I disagree. With Levi not being able to take over and win us a game. I can recall (2) pretty big games. (1) APP St. 2020. (2) ULM 2019. His legs moved the chains and ran the clock.
Other than the stuff thats already discussed, I had a few takeaways.
1. Cant take a delay of game in the 2nd. You have 10 coaches plus a bunch of GAs and even UGAs. Somebody has to be responsible for watching play clock at all times. It turned a 3rd and 3 to a 3rd and 8; we gained 5 yards and punted on 4th and 3.
2. Clock management at the end of the first half was terrible. Got the ball at 2:00 down 14-3 with all three TOs. Completed a pass of 9, ran for -1, ran for +1; that span took 1:20 off the clock. Texas calls TO hoping to get ball back, we forced to go for it on 4&1 and get it. Had a 1&10 on our 37, LL rush for 11 to the 38, and then completes pass for 1st down at Texas 31 with 7 seconds left, kick FG. We were only able to drive 44 yards in 2:00 with all three TOs. It was clear Billy was playing for the FG and not a TD, which I wouldnt mind if we got the ball in the 2nd half, but we didnt. We lost the middle eight 14-3.
3. Decision to go for 2 down 35-18 (17 point differential) with 9:31 left in the game. Instead of making it a two possession game by kicking PAT, we go for 2, fail, and it stays a three possession game. Sure, it seemed like all hope was lost at that point, but there was still time left. Dont go for 2 unless you have to, including limiting amount of possessions necessary to stay in the game.
Every decision in a game should be aimed towards winning the game, and the little things matter. I thought Billy managed the game poorly; I don't know if its a player talent issue or if he is still a young coach and learning. Of course, all of this is easy to b___ about after the fact, but we pay him a good bit of money to be good at it.
Going for 2 so early reminded me of when John Fox panicked early in the Superbowl.
That took a point off the board for Carolina.
New England with nothing to lose goes for 2 and makes it.
Combining for a 3 point swing. The margin of victory.
Never go for two unless it is the very end of the game.
I went back and forth over this in my head a ton of times and I still don't think it was an awful decision. If we kick the extra point we are down by 16, if we make the 2 point conversion we are down by 15, so the options were 17 or 16 which are very similar as it would be very difficult to get 2, 2 point conversions. But 15 only takes 1 2 point conversion to tie the game. I think he was trying to play the percentages. I don't nessacarily agree with the decision, but I see where he was going.
Understood on the possessions point, but look at the counter argument. You go for two and make it, you can WIN the game with two possessions.
I studied A LOT of math and some statistics on my way to a EE degree at UL. There is quite a bit of very interesting math on two point conversions and when to go for it and when to not.
It is akin to playing blackjack. There are very definite mathematic rules that gain you a slight edge versus the house, but ONLY if you play that way 100% of the time.
IMO, for the small advantage Coach Napier is trying to eke out here, he is going to have to be very consistent in his application of the strategy, and remembering one season will still be a very small sample size.
I am not sure I would have the, will/guts/lack of emotion, to do it for a little upside.
And to follow on, a good article from a couple of year ago, think you need to be a subscriber, but not 100% sure.
https://theathletic.com/1284371/2019...at-fitzgerald/
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)