We needed to stay within one “regular” score. We then had to hope to force a TO and TD to tie. At that point, after the boneheaded decision, we now had to make a stop or a TO and MAKE A 2pt to just tie and force OT which this stupid decision was theoretically trying to avoid.
Yep.
Yep our national reputation is that of frauds and pretenders every year. it's getting so old.
I don't think fans expect to win 50% of games against top 5 teams. But 33% would be nice, especially if we're a top 10 team ourselves.
It had nothing to do with us losing….we lost by eight instead of seven. Had we lost by two, then people could beat that drum to death. Same with not challenging the Evans catch, we got the first down, it didn’t matter. The could have scenarios just to prove a point is ridiculous.
So we lost by eight instead of seven, had no impact on the final outcome even if you disagreed with it.
The point you are missing and using your hindsight bias assertion is that most would NOT have made that call at the time. There was zero need to take the risk.
So being behind by one score is a different mood than being behind by one score? I don’t think it changed the mood at all for those on the field…maybe for the fans who look for every reason to blame the coaches for a loss. And coaches that use analytics would have gone for it there, I’m not sure why so many on here fight against Franklin making these decisions…it’s analytics and he will continue to make these decisions based on that….see the Eagles for one example.
Again, doesn’t matter. I don’t like the call either, but it’s clear after all this time that he’s going to do what the analytics say and he’s not going to change, just like the other coaches who use analytics. As soon as they lined up for two, Danielson said that’s what the analytics say to do. That doesn’t make Franklin a bad coach or one who panics in big games, it makes him a coach who follows a certain set of rules whether you agree with him or not. And again, had they made it, this would be a whole different discussion.
It does matter. If you only have a 35% chance of success you are throwing point Away. It’s not even rocket science.
James Franklin would be the 1st to say, “You are what you are”.
Actually, the reality of making the two point conversion there’s more than 50% if you go and look at probability based functions so I understand why he did it. Again go look on the other site as there is a thread regarding that situation. If you remember lionJim from the board, he will justify those probabilities in the thread.
The problem I have is that there are also people who say not to ever punt the football because of analytics. Who decides when to use them and which ones to follow? Hypothetically, if it is better to go for two then shouldn’t the team just abandon kicking the XP early in the game and at least they’ll know that statistically the odds are in their favor? At least that approach may take the momentum killing part of it out of the equation.
Agree that second and one is the perfect time to try and go long. You have two more downs to run the ball if needed and getting a chunk play there really sets up for you to take all of the available time off the clock so that Oregon does not have a chance to make a couple quick plays in the last 30 seconds to get a field goal and win.
The point/roaring you are trying to make is not valid and certainly/especially not valid last night.
That depends on whether you think you would win in OT. If not, then you go for 2 when he did. I wouldn’t have gone for 2, but I understand the reasoning. Only you in your arrogance can you not see this.
What does that have to do with going for 2 or not. I wouldn’t have done it. I am simply stating the reasoning of doing it. I’m sure he was asked by media as to why he went for 2.
^^^^ THIS ^^^^
Saban and Smart and possibly Day….there you go. And all of their losses were to teams with less talent.
You can stop with the pearl clutching. This is a football board.
