MSU HC Tucker calls himself a 'horsesh*t coach'

Submitted by Caesar on September 20th, 2022 at 12:45 AM

Here's a link to the quotation, via Twitter.

Obviously, I enjoy this because it's MSU, &c. His self-critique seems accurate, too, because he personally helped to coach the DBs. 

One sub-topic I'm interested in hearing about from the board, putting aside the football aspect of it, is how helpful saying this about oneself can be.

On one hand, I like frankness and willingness to take responsibility. I really dislike it in others and myself to not be honest about what happened and attempt to rewrite the past, often to feel better. Though on the other hand, I do think there is truth to some ideas that we listen to the things we say about ourselves and that negative talk can harm your output and growth. Is the solution maybe to be honest about the situation but not describe it in absolute terms about yourself? Something like, "I made this mistake, but I am capable of better."

 

BeatOSU52

September 20th, 2022 at 3:29 PM ^

They were all so much fun.  2004 is obviously the most memorable, but 2003 and 2005 wins in EL were so awesome as I remember how much shit-talking their fans were doing those weeks leading up to those games, especially in 2005 when Michigan was struggling and Stanton's September heisman campaign was in full force.

Squader

September 20th, 2022 at 1:06 AM ^

Idk a thing about position coaching or player development, but I watched nearly the whole UW game and thought there were definitely some weird game theory choices.

  • They went for 2 when it was 22-6, which makes sense. Classic Brian point about finding out if you're down by 14 or 15 earlier. They got that one, and then UW put up another 7 to make 29-8. At that point MSU scores another TD to pull to 29-14 but Tucker goes for it again, which makes no sense. You're down 15 - kick the extra point to make it 14, getting to 13 down has little value. Instead they failed and were back down 15 again.
  • With something like 14:40 left on the clock and down 3 scores (36-14), Tucker goes for it on 4th and 6 from his own 24(!). Wtf. They fail and turn it over in downs, this sets up the goal line stand - interception - UW field goal sequence that makes it a four score game and essentially put it out of reach.

Struck me as odd in both cases - the first is just dumb, IMO, and the second felt strangely desperate. Given what they did the rest of the quarter, a punt there and a stop might have been the difference between never quite making it close and really taking that game to the wire.

Robbie Moore

September 20th, 2022 at 9:45 AM ^

That $95 million extension Tucker signed does not prove he is a great coach but rather a great negotiator. He had 4 years and $25 million or so left on his original six year deal, which was double what he made at Colorado. Somehow, he frightened MSU into giving him $95 million. As though he had proven himself to be the equivalent of Nick Saban. A year and a half later he is a self proclaimed horseshit coach.

readyourguard

September 20th, 2022 at 10:24 AM ^

He didn't negotiate anything.  Fan boy Matt Ishiba had such a raging hard on for a guy who beat Michigan in his first try, and overtones from LSU possibly showing interest, Ishiba made him an offer he couldn't refuse.

I have a mortgage with United Wholesale.  On one hand....gross. But on the other, I view it as my way of helping Sparty keep their version of Hoke under their employ.  

Mr Miggle

September 20th, 2022 at 5:35 AM ^

On that strange decision to go for two, I thought Tucker was just confused about the score. 29 is an unusual total and he couldn't handle the arithmetic under pressure.

Down three scores in the 4th Q is a time to be desperate. I suspect there's very little difference between going for it and punting. 

Carcajou

September 21st, 2022 at 12:34 AM ^

When it was 22-6, it was probably still to early to be going for two. I realize that it was a difference between two scores and three, but statistically the chances of succeeding on a two point play are not 50% (historically they are closer to 33%, while kicking is closer to 95-99%).

Coaching wisdom is that you only start going for two later, when you are running out of time. and can reasonably assume the opponent can be held to not scoring again.

Of course there are other considerations: if your offense is on a roll and the opponents defense is exhausted or disorganized, then going for two may make more sense.

 

Richard75

September 20th, 2022 at 12:54 PM ^

@The Homie J

Chasing points and being ultra-aggressive does indeed work for him.
 

That game Saturday had two phases: the portion when both teams ran their standard offenses and employed typical game theory (during which Washington was clearly superior) and the part where MSU went for everything while Washington played less and less aggressively. Tucker gets that you need to move on to phase 2 ASAP against superior competition.

Eng1980

September 20th, 2022 at 7:33 AM ^

The NCAA two-point conversion would have two brief resurgences: One in 1970, when two-point attempts saw a still record-high conversion rate of 47.1 percent, and PAT kicks were successful just 88.3 percent of the time; and one final time in 1974, when two-point conversions' expected value of .928 points just barely outpunched PAT kicks’ expected value of .901. 

NCAA numbers are more situational, but most coaches should be going for two more often.

It is more fun to go for two and do you really think you were going to win if you kicked?

Caesar

September 20th, 2022 at 7:56 AM ^

I wish I could upvote this more. EV is an great way to look at the decision.

One factor for a team would be their red-zone/short yardage numbers. I don't know enough about MSU to say for sure, but I'm thinking that Michigan without Haskins, for example, would adjust their confidence for 2-point conversions down.

LeCheezus

September 20th, 2022 at 11:02 AM ^

Small differences in expected value are worse than general game theory for deciding on 2 point conversions.  EV calculations are based off of very large sample sizes, and in most NCAA games you're scoring 3-5 touchdowns, so the sample size is small.  2 point conversion rates usually hover at just under 50%, there is a very solid chance you will underperform that ~< 1 point EV for a 2 point conversion on a per game basis. Those numbers are (usually) opponent independent, so you will probably have a higher conversion rate against the Hawaii's than against the Alabama's of the world.

TrueBlue2003

September 20th, 2022 at 1:31 PM ^

Yes, the variance for 2pt conv is much higher so there is a solid chance you underperform ~1 pt EV, but there is also a solid chance you perform well over 1 point per attempt and against a better team on the road, that's variance that you like.  When you're the underdog you want to increase variance.

I think he's smart about this.

jmblue

September 20th, 2022 at 12:09 PM ^

The thing about a 2-point try is that it's just far enough (3 yards) to make coaches nervous about running the ball.  So it typically becomes a passing situation, but throwing into a crowded end zone is tricky, too.  I'd be curious to see the breakdown in success for runs vs. passes.

rc15

September 20th, 2022 at 8:29 AM ^

If you punt down 3 scores in the 4th quarter, you're giving up and you're telling your team that...

ESPN had it at 99.9% chance of Washington winning at that point (and it actually somehow went down to 99.8% after they failed). We make fun of James Franklin for a sad FG which lowers your chance of winning to make the score look more respectable, Tucker did the opposite of that here. He tried to make his 0.1% chance into 0.2%.

Grampy

September 20th, 2022 at 9:14 AM ^

This two point conversion talk is not why Tuck is a horseshit coach. He failed to give his team a chance to win long before, like when he approved the game plan. His lack of pursuing a more aggressive passing strategy early in the game doomed his running game. This resulted in an ineffective offensive performance until the game was out of hand and he was forced to change.  No amount of two point conversions was going to change the outcome. 

Amazinblu

September 20th, 2022 at 10:02 AM ^

Squader - I completely agree - when they were down 29-8, it made no sense to go for two.   If the sequence was - Spartan TD. kick the extra point - they are down 14.   Do it again - they are down 7.  And, do it once more - while preventing Washington from scoring - THEN, you have a choice - tie the game - or try a two point conversion for the lead.

That was a very poor decision, in my mind.

rc15

September 20th, 2022 at 10:27 AM ^

Wrong... Let's assume they are going to get the 2 more TDs to potentially tie the game and a 2pt conversion is 50/50 while a PAT is 100% to make the math simple.

2pt successful - PAT - PAT = 50% chance you win

2pt failed - 2pt successful - 2pt successful = 12.5% chance you win

62.5% chance you win, assuming you get the next 2TDs.

PAT - PAT - 2pt successful = 50% chance you win (same as just going to OT)

jmblue

September 20th, 2022 at 12:23 PM ^

Let's assume they are going to get the 2 more TDs to potentially tie the game and a 2pt conversion is 50/50 

They're not quite 50/50 though, but typically around 44-45%.  That's including surprise tries (like Oregon's swinging gate, or the one we ran against Rutgers in the 78-0) which probably succeed more often.  Take those out and the conversion rate probably drops a percentage point or two.  

MNWolverine2

September 20th, 2022 at 10:24 AM ^

Going for 2 was actually the right call when down 15.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/when-to-go-for-2-for-real/

If you get the 2 points - 2 TDs essentially wins the game.

If you kick the extra point - 2 TDs just gets you to overtime where your win % is still 50/50

Miss the 2 points, and it's still a 2 score game and you get 2 shots at another 2 point.

I would hope Harbaugh would go for 2 in this situation as well (and would expect him to with Weiss involved),

Squader

September 20th, 2022 at 11:30 AM ^

Disagree. Remember the situation here: kicking the XP puts them down 14.

Saying they should go for 2 there is the same as saying every team should go for 2 every time.

Instead, by missing it, he puts himself in position of needing another low-probability 2 point conversion just to make it to that dreaded overtime you were trying to avoid. Miss it again and you've worked your way into a loss all on your own.

On the punt - three scores with 14:40 left is not at all the time to go for it from your own 24 on 4th and 6, and I'd be embarrassed for Michigan if they did something that stupid. You're nearly guaranteeing the other team the points that will ice the game. If you kick it, get the ball back, and score, you're now in a two score game with something like 10:00-13:00 left on the clock. Keeping the ball there is hardly your last chance to stay in the game. And indeed MSU demonstrated that as they dominated the 4th quarter- if they hadn't handed UW that field position and 3 points, UW probably doesn't score again, which means it comes down to a single possession in a game where MSU tried two onside kicks.

If it had been 4th and 2 from their own 34? Maybe, I guess I could see it. 4th and 6 from your own 24 with a quarter to play is just dumb, IMO.