As I read many of the posts on here and various other Bama boards, I see many people posting about the conservative nature of Mike Shula as an offensive coordinator and I must take exception to it. I thought, paticularly in the first half, that the playcalling was near flawless. Shula as an offensive coordinator receives a passing grade. Unfortunately, Shula as the head coach and chief decision maker did not receive those same marks.
I would like to give an example of a similar situation where Phillip Fulmer seemed to use the same strategy and the results were equally as disasterous.
In the 05' game, as we all know the score was tied with around five minutes left and Tennessee had driven the ball deep in opposing territory. On 3rd and goal from the 15, Fulmer faced a decision that would likely have a huge impact on who won the game. In both games, a TD for Bama/Tenn most likely would have sealed a victory given the fact that the other offenses probably could not have driven the ball the length of the field and scored a TD to tie the game. Therefore, putting the ball in the end zone at that time was at an absolute premium. Since it was only 3rd down and the field goal was a near chip shot there seemed to be no conceivable reason not to throw the ball in the end zone.
As we can remember, Fulmer obviously ignored the game situation and decided against going for the win, instead he chose to the throw a screen pass which even if not fumbled would not have made it into the end zone. He chose not to trust his offense and let the game ride on his kicker. The decision seemed puzzling to me since he started Clausen based on the fact that he made less critical mistakes than Ainge. If he didn't trust Clausen not to make a mistake, then why not start Erik Ainge who obviously had the stronger arm and more potential to be successful in vertical passing game.
Similarly this past Saturday, Shula chose not to let his offense win the game for him and instead chose to let the game ride on a kicker who was already in an emotionally wounded state. In both cases, the head coach either chose to ignore or did not realize the game situation that was presented in front of them.
Every single Saturday, head coaches are faced with situations just like these where having a keen sense of where both teams are at emotionally and physically is of extreme importance. To be successful, they must show they understand the momentum,ebbs and flows, and nuances of the game they've been involved in the past 3 quarters.
During a tight game that comes down to the end, as a head coach you have to make a conscience decision about how you are going to win the game when the situation presents itself. What has worked for you up until that point in the game? What weaknesses or tendencies is the opposition showing? Who is the player/players on your own team most likely to make the play to seal the victory for you? What opposing players are wearing down and most likely to make costly mistakes? All decisions that head coaches make every single Saturday and will ultimately prove their worth at their chosen profession.
It seemed pretty evident who the players were going to be for Alabama to make those plays: JPW,DJ Hall, and Keith Brown were having tremendous success while KD and Leigh Tiffin were not. At 3 minute mark, we could have sealed the victory with a TD considering that Mustain looked highly unlikely to drive the entire length of the field and tie the game. Not even attempting to throw the ball into the end zone towards the end of regulation was not only way too conservative; it was totally ignorant of what had happened in the game up until that point and of where both teams were at mentally and physically. Arkansas' defense was on the ropes with no answer for John Parker Wilson and it seemed like throwing the ball into the end zone would have been the uppercut to knock them out. With your QB playing lights out as JPW had done, there is no conceivable reason why you do not keep attacking the defense and at least attempt to score a TD. Shula ultimately let Reggie Herring off the hook.
In my humble opinion, Shula has failed to realize the major difference in successful decision making relative to the NFL and the college game. The best college coaches such as Stoops,Carroll,Rodriquez and others are almost exclusively very aggressive in not only their schemes, but they realize that you must be a gambler in order to be successful. The college game requires it. You have to take extreme calculated risks and be willing to die in order to live when it comes to being a college head coach. Last Saturday, it was this same situation that separated John L. Smith from Charlie Wiess. Smith was unwilling to gamble at the crucial times and it cost him an enormous win just the same as it cost Shula and it cost Fulmer last season.
Shula gained alot of my confidence in him as an offensive coordinator last Saturday. I just wished I could say the same about him as a head coach.
I would like to give an example of a similar situation where Phillip Fulmer seemed to use the same strategy and the results were equally as disasterous.
In the 05' game, as we all know the score was tied with around five minutes left and Tennessee had driven the ball deep in opposing territory. On 3rd and goal from the 15, Fulmer faced a decision that would likely have a huge impact on who won the game. In both games, a TD for Bama/Tenn most likely would have sealed a victory given the fact that the other offenses probably could not have driven the ball the length of the field and scored a TD to tie the game. Therefore, putting the ball in the end zone at that time was at an absolute premium. Since it was only 3rd down and the field goal was a near chip shot there seemed to be no conceivable reason not to throw the ball in the end zone.
As we can remember, Fulmer obviously ignored the game situation and decided against going for the win, instead he chose to the throw a screen pass which even if not fumbled would not have made it into the end zone. He chose not to trust his offense and let the game ride on his kicker. The decision seemed puzzling to me since he started Clausen based on the fact that he made less critical mistakes than Ainge. If he didn't trust Clausen not to make a mistake, then why not start Erik Ainge who obviously had the stronger arm and more potential to be successful in vertical passing game.
Similarly this past Saturday, Shula chose not to let his offense win the game for him and instead chose to let the game ride on a kicker who was already in an emotionally wounded state. In both cases, the head coach either chose to ignore or did not realize the game situation that was presented in front of them.
Every single Saturday, head coaches are faced with situations just like these where having a keen sense of where both teams are at emotionally and physically is of extreme importance. To be successful, they must show they understand the momentum,ebbs and flows, and nuances of the game they've been involved in the past 3 quarters.
During a tight game that comes down to the end, as a head coach you have to make a conscience decision about how you are going to win the game when the situation presents itself. What has worked for you up until that point in the game? What weaknesses or tendencies is the opposition showing? Who is the player/players on your own team most likely to make the play to seal the victory for you? What opposing players are wearing down and most likely to make costly mistakes? All decisions that head coaches make every single Saturday and will ultimately prove their worth at their chosen profession.
It seemed pretty evident who the players were going to be for Alabama to make those plays: JPW,DJ Hall, and Keith Brown were having tremendous success while KD and Leigh Tiffin were not. At 3 minute mark, we could have sealed the victory with a TD considering that Mustain looked highly unlikely to drive the entire length of the field and tie the game. Not even attempting to throw the ball into the end zone towards the end of regulation was not only way too conservative; it was totally ignorant of what had happened in the game up until that point and of where both teams were at mentally and physically. Arkansas' defense was on the ropes with no answer for John Parker Wilson and it seemed like throwing the ball into the end zone would have been the uppercut to knock them out. With your QB playing lights out as JPW had done, there is no conceivable reason why you do not keep attacking the defense and at least attempt to score a TD. Shula ultimately let Reggie Herring off the hook.
In my humble opinion, Shula has failed to realize the major difference in successful decision making relative to the NFL and the college game. The best college coaches such as Stoops,Carroll,Rodriquez and others are almost exclusively very aggressive in not only their schemes, but they realize that you must be a gambler in order to be successful. The college game requires it. You have to take extreme calculated risks and be willing to die in order to live when it comes to being a college head coach. Last Saturday, it was this same situation that separated John L. Smith from Charlie Wiess. Smith was unwilling to gamble at the crucial times and it cost him an enormous win just the same as it cost Shula and it cost Fulmer last season.
Shula gained alot of my confidence in him as an offensive coordinator last Saturday. I just wished I could say the same about him as a head coach.
