PonyFans.com

The CHART only applies if you are CERTAIN to ONLY get the ball back the requisite amount of times necessary to win/tie. We had 12 minutes, and by going for it that early, took us out of the game.

In this situation, being down 20-11, you will have to go for 2 pts at least once...but you DON'T go for it down by 9, you wait until you LAST possession.

By going for it at 20-11, if you got it, what advantage have you obtained? NOTHING. IF you don't convert, then you have taken your team out of a ONE MORE SCORE TO TIE opportunity with 12 minutes to play...

In other words, being down by 9 means two more scores are required by your team...a WHOLE lot different psychological advantage for FSU to defense, and a whole lot harder challenge for your team (SMU) to STAY IN THE GAME.

The correct call is to kick the extra point and only be down by 8, that makes the remaining 12 minutes a ONE SCORE game.

I realize the math is the same, but when you don't get it down by 9, then you have effectively taken your team out of the game too early.

those were my thoughts exactly at the time. this team is fragile enough and has shown so little ability to score with it's offense that the ONLY call was to kick the point and stay within one TD of a tie. The heck with the book/chart. Sometimes a little common sense comes into play.

Having said that, this is ridculous that a single play/decision is getting so much of our attention. Let's face it, this season is basically what they call in my business a "total loss". We're playing to give some guys experience for next year. While it would be nice to win at least one game, I don't hold out much hope for that after seeing what Rice has done the past two weeks. I give us no chance against La Tech or TCU. Just hope that finale is not too humiliating for the Ponies.

We needed a two-point conversion at some point if we were going to tie the game. But going for two there was the wrong call. Not making it - which of course is how it worked out - made the game a two-possession contest, which is a lot to ask of an offense that doesn't pass well. We should have taken the kick, and then if we got the second touchdown to pull within two points, we're riding an emotional high and Fresno is scared. At least we have a chance then.

I don’t think it is the no-brainer that some people think it is. I agreed with the call. If you know you are going to need a 2-point conversion, there is some logic in going for it now. If you don’t get it, you know you need two possessions from the outset.

If you go for the extra point, you will still need that touchdown and the two-point conversion. If (like it was gonna happen) we marched down and got the second touchdown and then failed on the two point conversion, we then probably spent so much time getting there that we likely wouldn’t have the time to even get an onsides kick and move the ball 30 yards to get into fieldgoal range for the win. There is some logic in knowing whether you will need 1 or 2 possessions from the outset.

That being said, the notion that our offense was going to move the ball on three consecutive possessions is kind of ludicrous. I actually felt better when the defense was on the field because part of me actually believed the defense stood a better chance of scoring than the offense.

The defense gave me some encouragement yesterday. I actually felt like I was watching a defense that knew what it was doing. That makes me feel somewhat better. The offense still depresses me.

I've always wanted my team to go for it early because then you know how many scores you need to get. I'd rather miss the two with 10 minutes to go and have a chance to make it up, than to miss it with 1 minute left and have no opportunity.

Not only are we the lowest scoring team in college football, but probably one of the 5 lowest in the past 10 years.

It's already the fourth quarter, we only have one more score in us, at best, for the remainder of the game.

You go for the 2-point conversion last, end of story.

There is something to that Damone, but in this case the reality was that SMU was not gonna score 3 times in a row. Twice was asking alot, so we had to keep it a one possession game with that extra point. Its really just for debate, because we weren't gonna win that game anyway because Fresno was the better team and would have turned it up a notch like we have seen many times before.

Like so many calls, the coach doesn't have a chance. Had we made the 2 point conversion, Bennett would have been hailed a hero, instead he's now a bum. If instead of punting on 4th and 12yds and gone for it and not made it (like we succeed on 12yd plays all the time)he would have been a bum, but of course having punted instead of going for it he's now a what...a bum?

Yeah, but with 3 minutes to go, you are OUT of the game, they know it, you know it, the defense on the other side knows it, and the team knows it.

You don't risk taking yourself out of the game until you absolutely have to.

That's the point.

You prolong the game until the next possession.

THERE IS NO EXCUSE. PERDIOD.

It was a bad call.

the only way I can justify Bennett's decision is that he took the "high road" in showing confidence in his team...1st, that they would convert the two pointer. 2nd, that if they missed, they still had time to score twice (we all know better, but just like the coach doesn't want his team to quit on him, he doesn't want to quit on them). That's the only possible explanation I can come up with and I'm guessing that was the case.

We've been having field goals fumbled and blocked. An extra point is not a given this year. Think how demoralizing missing an extra point would have been. Trying for two at least gives the team the feeling we're doing everything to win. I watched the Ky./Ark. overtimes. Both teams were completing two point plays over and over. But then again Ky. has a 300 pound QB who can run and pass. Ark. has a 6'9" QB who is a senior and can pass. We don't have that luxury.

Evidently Steve Spurrier can't coach either. Down by 15 points, the Redskins went for a 2 point conversion on their first touchdown to trim the 15 point difference...BTW they made it...we didn't.

IN OT, after the second one, they are REQUIRED to go for it.

What has that got to do with anything...OT was not a factor.

Going for two there is a coin flip. Complaining about it after the fact is just sour grapes.

If you want to question something that would have made a difference. How about not kicking the field goal near the goal line. It is kind of the same thing but that would have made a big difference down the line. Especially if you plan is to count on your defense and not panic when you get close to the goal line.

<small>[ 11-03-2003, 07:31 AM: Message edited by: The PonyGrad ]</small>