You do not go for 2

PhirePhilBennett · Post by **PhirePhilBennett** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:26 pm

under 8 minutes to go...in this case they got it, but here's why you DONT go for 2...

It ONLY helps you if you think that UAB is going to score two FGs and you are trying to ensure a TIE.

Now, what if UAB scores a TD and you DIDNT get the 2pt?

Well, they'd be up by 3 then: 16-13.

Now, SMU gets the ball and they COULD have scored a FG to win it, instead, they are scoring a FG to tie.

That is why you don't go for 2 in this situation...minimal advantages with terrible consequences.

PhirePhilBennett · Post by **PhirePhilBennett** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:27 pm

Reminds me of the TULSA fiasco 2 years ago...ridiculous

expony18 · Post by **expony18** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:32 pm

PhirePhilBennett wrote:under 8 minutes to go...in this case they got it, but here's why you DONT go for 2...

It ONLY helps you if you think that UAB is going to score two FGs and you are trying to ensure a TIE.

Now, what if UAB scores a TD and you DIDNT get the 2pt?

Well, they'd be up by 3 then: 16-13.

Now, SMU gets the ball and they COULD have scored a FG to win it, instead, they are scoring a FG to tie.

That is why you don't go for 2 in this situation...minimal advantages with terrible consequences.

shut up... we got it ... dont talk!

KnuckleStang · Post by **KnuckleStang** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:18 pm

The chart says we should have gone for it, if we thought we had a 48% chance of making it (?).

http://www.footballcommentary.com/twoptchart.htm

docabel · Post by **docabel** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:33 pm

While I think we could argue back and forth about the going for two on the conversion after the 2nd touchdown. What I don't understand is why we didn't go for 2 after the interception for a TD. The PAT put us up 13, and a 2 point conversion would put us up 14. That was the bigger mistake in my mind.

KnuckleStang · Post by **KnuckleStang** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:44 pm

docabel wrote:While I think we could argue back and forth about the going for two on the conversion after the 2nd touchdown. What I don't understand is why we didn't go for 2 after the interception for a TD. The PAT put us up 13, and a 2 point conversion would put us up 14. That was the bigger mistake in my mind.

Agreed. The almighty chart bears your assertions out.

docabel · Post by **docabel** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:48 pm

KnuckleStang wrote:
docabel wrote:While I think we could argue back and forth about the going for two on the conversion after the 2nd touchdown. What I don't understand is why we didn't go for 2 after the interception for a TD. The PAT put us up 13, and a 2 point conversion would put us up 14. That was the bigger mistake in my mind.
Agreed. The almighty chart bears your assertions out.

If you are a "legitimate" D-1 football coach you should not need any almighty chart to know that being up by 12, 1 point does you little good, 2 does a lot of good.

FloridaMustang · Post by **FloridaMustang** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:51 pm

I loved the call. I have no idea what the beef is. Knowing it might STAY a close game, he was giving us an opportunity to win if they scored a TD. If we didn't get the conversion, we still only needed a FG to tie. How is that not good coaching?

couch 'em · Post by **couch 'em** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:55 pm

I thought it was the right call.

docabel · Post by **docabel** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:09 am

I did not have a problem with the call of going for 2 - it was an agressive call that we seemed to be lacking most of the night. My problem is not going for 2 on the ensuing touchdown.

KnuckleStang · Post by **KnuckleStang** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:09 am

docabel wrote:
KnuckleStang wrote:
docabel wrote:If you are a "legitimate" D-1 football coach you should not need any almighty chart to know that being up by 12, 1 point does you little good, 2 does a lot of good.

Like it or not, ALL D-1 and pro coaches keep that "almighty" chart handy and refer to if often. Not saying it's right, but that's a fact.

smu diamond m · Post by **smu diamond m** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:05 am

couch 'em wrote:I thought it was the right call.

Yes sir. It was a severe blow to the mentality of the UAB team.

perunapower · Post by **perunapower** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:14 am

smu diamond m wrote:
couch 'em wrote:I thought it was the right call.
Yes sir. It was a severe blow to the mentality of the UAB team.

And made me go hoarse all in one sweep.

MustangIcon · Post by **MustangIcon** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:52 am

FloridaMustang wrote:Knowing it might STAY a close game, he was giving us an opportunity to win if they scored a TD. If we didn't get the conversion, we still only needed a FG to tie. How is that not good coaching?

We would have had the opportunity to win the game if they scored a TD even if we kicked the extra point. We kick the extra point, we go up by 5. They score a TD and are forced to go for 2 to make it a 3 pt game. If they do not convert then a FG wins the game. If they do, a FG ties.

I did not have money on the game but think about a better's perspective on this one. SMU is up by 4 pts, the line is 5.5 at game time. The extra point with no further scores, SMU doesn't cover. The 2 point conversion SMU covers by a half point. Hearts stopped on that tip and eventual catch by Dorsey.

OC Mustang · Post by **OC Mustang** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:03 am

Phire...
You wouldn't know the right call to make in that situation if it bit you in your hind end.

It isn't obvious, like say, Blake Warren fumbling the ball so much that duct tape wouldn't have helped.

The "chart" says go for 2. Bennett has nothing to lose. He played the game very tight pretty much the whole way, so it falls in the category of calculated risk. No harm, no foul.

Bottom line, though, and I hope this sinks in real good with everybody.

It's a W. Next.

You do not go for 2

You do not go for 2

Re: You do not go for 2