Word is getting to us here that there was some rather pointed pushback from the higher-ups for UVA Football coach Tony Elliott over how his staff handled three situations in the ACC Championship Game loss to Duke on Saturday night.
The first, I think, is a quibble, and overwrought – that Virginia won the opening coin toss and decided to kick off, giving Duke the ball first, which played to the Blue Devils’ advantage when they went 75 yards on 15 plays and 9:38 of game clock for a TD.
That’s 20/20 hindsight there, but I see the point – that Virginia, in the first matchup with Duke, last month, had played getting the ball first to its advantage, scoring on a long drive that set the tone for the 34-17 win.
If there’s not an offsides penalty in punt formation mid-drive in the rematch, we’re not talking about Duke getting the ball first and scoring, and how that set a different tone for this one.
Verdict on this one: not guilty of anything that I can see.
OK, so, now, to the second issue – remember the illegal-formation penalty on Duke on the first play after the two-minute timeout in the fourth quarter?
The refs had a long discussion with Elliott and an analyst on his staff about the penalty, and it sure did appear to those watching on TV at home, who got tight shots of the meeting of the minds, that Elliott was not only leaning on, but deferring to, the analyst as to what to do.
My read of that situation was, Elliott was not so much leaning on the staffer as he was getting confirmation from the officials that, if he declined the penalty, which he obviously needed to do, the clock wouldn’t start until it was back in play; otherwise, he would need to burn one of his two remaining timeouts.
That’s how things played out, so the criticism here is more about appearances, than Elliott actually deferring.
Verdict: not guilty on Count #2.
The third issue is one that I wrote about in my Mailbag column earlier tonight – that it appeared that Elliott and offensive coordinator Des Kitchings play-called on the first down in OT as if it was a first-and-25 after the roughing-the-passer penalty on James Jackson the Duke TD, and not the first-and-10 that it was.
ICYMI
I used the term of art “fog of war” to describe how such confusion could cloud one’s thinking, but I get the point – that coaches, coordinators and analysts are paid to know that it’s first-and-10, and not first-and-25.
From what I have been told, the point was made that the staff needs to be on top of these kinds of things.
Not like that last one is the first time that a basic misunderstanding in a key moment could have been costly.
I wrote in my Mailbag about the confusion over the extra point after the TD in the second OT of the UVA-Florida State game that could have, and maybe should have, resulted in a delay-of-game penalty.
The staff, in that one, sent out the kicking unit for a standard extra-point try, when the rules call for a mandated two-point try after a TD in a second OT situation.
The officials that night gave us an out in allowing time for the offense to return to the field, and Kitchings to have time to call a play, without assessing a five-yard delay-of-game penalty.
Gotta know the rules.
I’ll give Elliott and his guys a pass on the first two items that I’m told he got pushback over, but that third, man, that would be inexcusable, if what appears to have been what went on is what actually went on.
The jury is still out on Count #3, but the deliberations aren’t going well for the good guys.
Support AFP
Share
Chris Graham
