2 Point Conversion

BigWillie

BigWillie

New member
As proud as I am of the boys for battling today and even Pelini for getting them ready, I have to question his call at the end. We have had trouble stopping their offense all day and we decide to play for the tie instead of going for the win. I don't get it and that is definitely not a Pelini-esque call, IMO.

General rule of thumb is on the road at the end of the game, you go for the win. Why not decide the game ourselves rather than let TTech decide it for us? I don't get it. Our offense was moving the ball at will on the ground and in the air versus them, but we play for the tie? Watson and Pelini should have a play drawn up for that situation already on hand, but nothing.

I know alot of people are proud of a moral victory, but I'm not so keen on these things. I'm selfish and I want a win. I want to know why Pelini did not allow our guys to decide that.

I'll step down off my soap box now.

 
huskerfan500 said:
I totally agree although you know if they would have gone for it and not made it all hell would break loose.
Click to expand...
I don't see why or how. It was likely the best call in that situation of the game.

Tech had a strong wind in their face meaning they would need to drive deep in our territory for a FG at least. They had no timeouts. Our defense had trouble stopping them all day. We had kept their defense on the field for the majority of the game. Our offense was rolling on the ground and in the air.

Honestly, I believe it was the best choice. I know hindsight is 20/20, but even at the time in the game thread I stated I thought it was the wrong choice.

No guts no glory.

 
I don't think we needed to go for 2. We lost it in OT. TT should have never got big yards on their first play in OT. We still had the game after TT's missed PAT. Ganz threw the INT. We are not mentally tough enough yet to win these types of games...sad but true.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would of gone for 2. At that point in the game "one play" is either going to win it or lose it anyway. Why not do it then while you have everything going for you!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigWillie said:
As proud as I am of the boys for battling today and even Pelini for getting them ready, I have to question his call at the end. We have had trouble stopping their offense all day and we decide to play for the tie instead of going for the win. I don't get it and that is definitely not a Pelini-esque call, IMO.

General rule of thumb is on the road at the end of the game, you go for the win. Why not decide the game ourselves rather than let TTech decide it for us? I don't get it. Our offense was moving the ball at will on the ground and in the air versus them, but we play for the tie? Watson and Pelini should have a play drawn up for that situation already on hand, but nothing.

I know alot of people are proud of a moral victory, but I'm not so keen on these things. I'm selfish and I want a win. I want to know why Pelini did not allow our guys to decide that.

I'll step down off my soap box now.
Click to expand...

Says who? I would have gone for two myself because I thought we had momentum, but there's a lot of coaches that play for overtime in that situation.

Of course, if penalties had been under control... like 2 holds taking us out of field goal range at the end of the 2nd period... there wouldn't have been an overtime to debate over.

 
eoltmer said:
Everyone has something to learn....even Bo. TO did the same things and learned from them Bo will do the same.
Click to expand...
TO's first year 1973, against Missouri, Kansas and Okie St. were 1 pt loss, 1 pt win and a tie, respectively

Against Missouri he went for the win, and was chastised for not going for the tie.

Two weeks later, learning his lesson, he went for the tie. And was chastised for not going for the win.

TO said from the experience, paraphrased: "From now on I am going to do what I feel is best for the team, and not read the papers"

 
Bleeding Husker Red said:
BigWillie said:
As proud as I am of the boys for battling today and even Pelini for getting them ready, I have to question his call at the end. We have had trouble stopping their offense all day and we decide to play for the tie instead of going for the win. I don't get it and that is definitely not a Pelini-esque call, IMO.

General rule of thumb is on the road at the end of the game, you go for the win. Why not decide the game ourselves rather than let TTech decide it for us? I don't get it. Our offense was moving the ball at will on the ground and in the air versus them, but we play for the tie? Watson and Pelini should have a play drawn up for that situation already on hand, but nothing.

I know alot of people are proud of a moral victory, but I'm not so keen on these things. I'm selfish and I want a win. I want to know why Pelini did not allow our guys to decide that.

I'll step down off my soap box now.
Click to expand...

Says who? I would have gone for two myself because I thought we had momentum, but there's a lot of coaches that play for overtime in that situation.

Of course, if penalties had been under control... like 2 holds taking us out of field goal range at the end of the 2nd period... there wouldn't have been an overtime to debate over.
Click to expand...
Says the majority of football coaches in America. Even D'Marco Farr (former NFL defensive lineman) stated this after the game.

I would figure most have heard this thought process numerous times over the years.

 
huKSer said:
eoltmer said:
Everyone has something to learn....even Bo. TO did the same things and learned from them Bo will do the same.
Click to expand...
TO's first year 1973, against Missouri, Kansas and Okie St. were 1 pt loss, 1 pt win and a tie, respectively

Against Missouri he went for the win, and was chastised for not going for the tie.

Two weeks later, learning his lesson, he went for the tie. And was chastised for not going for the win.

TO said from the experience, paraphrased: "From now on I am going to do what I feel is best for the team, and not read the papers"
Click to expand...
You can't compare the decisions before the overtime rule was in effect vs. now. Used to be that the decision was an almost sure tie vs. going for the win. Now the decision is whether to try to win on one play vs. trying to beat them in OT. There is no clear cut decision.

I took a quick google at the odds of making a 2 point conversion. The only thing I found quickly was this article: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news...o&type=lgns, which refers (I think) to NFL stats that says an extra point is 99% while a 2 point conversion has a 44% success rate. If you think you have a 50/50 chance of winning in OT, that says you should go for 1 and go to OT.

But it's close enough that you might reconsider if you are big underdogs, like we were. It might be a lot less that 50/50 in OT. However, we were out playing TT at that point, and have a better kicker. And that kicker difference could easily have been the decider.

I think if you are the better team, it's a no-brainer to put it in OT. If the teams are even-up, still looks like better odds in OT. If you've tied it on flukes and have no business being in the game with the other team, roll the dice and go for 2. Otherwise, it's a gut feeling call. I was calling for sending it into OT but wouldn't have been upset to go for 2, even if it didn't work. We were a big underdog but I don't think we got there by flukes at all.

 
I'll also add that Ganz was hot and TT wasn't playing good defense, so our chances of making the 2 point convo was probably higher than 50/50 at that point. So maybe the 2 pointer was the better odds call, but I'll still trust Bo on this.

 
Back
Top