Question for older Bama fans about ties in a game.

  • HELLO AGAIN, Guest! We are back, live! We're still doing some troubleshooting and maintenance to fix a few remaining issues but everything looks stable now (except front page which we're working on over next day or two)

    Thanks for your patience and support! MUCH appreciated! --Brett (BamaNation)

    if you see any problems - please post them in the Troubleshooting board!

Well...

PATs are a 96% make for a tie...

2 pt conversions have ranged from 34-47% in a season since the 1970s. So you go for two and you have about a 60% chance of losing.
 
When the college OT was introduced, I liked the idea at first. But now with the 2 point shootout starting with the 3rd period is ridiculous. This infinite OT model just makes teams more fatigued and subjects them to more injuries that can cost them the game next week. We should go to one period starting from the 25 yard line, one period of 2 point conversions. If the score is still tied, game over. No winner.
 
So this is probably a Selma question or a question I should have waited till the off season to ask. but hyping the TSIO I ran across the 93 game. That is the only tie I have ever remembered in my life and I was a kid when it happened.. I know the phrase “ties are like kissing your sister” but the 93 game felt more like a win cause we trolled Tennessee.

My question is. Did ties in general feel as bad as a loss or was it something different?
Nope. Ties always felt better.
 
When the college OT was introduced, I liked the idea at first. But now with the 2 point shootout starting with the 3rd period is ridiculous. This infinite OT model just makes teams more fatigued and subjects them to more injuries that can cost them the game next week. We should go to one period starting from the 25 yard line, one period of 2 point conversions. If the score is still tied, game over. No winner.

Remember, it was introduced in 1996 back when we were still operating under the Bowl Alliance rules for national championships. So it was IMPORTANT for every game to have a winner and a loser. And I'm sure they knew the BCS was just around the corner, so this was a dry run.

We can argue and probably agree on the need for a winner and a loser in the event of a two-team BCS or even a four-team playoff. But once the playoff went to 12, there is literally NO REASON for it.

Just wait until one of these mammoth overtime games ends the season of a crucial contributor on a national title contender. That's when the method will change.
 
Coach Bryant had nine ties at the Capstone:

1958 Vanderbilt - Vandy was heavily favored in this game that ended in a 0-0 tie in Bryant's 2nd game. He took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 3 years.

1959 Vanderbilt - perhaps worth noting this was the third year in a row the two teams tied. We missed what would have been a game-winning FG but we were trailing, 7-0, entering the fourth.

1959 Tennessee - entering the game, the Vols were ranked #14, and it was very similar to the Vandy game except we tied it in the second quarter. Yes, missed a field goal that would have won it late - from 16 yards. The two teams combined for 15 first downs (Vols had 5).

1960 Tulane - we trailed the whole day, scored a TD in the final minutes - and missed the PAT that would have won it. Tulane was 3-6-1 that year.

1960 Bluebonnet Bowl (vs Texas) - I wasn't around, but I'm guessing this was a "whew, we got away with it." We only had four first downs the entire day, lost the turnover battle (2-0), offensive yards were about the same, but we got socked with twice the penalty yardage.

1965 Tennessee - this is the infamous Stabler throwing the ball out of bounds on fourth down.

1967 Florida State - honestly don't know much about this one. But I will say that 37-37 in 1967 sounds like a dazzling ballgame, too.

1970 Bluebonnet Bowl (Oklahoma) - we missed a final field goal attempt from 34 yards. Brutal, I'm sure.

1981 Southern Mississippi - this maybe should have been a warning for what happened in 1982. Reggie Collier sliced up our defense for over 200 yards passing - and his AVERAGE for the season was 90 ypg. He absolutely cut up our D (14 for 25, 202 yards, 0 INT plus 13 carries for 43 yards and 1 TD). Bear in mind, our "starting QB" (the passing one, Ken Collier) was out, so we only threw the ball 3 times that day. We didn't have to throw it, we rushed for 273 yards. The story AT THE TIME was that we had called timeout that wound up enabling them to set up the field goal, where Steve Clark hit a 40-yard line drive for the tie. And that gave rise to "is there something wrong with the old man" stories. The story relayed on this board is that someone (an unknown someone) on our team called the timeout with 8 seconds left, and USM had none, so they probably wouldn't have gotten the play off - and Bryant threw himself on the grenade and took the blame.

"I don't know why I did that," Bryant said.

Of those nine ties, MAYBE three of them were acceptable.

Most were "damn, we had it won."

Like you said, context matters. That’s why I created this thread. It’s just alien to me because I only remember one in my life. A win may feel crappy if you played down to the competition but you are happy you won. And even in a valiant effort. Losing sucks. Ties seem to live in their own world.

I appreciate y’all’s feedback.
 
Not to derail my own thread but how do you not give the ball to BO Jackson in that situation??

Why when you're down by two do you give it to ANYONE, especially after you've set up the field goal to win?

But yes - if you outsmart yourself with "I'm gonna plow it in there," you give it to Bo.
 

New Posts

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads