That miss inhibited us from some options later on. It was a very unnecessary strategy. Just mindless on my opinion.
Somebody explain the two point attempt logic?
- Thread starter SEPATOPTEN
- Start date
You can’t explain the unexplainable.
The logic was to try and make it a 3pt game where a FG would tie. It makes sense late in the game but somewhat questionable that early.
I’m often critical of some of Franklin’s decisions, but didn’t mind that one at all. Think it’s very “results-based” to look at it as a bad move. At the time they came out for it, I was indifferent to going for it.
Me neither. Many teams will go for two with a 5 pt difference.
My problem was the execution. 83, who just scored the TD, needed to take his block downfield a little. The defender got off it and forced 3 to make a decision.
The explanation is that he went with the chart that says down 5 go for 2 but he ignored that there were 20 minutes left in the game. It wasn't thought out and was the wrong decision even if we would have converted the attempt.
Who are you, Slade’s mother? The block was there but instead of reading the block correctly and cutting up inside of it for two easy points, he did the exact opposite and ran harmlessly out of bounds. Terrible by Slade, but the decision to go for two then was wrong and having Slade in the game at all was beyond stupid.
I imagine he thought their offense was humming with their QB having more TDs than incompletions and aggressively chasing points was the correct call at the time.
The problem is that coaches have these stupid charts of when to go for 2 that don't take into account how much friggin' time is left in the game!
There was a TON of time left at that point so it was completely unnecessary to do that. If we get the one point, we likely win the game.
There was a TON of time left at that point so it was completely unnecessary to do that. If we get the one point, we likely win the game.
What are you Bowers sister? lol Bowers didn't move the defender down field, didn't move him inside or outside he MUFFED the block. Bowers man made the tackle.
Not making it altered the game. Making it would have altered it. You are assuming if the extra point is kicked all decisions and play calls would have worked out identically as they had.
Kicking 3 instead of missing on 4th down would have altered it even without the two points.
Pass interence called on either of two Manny interceptions would alter the game.
In the end, it’s a loss. Still 8-1 and in control of own destiny
Kicking 3 instead of missing on 4th down would have altered it even without the two points.
Pass interence called on either of two Manny interceptions would alter the game.
In the end, it’s a loss. Still 8-1 and in control of own destiny
I was critical of the call when it was made but IMO the worst call(s) came later. PSU was down 12 instead of 11 where a FG + TD + 2pt convrsion would tie. PSU had to go for a TD because of the missed 2 pt conversion. So what were the play calls?
- 1st down run by Ford for 2 yds. That was OK because PSU knew they were in 4 down territory. It was worth a shot. If he got 4 yards PSU could have kept trying to pound the ball.
- 2nd down run to Ford for 3 yds. That was questionable IMO because the previous run let PSU with 6 yds to go for a TD.
- 3rd down run by Clifford for a 1 yd loss. This reminded me of the 4th down and long call vs. OSU where we handed it off to Sanders. WTF?
- 4th down incomplete fade pass to Hamler who was 6" shorter than his defender. Hamler can run by people but he isn't the guy I would want to put into a jump ball situation. This was a complete mystery. Friermuth 6'5", Bowers 6'4", Chisena 6"3", Shorter 6'4"..... or Hamler 5"9". I don't understand. (BTW, Kuntz is 6'7". What up with him?).
Take points, don't chase them- O yeah don't fake punt on your own 23 on your first possession (Bowl Game) as well.
The call was not the problem, the decision making of the RB was. He cuts in as mentioned above, 2 pts, and some of you whiners are talking about the brazen set CJF had there.
If Slade cuts inside, CJF is a genius.
So he was blocking like Slade did when Clifford got hit and threw an int?
I didn't like the call but I agree that it might have worked if the RB had cut in where he had a blocker.
Actually, everyone would forget about it...for some reason, going for two early and failing to convert is usually brought up again and again. The 50% of times that teams make it and it helps, no one ever talks about it again.
If Franklin had stuck with Journey Brown he might have been a genius. If my aunt had balls.....
Look, there are a MILLION reasons we lost the game. The stupid 2 point attempt was just one of them.
Despite the fact that we were badly outplayed, we still had a chance to win the frickin' game.
AND we still control our own destiny.
Despite the fact that we were badly outplayed, we still had a chance to win the frickin' game.
AND we still control our own destiny.
I don't appreciate your talking that way about my Aunt Tom.
I always see the '' chasing points early'' different if its because of a missed XPT earlier vs just the actual point differential. I know in the end it doesnt matter but somehow trying to pick up a lost point vs just adding one . It seems like a morale boost more to make up a missed PAT on a TD 6 vs 2 FGs. 6
The bottom line is (A) .... plays that don't work are stupid; and (B) plays that do work are genius. What makes great coaches is the ratio of A to B.
Wrong. You play the percentages. You make high percentage calls, like kicking for the 1 for as long as you can until you're FORCED to make lower percentage calls, like a 2 pt attempt. There was no reason to take the risk at that point.
As we could see, it drastically altered the game. Certainly could have been kicking the game winning FG at the end if not for that call.
Wrong. He's still an idiot for going for it. The result has no impact on whether or not it was the right decision.
Why do you think “the percentages” dictated an XP? If anything, in that situation, the percentages would say to go for 2?
Don’t confuse “conventional wisdom” with “percentages”.
NO. Conventional wisdom would be using a stupid chart that says if your down 5 you go for 2. It's simple, a 1 point conversion is a MUCH HIGHER PERCENTAGE play than a 2 pt attempt. That is playing the percentages. It's not actually rocket science, pretty simple, in fact.
And a 2point conversion is worth more points.
4th and goal from the one inch line...kicking the FG is a MUCH HIGHER PERCENTAGE, but it’s usually a horrible decision, and certainly not increase your chances of winning. Also not rocket science.
Usually, saying you should “play the percentages” means you should increase your chances of winning.
Now you're just being ridiculous. Going for a 2 point conversion IN THE THIRD QUARTER of a game is not comparable to 4th and inches. Come on, man. I'm out now, have a nice evening.
Yes everything does change after that and that is one of the fake absolutes about a conversion or miss. Wrong call for sure in so many ways regardless. Leaves you vulnerable to a field goal eight point lead. I was going nuts. Why would you put yourself in that position. I love our coach but that a very bad choice.
Yes execution was the problem but risk was not worth the reward. There was tons of game left. It was an awful decision. As someone said even if they make it is the wrong choice.
