Kirby and "Playing to Win"

ATHENS - The result will make the fake punt against Alabama live in infamy. 

However, the rational for going for it - even on 4th and 11 from midfield - probably shouldn’t be as dismissed as it has been in some quarters. As I said from the moment I shared my opinion on the play right after the game, I would have punted the ball and made Alabama drive the field to win the game.  

Follow Dawg Post on Twitter today!

But that might not be the way that Kirby Smart thinks. In fact, I’m pretty certain he doesn’t think that way. Yes, there is a tight-rope walk that comes with decision making in crunch time. Very few folks in life have to make decisions that quick, so there’s not much most of us can draw upon in terms of actual experience when talking about that play, specifically. 

“Thought it was there, and it was there today,” Kirby said of the gamble after the game. “We were going to snap the ball quick. We took too long to snap the ball. They didn’t have a guy covered. We had a guy wide open. We took so long to snap it, that they recognized it and got the guy covered late. It was probably 20, 30 yards of field position that. We came to win the game. We wanted to win the game.”

Mark Richt was criticized for years because he “played not to lose.” Kirby is now criticized for trying too hard to win. At the end of the day all that anyone cares about is getting a result… specifically a win. They don’t care how you do it, but care a lot how you do it if you don’t.

The ball was snapped with eight seconds remaining on the 40-second play clock. Even after the snap, now Ohio State QB Justin Fields seemed intent on running the ball rather than looking to pass as soon as he slid up in the pocket. Running the 11 yards would have been a tall task with seven men in the box. 

Plays don’t work dozens of times each game. But this play won’t go away any time soon for Kirby’s critics, which is part of coaching.

Still, and this is the important part, what does it say about Kirby that he was willing to pull the trigger on a fake with everything on the line? Specifically: What does it say about his appetite for risk? For years UGA fans discussed Richt’s willingness to kick field goals over going for it or punching it in on fourth and short. Kirby is the complete opposite of Richt, it seems, on the appetite-for-risk scale. 

I only bring up the play for two reasons. Recently I listened to a podcast that featured Shane Parrish, who is a former Canadian intelligence officer and the owner of the website Farnam Street. I have also gone back through UGA’s entire 2018 season (vs. Power 5 schools) to watch each offensive snap. 

What was Kirby thinking during that play? He already told us: “It was there today. We came to win the game.”

Does Kirby trust his gut too much? Or does he believe in something more basic and to the point? That you can cost yourself by not taking a risk, too.

UGA could have still won by punting the ball, but Kirby, it appears, saw something or felt something at the time. This wasn’t his first risky move - it just came at the biggest moment of the season. It won’t be his last, either. I don’t get the feeling he’s any more trigger shy now. That doesn’t make the decision to fake the ball “more wrong” that it didn’t work. UGA’s head coach just seems to be more willing to take risk more than most - perhaps more risk than most in big moments. Then again, isn’t that a big part of something being “risky”? 

Remember the onside kick to start the 2017 South Carolina game? Everyone remembers the 2018 LSU fake FG. The fake FG against TCU jumpstarted the Dawgs in the 2016 Liberty Bowl. Kirby’s mindset seems to revolve around watching to see if he can take advantage of the odds being as in his favor as they can be in a given moment, and take the risk because it is worth it. 

In three of those four situations, the risk didn’t pay off, but half of the time UGA still won the game. 

I remember a finance class I took in grad school at UGA where we talked about the probability of hitting it big at the lottery. At some point, when the odds grow increasingly long, it made more sense to bet. 

That flipped the notion that the lottery was “a tax on people who aren’t very good at math” because at some point the math boomerangs around, and you need to bet. This isn’t normal thinking. It goes against what is common and normal. 

But UGA hasn’t gotten what it wanted with common and normal over the last few decades, so it brough someone else in who was willing to live more on the edge - running up to the red line rather than tip toeing up to it. 

Taking a step back from in-game decisions: What about the risk of not returning Jacob Eason to the starting lineup in 2017? Did that risk pay off? Is that risk the same as the risk of going for it against Alabama? 

I’m asking. Risk is everywhere in the job of a head coach.

Back to the fake punt, from my perspective on the field (I have been a photographer on game days for the last 19 seasons) Georgia’s defense was totally spent when the game was tied, and Kirby put Fields in for the fake. I specifically remember Alabama calling timeout down 28-21 and saying to someone next to me that the defense was totally exhausted. D’Andre Walker was out (which hurt as much as anything), and momentum in the Alabama offense-UGA defense side of the game had changed seemingly for good. 

After Alabama tied the game, UGA drove the ball to midfield and ate up two minutes on the clock. Kirby may or may not have been able to see what I saw: that his defense was done. It was 4th and 11, and the rest is history. 

And this isn’t revisionist history. Kirby can defend himself, and he is well paid to make these decisions. Not going for it, and punting, is a decision, too. He would be criticized either way because this is what we do.  

Was it the wrong call? We know the execution was bad as soon as the play clock got to eight seconds and that was further confirmed as Field tucked the ball into his chest. As I said above: I would have punted, but that’s me. That doesn’t mean I was right; and it doesn’t mean Kirby was wrong to be aggressive the way he was. 

Alabama converted a 3rd and 8 at the 50… meaning the defense nearly got off the field right after the fake. But that play, which was for 19 yards, and the two following plays of 16 and 15, gave the Tide the margin it needed to win the SEC. Jake Fromm’s mad dash down the field couldn’t save UGA. 

But it was the fake punt we should rightly focus on. It shows us the type of coach Kirby is and wants to be - a risk taker even in the biggest moments... particularly in the biggest moments, and those are not going to hit all of the time. He’s shown us who he is, and, frankly, he’s not going to apologize for it. He goes big. It has worked in recruiting, and no one questions his method there... at least not any more.

Folks have to understand that Kirby’s type of thinking in the moment, which has been dismissed as stupid or careless, isn’t always reckless as Twitter would have you believe. Just because something doesn’t work, doesn’t mean it’s the wrong decision. The scoreboard doesn't lie, but it also doesn’t contain nuance. It is about risk vs. reward. 

The risk of losing vs. the reward of winning - UGA fans are going to have to develop a new tolerance for risk. Fans used to criticize for “not playing to win”. Now folks are going to have to live with the aggressive style they say the always wanted. We’ve seen the reaction when it doesn’t work. When it does I am sure the reaction will be totally different.