ADVERTISEMENT

4th and 1

Can anyone explain why we didn't use a fullback when we went for it on 4th and 1 in the second quarter?
To me the biggest issue was subbing, which allowed WI to bring in their big bodies. We are not good enough to go toe to toe up the middle when the D knows what’s coming. You either get to the line and run a play (which we did successfully later in the game), or go misdirection/outside).
 
these are all fantastic questions that wouldn't be asked in a press conference in a thousand years

like our coaching staff, our media are also gutless
 
  • Like
Reactions: kocat6 and K_Y_E
But if you’re going to run it right up the middle like we did, why not use a fullback as an extra blocker? I thought that’s what we have a fullback on our roster for.
Sure, would be fun to try it. One way or another it would be nice to see them execute.

My broader point is that I don't think it matters if we make it or not. We have converted a bunch of 4th downs this year only to fail to score after anyway. Use the play where everyone in the stadium KNOWS you're just going for the sticks, and score instead.
 
But if you’re going to run it right up the middle like we did, why not use a fullback as an extra blocker? I thought that’s what we have a fullback on our roster for.
The only time we’ve seen the Fullback at it’s capacity was in the spring game, other wise it’s been none existent..We scored last week with the fullback but it looked like more inside reverse..
 
  • Like
Reactions: phoenix4nu
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT