Dan Mullen is one lucky SOB

[Zambo]

Holy Hell.

There was almost 13 minutes left in the game geniuses. The only time you go for two is when you're so desperate for points that you are hoping that you can stop the other team from scoring again in order to win the game. With 13 minutes left there is plenty of time for both teams to score more points. If I have to offer any proof, just look how the game actually turned out. We missed the conversions and damn near lost the game because of it, yet you sit here as if that was some kind of fluke occurrence that they were in a position to kick a FG. If you're not asking yourself "Ok, what is the score going to be if the other team kicks a FG" then you simply aren't thinking like a football coach should be thinking.

With 13 minutes left, we go down by 4, they kick a FG, we can still tie the game with a TD. You miss the XP there and we go down by 5, now we need a TD and 2pt conversion just to get back to where we should have been in the first place.

If you think we should have gone for 2 there because it would have put us down by only 3 and we could tie the game with a FG, then you should be screaming for us to go for 2 every time in that circumstance...even in the 2nd quarter because it makes just as much sense. Sorry if a little more insight into how football games actually play out doesn't jive with your grade-school caveman math skills.

 

[GatorJ]

The first 2 was at 12:41, the second 2 was at 4:11.

The first 2 puts us down 3 if we make it. The extra point would have put us down by 4. It was 100% the right call. It was the 4th quarter. If it was the 3rd quarter, you would be 100% right. It was the right call. The second 2, Mullen should have used one of his 3 remaining timeouts.

I don’t have a problem with the second one. The first one was too early IMO. Basically said as much in his presser. The reason he did the first one was because they were having problems getting into the end zone And scoring was a bit of a challenge. We scored more points in the fourth quarter than we did in the entire game.

Simply said, if their kicker made that kick we probably lost the game. If he would’ve hit the extra point in both those drives, that kick would’ve merely tied the game.

I think he went for two the 1st time because he was pressing. The problem with Franks is that he takes too long to make reads and get the ball down the field. So it eats up a lot of time off the clock and scoring is at a premium. I don’t think he expected the offense to be more explosive under Trask.

Of course I have no knowledge on this – but I think the reason Trask was not starting over Franks is because Trask turns the ball over a lot in practice. And I think he’s going to turn the ball over a lot this season. But I think the team will be more fun to watch.

 

[Gator By Marriage]

I think he went for two the 1st time because he was pressing. The problem with Franks is that he takes too long to make reads and get the ball down the field. So it eats up a lot of time off the clock and scoring is at a premium. I don’t think he expected the offense to be more explosive under Trask.

If you are correct, then I have less respect for the decision. I would have thought that watching Trask on his first drive would have given CDM more confidence.

Of course I have no knowledge on this – but I think the reason Trask was not starting over Franks is because Trask turns the ball over a lot in practice. And I think he’s going to turn the ball over a lot this season. But I think the team will be more fun to watch.

Well, he did throw two passes (and one in the UT-Martin game) that could easily have been picked.

 

[NOLAGATOR]

I know we were lucky but...

We missed a chip shot FG

We were missing our #1 DB

Our best pass rusher went down

We were missing Toney

We had several very questionable calls go against us AGAIN.

And ESPN made it clear they don't like us.

 

[Concrete Helmet]

Sorry if a little more insight into how football games actually play out doesn't jive with your grade-school caveman math skills.

So I will ask you next time what the final score will be with 13 minutes left in a game that has been a defensive struggle and has 2 back up QB's playing? I'll split everything I make in Vegas with you, I promise....perhaps you should inform the coaching staff of your clairvoyant abilities also....

 

[BMF]

I don’t have a problem with the second one. The first one was too early IMO. Basically said as much in his presser. The reason he did the first one was because they were having problems getting into the end zone And scoring was a bit of a challenge. We scored more points in the fourth quarter than we did in the entire game.

Simply said, if their kicker made that kick we probably lost the game. If he would’ve hit the extra point in both those drives, that kick would’ve merely tied the game.

I think he went for two the 1st time because he was pressing. The problem with Franks is that he takes too long to make reads and get the ball down the field. So it eats up a lot of time off the clock and scoring is at a premium. I don’t think he expected the offense to be more explosive under Trask.

Of course I have no knowledge on this – but I think the reason Trask was not starting over Franks is because Trask turns the ball over a lot in practice. And I think he’s going to turn the ball over a lot this season. But I think the team will be more fun to watch.

Having the benefit of hindsight, yes we should have kicked. But there is literally a "book" on this, and it says to go for two - especially when you're struggling to score - in the 4th quarter. Sure, maybe if it was 14:55 of the 4th quarter you go for 1, but we were struggling to move the ball and score. I would guess there were better odds of us going to OT w/ the score tied at 21 vs. what played out.

 

[GatorJ]

I know we were lucky but...

We missed a chip shot FG

We were missing our #1 DB

Our best pass rusher went down

We were missing Toney

We had several very questionable calls go against us AGAIN.

And ESPN made it clear they don't like us.

A lot of calls went against KY as well. I don’t think it was one sided.

 

[GatorJ]

Having the benefit of hindsight, yes we should have kicked. But there is literally a "book" on this, and it says to go for two - especially when you're struggling to score - in the 4th quarter. Sure, maybe if it was 14:55 of the 4th quarter you go for 1, but we were struggling to move the ball and score. I would guess there were better odds of us going to OT w/ the score tied at 21 vs. what played out.

The good news is that I don’t think he has to make that call again this season. How many times have we had to go for it on 4th to just build momentum?

 

[Zambo]

So I will ask you next time what the final score will be with 13 minutes left in a game that has been a defensive struggle and has 2 back up QB's playing? I'll split everything I make in Vegas with you, I promise....perhaps you should inform the coaching staff of your clairvoyant abilities also....

You hardly need to be clairvoyant to make an educated guess that with 12 plus minutes left there is still time for scoring. Clairvoyant would be thinking that with almost a quarter of the game to be played, you can start doing final score math. What you fail to grasp sir is that it is the LACK of clairvoyance that makes the decision to go for 2 there stupid. And BTW Mullen himself admitted as much. So even though when we lined up to run the play and those of us in the box were screaming to just kick it, and even though we were obviously proven right, you just strap your concrete helmet on a little tighter and continue to burrow into your dark place where you pretend such things are simple so you can feel like you can understand them.

 

[Zambo]

Having the benefit of hindsight, yes we should have kicked. But there is literally a "book" on this, and it says to go for two - especially when you're struggling to score - in the 4th quarter. Sure, maybe if it was 14:55 of the 4th quarter you go for 1, but we were struggling to move the ball and score. I would guess there were better odds of us going to OT w/ the score tied at 21 vs. what played out.

Show me this book. It doesn't say what you think it says. Please produce it and lets all read it together.

 

[BMF]

Show me this book. It doesn't say what you think it says. Please produce it and lets all read it together.

I'm sure you know how to use google, but here you go:

When To Go For 2, For Real


Two Point Conversion Chart


And I'll recommend you buy this book:

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Football

 

[Zambo]

I'm sure you know how to use google, but here you go:

When To Go For 2, For Real


Two Point Conversion Chart


And I'll recommend you buy this book:

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Football

Your own link says the following: Those changes to a team’s win probability are all that’s needed to construct a rudimentary “Go or No” chart (for 10 minutes left).
Furthermore, the actual time vs score chart for our situation on Saturday shows that a team with an average shot at converting the 2 pointer should kick it.

What else do you have?

 

[BMF]

Your own link says the following: Those changes to a team’s win probability are all that’s needed to construct a rudimentary “Go or No” chart (for 10 minutes left).
Furthermore, the actual time vs score chart for our situation on Saturday shows that a team with an average shot at converting the 2 pointer should kick it.

What else do you have?

I have nothing else. You think we should have put ourselves 4 points behind needing a TD to win. I think we should have tried to put ourselves in a position to kick a FG to not lose. Done. That's it. But I do still recommend that last link for you....

 

[Zambo]

The bottom line is that with 4 or 5 minutes left, you go for 2 and hope to get the conversion, stop the other team, and then you need a FG to tie or a TD to win. Literally everybody understands that.

But with 13 minutes left to play there is just too much other stuff that can happen. You do the same thing you would do in the 2nd or 3rd quarter, which is accumulate points. This strategy proves itself time and time again, just as it did on Saturday.

 

[soflagator]

We had scored 16 points at the point and were down 5. A 2-point conversion makes the score 21-18. Not going for it puts us down 4, which is useless. It was absolutely, 100%, no if's, and's, or but's about it the right call. There is a "book" on this and it was the right call. Not going for it would be like staying on a 15 vs. a dealer showing a face card in blackjack. You absolutely have to hit, even if the next card is a 10 you absolutely must hit (because the card could be a 6). We hit and missed. The 2nd attempt w/ 3 timeouts is what bothers me (not using the timeout).

I understand the mathematical element of his going for it. What I didn't like was the timing. And not just the fact that there was still 12+ minutes to play, but also because of the fact that we'd driven straight down the field with our new QB and suddenly had all the momentum against a shell-shocked defense that had no answer for what we were doing. In addition to risking the crowd getting back into the game as they get something to cheer about, to me, it kind of kills the whole "we have confidence in Trask" when we're all but saying we think we may only be good for a FG from here on out. Situational rules or not, in that moment I'd have preferred us kicking and sending the message that we're not even thinking about the tie. Rather we're just going to go down the field and do it again, maybe two more times if time permits, and win this game. So again, I get the reasons you do it, but I think we would'v been better served not in that case.

 

[oxrageous]

I agree with BMF and Crete on this one. I would have gone for two under those circumstances. If Tebow had been our QB perhaps not, but we had no idea at that point if we’d ever sniff the end zone again.

 

[Zambo]

In short, the chart is worthless when both teams have multiple possessions left before the end of the game.

 

[neteng]

I agree with BMF and Crete on this one. I would have gone for two under those circumstances. If Tebow had been our QB perhaps not, but we had no idea at that point if we’d ever sniff the end zone again.

Huh? With Tebow as our QB I go for that 2 in that moment every time. With Trask or Franks, and more importantly, our OL ... I don't ... I kick that EP and pump my D up. Maybe us missing the chip shot FG earlier helped CDM in making the decision to go for it. I dunno ... I just know I would have kicked the EP and let Trask have full mo on the sideline with his O.

EDIT: But I think going for 2 isn't as horrible as I thought during the game either

 

[TheDouglas78]

We had scored 16 points at the point and were down 5. A 2-point conversion makes the score 21-18. Not going for it puts us down 4, which is useless. It was absolutely, 100%, no if's, and's, or but's about it the right call. There is a "book" on this and it was the right call. Not going for it would be like staying on a 15 vs. a dealer showing a face card in blackjack. You absolutely have to hit, even if the next card is a 10 you absolutely must hit (because the card could be a 6). We hit and missed. The 2nd attempt w/ 3 timeouts is what bothers me (not using the timeout).

BMF is correct, In the 4th quarter the difference between being down 5 and 4 is no difference at all both are a touchdown, you try to make it a 3 point game. You aren't counting it by points but by types of scores, and you can't count on a safety.

 

[TheDouglas78]

Of course I have no knowledge on this – but I think the reason Trask was not starting over Franks is because Trask turns the ball over a lot in practice. And I think he’s going to turn the ball over a lot this season. But I think the team will be more fun to watch.

how many passes passed through Kentucky DB's hands, if they hadn't had the injuries and ejections in the secondary those might not have been completions. Also another reason we moved to a quicker passing offense. Less time to react.