stopped us either! If there was one thing Kiffy was good at, it was that he'd run the same play 65 times a game if it worked and you didn't stop him.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

That seems to the thing that bugs me most about Grubbs... We are tearing the opposition up and he suddenly completely changes things and we flounder.

Grubbs likes to play, "Let's see if THIS will work!"

 

[DrollTide]

We do seem unable to put the game away when we have a healthy but not insurmountable lead. Last year, we were up 28 on Georgia, and they came back and it needed a counter-miracle for us to win it. Giving up big leads into a nail-biter or outright loss has been common.

We are 1 play from a loss far too often.

I see CrimsonAudio says it is NIL, surely that plays a factor. The weak running game (possibly also NIL-related) is a major factor, we can no longer "take the air out of the ball" as Saban used to say. Maybe it is something to do specifically with DeBoer. I wish it would change, perhaps it won't.

 

[denver]

This is why Im on the fence with DeBoer( and Grubb) They seems to go very conservative second half if we are leading, killing momentum instead of going for the kill shot by milking the clock and conservative or bizarre play calling. I miss the days we just kept rolling up the score..our second half scoring average is barely at 10, or maybe under, in conference games. That makes for very nerve-racking watching!

 

[BAMARICH]

I think this is likely the strongest factor. It would connect to the "using the pass to as an extension of the run game" tendency, too

A couple of questions I've had about the same topic (but not sure how we'd find the answers):

1 - Does the 2nd half of the season pattern suggest other teams are adjusting to what we're doing and we're not countering as well? ie, would the Wisconsin game have been closer in November than in September?

2 - And is year 2 enough for us (or even himself) to know that this is how he wants it to be? He's not been a FBS HC anywhere for longer than 2 years. Might just be overly-optimistic, but is there a possibilty it gets better in years 3-4 as he builds the OL and full offense like he perfers?

And during games, part of me wants to say we "lack a killer instinct to put teams away" but then they're so clutch on 4th down and at the end of the game, so that's clearly "killer instinct" ... hard to rationalize it all

In regards to your first question, I think that's some of it... but might be the case across the board. With so much information available now, it's usually not a secret what you want to do after the first three or four games. In his three years with Grubb as his OC, it seems the answer to number 2 is "yes"... that's who he prefers to be as a coach. BTW, I don't have an issue with this philosophy. Every coach goes into a season and individual games saying "this is how we're going to win games". However, without a dominant running game, this philosophy is tough to consistently execute.

 

[countrytider]

In my opinion, what contributes to a lot of our "close game" issues is the OC not fully taking advantage of windows of time during games to put the game away. When everything is going our way, the defense has yet to stop what has gotten us to that point, we will completely waste multiple series. Then, as games usually do, the flow or "momentum" changes, the windows where everything was going our way closes and the game is still in a competitive balance. It has been an obvious pattern all season long. If we could have punch one more touchdown in to go up 24-0 Saturday, when everything was flowing our way, that game would have been over. But, the playcalling changed, we went away from what got us the 17-0 lead and wasted multiple series before halftime.

Bingo

When we feel we have a comfortable lead, everything changes. IE: our players doing the Crimson Crane as we go up 17-0 on Auburn in the 2nd quarter.

We take series off playing around on offense with multiple 3 and outs. Defense isn’t gonna hold forever…then the game tightens and we either hold on for the win, or have to make a play to win it since we give the lead away when we should have been staying focused and adding to it.

Hopefully it’s one of those things DeBoer improves at especially as he continues to grow in the SEC, and gets more of “his style” players in there.

 

[BAMARICH]

In my opinion, what contributes to a lot of our "close game" issues is the OC not fully taking advantage of windows of time during games to put the game away. When everything is going our way, the defense has yet to stop what has gotten us to that point, we will completely waste multiple series. Then, as games usually do, the flow or "momentum" changes, the windows where everything was going our way closes and the game is still in a competitive balance. It has been an obvious pattern all season long. If we could have punch one more touchdown in to go up 24-0 Saturday, when everything was flowing our way, that game would have been over. But, the playcalling changed, we went away from what got us the 17-0 lead and wasted multiple series before halftime.

A friend of mine pointed out Saturday that when we got the ball back when leading 17-0, we could have done exactly what you said IF we had simply stayed with what we'd been doing. Instead, on first down, we tried a trick play that totally backfired. We ended up going three and out on that drive and on the next one also... and Auburn went into halftime with momentum on their side.

 

[BAMARICH]

That seems to the thing that bugs me most about Grubbs... We are tearing the opposition up and he suddenly completely changes things and we flounder.

And he isn't changing it because they stopped us either! If there was one thing Kiffy was good at, it was that he'd run the same play 65 times a game if it worked and you didn't stop him.

You're 100% correct. IMO, this is as much Grubb as it is CKD. I'm like you... don't overthink it!