Not going for two cost us the game

[Bill Lumbergh 7351]

I'm not reading the whole thread, but when we went to OT I predicted that either our ST or OL would cost us the game in OT. Depending on how you want to look at it, both kind of did.

 

We're a streaky team, needed to end it while the streak was hot. Instead, we waited for our inevitable breakdown.

 

 

[A’Dam Psycho 1499]

I was fine going into overtime because we had all the momentum but when it became clear that we couldn’t stop the big chunky white boy that OU always seems to have and Rattler was settled in, we should have went for 2. But Herman is a pussy and would never play to win.

[TexArcher 39080]

Completely agree.

My new girlfriend just started watching football with me this season.  Right after the touchdown near the end of regulation but before the XP, I explained how OT works, and she was like, "I don't understand why you don't try to end it now.  You're always talking about how the offense needs to get some first downs to give the defense a rest.  Well, their defense has been on the field for a long time and they look exhausted, plus they're probably heartbroken.  Why are we giving them time to regroup?"

This woman has seen about 4 football games in her life and she's a better coach than Tom Herman.

Edited October 11, 2020 by TexArcher

[Mother mopar 3389]

Completely agree.
My new girlfriend just started watching football with me this season.  Right after the touchdown near the end of regulation but before the XP, I explained how OT works, and she was like, "I don't understand why you don't try to end it now.  You're always talking about how the offense needs to get some first downs to give the defense a rest.  Well, their defense has been on the field for a long time and they look exhausted, plus they're probably heartbroken.  Why are we giving them time to regroup?"
This woman has seen about 4 football games in her life and she's a better coach than Tom Herman.

Weird pix aren't coming through

[Thermos H. Christ 478]

I keep coming back to this.

Sam was absolutely on fire those last two drives, OU's defense was totally reeling and demoralized, and Tom decided to bet AGAINST Sam finding a way to pick up three yards to seal a legendary comeback. Tom figured the odds of this team putting together a couple drives on both sides of the ball without punching ourselves in the dick were better than the odds of Sam balling out for one more snap. Did anyone other than Tom Herman doubt Sam in that moment, or believe in OU's ability to stop him?

Sure, it's possible that Sam COULD have gotten stuffed, but how do you not bet on his ability to pick up three tough yards when the alternative is betting on ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT THIS TEAM. 

[Beau Vine 55898]

6 hours ago, TexArcher said:

Completely agree.

My new girlfriend just started watching football with me this season.  Right after the touchdown near the end of regulation but before the XP, I explained how OT works, and she was like, "I don't understand why you don't try to end it now.  You're always talking about how the offense needs to get some first downs to give the defense a rest.  Well, their defense has been on the field for a long time and they look exhausted, plus they're probably heartbroken.  Why are we giving them time to regroup?"

This woman has seen about 4 football games in her life and she's a better coach than Tom Herman.

I find this post extremely hard to believe...

*YOU* have a girlfriend?

[TexArcher 39080]

9 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I find this post extremely hard to believe...

*YOU* have a girlfriend?

Don't tell your mom, please.

[bullet 1631]

20 hours ago, SurlyORama said:

FOWTBS. Not a Herman fan, but going for 2 makes no sense for a coach, unless he HAS to. You don’t make it, it was CLEARLY a mistake. Because in retrospect it’s easy to say what was “right”

Yeah.  Its a gamble you don't need to take.  We were slicing up their defense and they had stalled out.  OT was in our favor.   We lost because our defense didn't make plays in OT and our offense didn't make plays in the last two OTs.

[bullet 1631]

17 hours ago, youdunnf'dup said:

It isn’t even about admitting we were the worst team. They were begging to be knocked out. We let them get saved by the bell and they got to clear their head before the next round. You end it right there because they were demoralized and we were on fire. Use your best 2pt play, roll the dice, and light a fire into this team. Don’t play it safe and let overtime create variables that are now out of your control. Even with something as simple as the OT coin flip. Being on defense first gives you a pretty big advantage IMO. Why would you want to chance something like that if you had it in your control with no time on the clock.

And yet some of you say we have lousy execution, so you bet it all on one play?

[bullet 1631]

I've seen us get next to nothing on 3rd and 3 too many times to want to go for two.

[52-80 19380]

it wouldve been funny though if they went for 2, gave the ball to ingram, and he fumbles it at the 1

[4th&Five 42027]

5 minutes ago, bullet said:

And yet some of you say we have lousy execution, so you bet it all on one play?

It’s much easier for a bad team to execute once than for a full OT series on offense and defense. 

[Not a cat 5819]

Just now, 52-80 said:

it wouldve been funny though if they went for 2, gave the ball to ingram, and he fumbles it at the 1

I was thinking the misdirection weak side swing pass to him but I think his head explodes in the huddle if we call that.  Plus we'd already burned them once on it. 

[zzz 199]

20 minutes ago, bullet said:

Yeah.  Its a gamble you don't need to take.  We were slicing up their defense and they had stalled out.  OT was in our favor.   We lost because our defense didn't make plays in OT and our offense didn't make plays in the last two OTs.

They didn't stall out. They went into clock mode to protect their turnover machine rattler. We did jack shit for 3.5 quarters. Their coach knows they have a shit defense and tried to use his best group, his offense, to secure the win by throwing a pass on third down. Their guy dropped it, but if he catches it the game is over. Herman had the same opportunity with his best group on the field and decided to take his chances with our defense. Our team is soft with no killer instinct. I wonder where they get that from?

Edited October 11, 2020 by zzz
Spelling and shit

[SurlyORama 165]

Let's all be honest: regardless of which decision Herman made (go for two at ANY point, or don't), as long as the game was lost as a result most of the same people (you know who you are) would be saying he made the wrong call, and it was obviously wrong.

I still think not going was the right call, but still think he's bad and he should feel bad.

[XYZ 2154]

What would Sam have chosen at the end of regulation, kick extra point or call his own number?

[USNALonghorn 5199]

4 minutes ago, XYZ said:

What would Sam have chosen at the end of regulation, kick extra point or call his own number?

This is the right question to ask.

[4th&Five 42027]

I was surprised both times that Sam never looked over and asked to go for two or looked like he thought they might. He knows who his coach is. 

[mulletpelini 5225]

In this season of all seasons, nothing is guaranteed.  There is no guarantee that next week every game will be cancelled.  I can't for the life of think for one second why ANY coach at ANY level wouldn't play every game like it is the last, because it actually might be.  You play to win the game.

Going for 2 should be the answer every fucking game of the entire fucking season.  IT'S A FREE FUCKING SEASON HOLY FUCK.  IT DOESN'T COUNT

[Longboard Horn 41417]

On 10/10/2020 at 7:35 PM, Xian said:

Seems like Tom would have learned something from the wvu loss a few years ago.   

Tom never learns. He believes he knows everything already. 

[TexasPride10 599]

Let's not forget that if the 2-pt conversion at the end of regulation had failed, we still would have had a chance at another onside kick and try to set up a last second field goal. I know recovering an onside kick is rare, but we did it two weeks ago, and we damn near almost did it again this week. Like many others have already said, I was screaming "Go for 2!" at my TV as soon as we scored. I can semi-understand him not going for it at the end of 2OT, because that would have been a "win or lose" play. But at the end of regulation, it would have been "win, or take another shot at winning", and Tom is a pussy for not playing those odds. 

[Thermos H. Christ 478]

20 hours ago, SurlyORama said:

Let's all be honest: regardless of which decision Herman made (go for two at ANY point, or don't), as long as the game was lost as a result most of the same people (you know who you are) would be saying he made the wrong call, and it was obviously wrong.

I still think not going was the right call, but still think he's bad and he should feel bad.

Yes, no matter what if he loses there are going to be a lot of folks saying he should have done the thing that doesn't lose, but I don't think he could be blamed for taking his shot at the end of regulation. I think more likely people would say we should have called a different play when going for 2 than would say we shouldn't have gone for it. 

Option 1: Bet the house on Sam Ehlinger being able to get you 3 yards

Option 2: Bet the house on the kicking unit successfully kicking the XP, the offense successfully putting together another scoring drive, AND the defense getting a stop or a turnover.

Losing is absolutely a possibility either way, but I think option 1 is clearly the higher percentage choice. How often does ANYONE stop Sam from getting 2 yards downfield and falling forward when we really need it? It happens, but he's got to be good for it 3 times out of 4, maybe more. Call a QB power RPO so he can take advantage if they send EVERYONE after him, and put the ball in his hands. 

[NeverMarryAStripper 22332]

What does the binder say though,lulz

Fire Tom?

[Bill Lumbergh 7351]

Fire Tom?

I would actually like to know what the statistics say about the likelihood of a coach with Tom's track record at this point in his tenure ever winning anything meaningful.

CDC should call Herman in for a conversation and have a binder with those stats ready to reference. After all, you can't really argue with the binder.

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

22 hours ago, SurlyORama said:

Let's all be honest: regardless of which decision Herman made (go for two at ANY point, or don't), as long as the game was lost as a result most of the same people (you know who you are) would be saying he made the wrong call, and it was obviously wrong.

I still think not going was the right call, but still think he's bad and he should feel bad.

I couldn’t possibly disagree with you more on this. I know there’s no way of proving it, but a decision like that by turtle Tom would’ve been borderline universally respected on this message board. This isn’t a hindsight type of deal where we know the outcome and know the decision we made was the wrong one. All signs pointed to it being obvious that we should’ve gone for two at the end of regulation, and if not then, 100% at the end of the 2nd OT where the game can be won or lost on that play. 

[SurlyORama 165]

47 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

I know there’s no way of proving it, but a decision like that by turtle Tom would’ve been borderline universally respected on this message board. 

You might be right that a lot of people might grudgingly agree a the decision to go for two, even if the play didn't work.

But, generally it's a toss-up if you go into overtime. After all, you played to a draw over 60 minutes, so at least that day the teams are evenly matched.

When you have all of the momentum (e.g., after coming back from 14 points down in the last several minutes), the odds of winning in overtime likely go up dramatically. Their defense hasn't even stopped you recently. While the odds of a successful two-point conversion are likely STILL well below 50% (I read at one point that in general they are around 35%).

That's my rationale anyway.

[dcar00 15005]

40 minutes ago, SurlyORama said:

You might be right that a lot of people might grudgingly agree a the decision to go for two, even if the play didn't work.

But, generally it's a toss-up if you go into overtime. After all, you played to a draw over 60 minutes, so at least that day the teams are evenly matched.

When you have all of the momentum (e.g., after coming back from 14 points down in the last several minutes), the odds of winning in overtime likely go up dramatically. Their defense hasn't even stopped you recently. While the odds of a successful two-point conversion are likely STILL well below 50% (I read at one point that in general they are around 35%).

That's my rationale anyway.

the problem with the calculus is that Riley did the same thing we bitch at Herman about.   he turtled on D and O in the last 5 minutes.  we took advantage.  In OT, Riley doesn't need to turtle anymore. Its a brand new game with a 25 yard field.  although he did in the 3rd OT and his kicker missed the FG.

Herman was thinking the OU we played in the last 5 minutes was the OU we were going to see in the OT.

my bet is he was also a pussy and didn't want the potential optics of going for 2 in a win or lose situation against the sooners if he failed.

[dcar00 15005]

3 hours ago, youdunnf'dup said:

I couldn’t possibly disagree with you more on this. I know there’s no way of proving it, but a decision like that by turtle Tom would’ve been borderline universally respected on this message board. This isn’t a hindsight type of deal where we know the outcome and know the decision we made was the wrong one. All signs pointed to it being obvious that we should’ve gone for two at the end of regulation, and if not then, 100% at the end of the 2nd OT where the game can be won or lost on that play. 

agree with this.  we were going to be pissed because we should have beaten the worst OU team in 20 years by 14+ but we wouldn't blame the call to try to end it with your best player and best unit on the field.

[SurlyORama 165]

24 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

Herman was thinking the OU we played in the last 5 minutes was the OU we were going to see in the OT.

Fair.

[USNALonghorn 5199]

Context matters.

Our defense had been on the field for 36 minutes compared to their 24. They played almost 1.5 games worth of football in minutes by the fourth OT. Once our adrenaline wore off and we came back to our norm, we had no chance. We should’ve let Sam do his thing from 3 yard line.

[williemackgarza 1828]

Having tom herman cost us the game

[jettrink 40]

To this minute I wouldn't trust our staff's playcall on a 2pt conversion.  We are doomed.

[Cornfusion 250]

On 10/11/2020 at 3:35 PM, TexArcher said:

Don't tell your mom, please.

Does not telling his mom go for all of us?

[gmr548 16704]

Extending the game benefits the better team. That was OU. Two yards for the W is a pretty good deal in that situation. Not going to get any better shot than that.

I was truly baffled at the end of OT2

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

1 hour ago, jettrink said:

To this minute I wouldn't trust our staff's playcall on a 2pt conversion.  We are doomed.

I trust that they aren’t dumb enough to take the ball out of Sam’s hands, and it’s in his hands, I trust that he makes the right decision and we get that 2pt conversation. ESPECIALLY considering how hot he was at that time.

[Guitarman 29]

Hindsight. We all thought it at the time.  You, me, the dog, the genital crabs, and everyone else. But even the evil genius Riley didn't do it nor did Mensa (snicker) .  Woulda shoulda coulda.