Chris Streveler Good enough make a team but not good enough to start

[Sir Blue and Gold]

No, the conjecture was that only Streveler could have made that play.  That the play's success was 100% Streveler, and not situational.

And because of this one play, Streveler is the nest backup in the league, and should always be Zach's backup over Wilson or Chase. (I will continue to use "Chase" an not Artie, or The Greek as my preferred name for him.  It will be a while before we get the spelling of Artopoeus, much like when Lirim was here)

I am agreeing with you. It had nothing to do with anything we did.

[TecnoGenius]

No, the conjecture was that only Streveler could have made that play.  That the play's success was 100% Streveler, and not situational.

Absolutely no one said only Strev could make that play.  I was saying the play only works because we had a starting QB in who was also a SY specialist.  It just so happened Strev was the QB that game.  And that is 100% true.  Yes, if Wilson had started then he too would have made that play.

The counter point some were making is that if Zach was starting then we get that play.  This is hogwash because if Zach was starting we would do a sub (not tempo) and then HAM gets to make their normal sub and there is no chaos, confusion or time constraint.  Then they would spot the guy and cover him.

I'm not sure why this is so difficult for some to understand?

So if you're now saying is was "situational", then we are saying the exact same thing and I'm not sure why anyone is still arguing.

[TecnoGenius]

It's completely irrelevant. Hamilton blew that play and it will be the only time this year any team in the league does it. It has nothing to do with keeping the QB in or not.

Except in this instance it is 100% because we "[kept] the QB in".  If we made our normal SY sub (which we may have, we had Wilson come in for Strev earlier in the year) then there is no chaos by HAM and the REC wouldn't be open.

As for "many teams don't sub", yes you are correct, but that is the few teams who NEVER sub anyhow.  So teams have already planned around a no-sub situation, and, again, there is no chaos.

The entire issue is HAM trying to sub when you CANNOT and the ensuing chaos.  Why did they do this?  Because NO ONE IN HAM had planned for WPG not to sub in at SY.  Why?  Because 99% of the time with Zach in we sub on SY.  And even 85% of the time this season we subbed in Wilson on SY when Strev was starting.

We screwed up their plans & expectations and they didn't know how to cope.  The should have just lumped it, kept their personnel unchanged, and gotten a DB out to cover Wheatie.

Remember, no matter what they were taking that too many men penalty and we 100% get a 1st down.

I guarantee you someone in HAM is getting a stern dressing down for that debacle.

[TecnoGenius]

Anyone who doesn't understand the chaos needs to watch the play again and note the 2-4 HAM guys desperately trying to get off the field when we are clearing going to snap it.  It wasn't that they barely didn't make it, they were still miles from the sideline.

And watch the HAM D gaggle/huddle trying to get a formation, it's a complete poop show with nobody in place, everyone looking confused, no one thinking or ready.

I'm not sure I've ever seen a team try to sub in like that in tempo.  It's never going to work.  It's almost always a TMM flag.

That is the entire reason O's go tempo in this situation, to force the personnel on the field to play a snap they aren't designed for.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Techno, for the 20th time, leaving in the quarterback who was running the offense to also do the sneak should never, and I repeat, never result in the defense not covering a receiver.

All Hamilton had to do is what has been 50 other times this season by every team and that's match up and defend.

They didn't and we scored. Good for us. You're taking two separate things which do not correlate, and trying to correlate them which is a mistake  someone makes if they don't fundamentally understand something.

[Pete]

Techno, for the 20th time, leaving in the quarterback who was running the offense to also do the sneak should never, and I repeat, never result in the defense not covering a receiver.

All Hamilton had to do is what has been 50 other times this season by every team and that's match up and defend.

They didn't and we scored. Good for us. You're taking two separate things which do not correlate, and trying to correlate them which is a mistake  someone makes if they don't fundamentally understand something.

the other factor was their coaches were asleep... you call a time out when things are that messed up

[TecnoGenius]

Techno, for the 20th time, leaving in the quarterback who was running the offense to also do the sneak should never, and I repeat, never result in the defense not covering a receiver.

All Hamilton had to do is what has been 50 other times this season by every team and that's match up and defend.

They didn't and we scored. Good for us. You're taking two separate things which do not correlate, and trying to correlate them which is a mistake  someone makes if they don't fundamentally understand something.

It's you who aren't understanding.  Yes, HAM should have done what they did 50 other times which is leave in the players that were on the field.  If you're saying that, then we are in agreement and I have no idea what you're talking about.

Until you say they should not have tried to sub in tempo you aren't saying the correct thing.

The play worked for us only because, and this is very simple:

1. tempo because starter=SY
2. no subs
3. ham subbed
4. about to take TMM flag, chaos, panic, confusion
5. guy open
6. profit

The fundamental mistake wasn't #5, the cause of the entire debacle was #3.

[TecnoGenius]

Techno, for the 20th time, leaving in the quarterback who was running the offense to also do the sneak should never, and I repeat, never result in the defense not covering a receiver.

And to be clear, I 100% agree with the above quote.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

It's you who aren't understanding.  Yes, HAM should have done what they did 50 other times which is leave in the players that were on the field.  If you're saying that, then we are in agreement and I have no idea what you're talking about.

Until you say they should not have tried to sub in tempo you aren't saying the correct thing.

The play worked for us only because, and this is very simple:

1. tempo because starter=SY
2. no subs
3. ham subbed
4. about to take TMM flag, chaos, panic, confusion
5. guy open
6. profit

The fundamental mistake wasn't #5, the cause of the entire debacle was #3.

Obviously they shouldn't have subbed. That's your point after 76 posts about this nonsense?

What's next, we lost because they scored more points?

[TecnoGenius]

Obviously they shouldn't have subbed. That's your point after 76 posts about this nonsense?

What's next, we lost because they scored more points?

SMH.  Not my fault it took 76 posts...

[TBURGESS]

That was a once in a decade or three play. We got incredibly lucky and got a TD. That's all that needed to be said.

[TecnoGenius]

That was a once in a decade or three play. We got incredibly lucky and got a TD. That's all that needed to be said.

And man was it a bucket load of fun.  I was cheering/screaming loudly at that one.  Too bad it didn't lead us to a win.