***Official 2022 College Football Thread***

[Mavric]

2 hours ago, sho said:

Saban, or whoever it was that elected to go for the 2 point conversion on their last TD in regulation cost 'Bama the win and i have yet to hear/read anything that explains why they elected to go for 2 at that point.  It made no sense in the moment and makes even less sense seeing how the game played out.   Instead of a game tying FG, it would have been a game winning FG and prevented OT.

 

I think it's pretty justifiable.  The first time they were up one in the fourth quarter of a low-scoring game.  Makes a lot of sense to try to go up three.

 

The second time they went up four with under five minutes to go.  Being up five is no different than four at that point so it makes sense to go for two.

 

Obviously in hind sight they would have loved to have kicked both times but I'd say both calls made sense at the time.  When it's 14-9 at the end of the third no one is expecting the teams scoring three TDs and two FGs in the fourth.

[sho]

14 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

I think it's pretty justifiable.  The first time they were up one in the fourth quarter of a low-scoring game.  Makes a lot of sense to try to go up three.

 

The second time they went up four with under five minutes to go.  Being up five is no different than four at that point so it makes sense to go for two.

 

Obviously in hind sight they would have loved to have kicked both times but I'd say both calls made sense at the time.  When it's 14-9 at the end of the third no one is expecting the teams scoring three TDs and two FGs in the fourth.

 

I have no issue with going for 2 on the first attempt.   The problem, for me, with the second one is the risk/reward.  As you pointed out being up 6 is no different than being up 5 (which is what the point differential would have been on the made conversion), but there's a huge difference in being up 4 or being up 5.  If they score a TD, when you are up 5 you still kick the FG for the win instead of not getting the conversion now puts you a position to only tie with a FG.  And being up 5 vs 6 with them scoring a TD doesn't change your options on what you need.  So there is no benefit for going for 2, and failing eliminates a win option for you.   Take the easy point in that situation 100 out of 100 times.  There is no benefit that makes the risk worth it in this scenario, with that amount of time on the clock.

[Mavric]

25 minutes ago, sho said:

I have no issue with going for 2 on the first attempt.   The problem, for me, with the second one is the risk/reward.  As you pointed out being up 6 is no different than being up 5 (which is what the point differential would have been on the made conversion), but there's a huge difference in being up 4 or being up 5.  If they score a TD, when you are up 5 you still kick the FG for the win instead of not getting the conversion now puts you a position to only tie with a FG.  And being up 5 vs 6 with them scoring a TD doesn't change your options on what you need.  So there is no benefit for going for 2, and failing eliminates a win option for you.   Take the easy point in that situation 100 out of 100 times.  There is no benefit that makes the risk worth it in this scenario, with that amount of time on the clock.

 

No, you misquoted me.   At that point, there is really no difference between being up four or being up five.  The other team still needs a touchdown to put them ahead.

 

There is noticeable difference between being up five and being up six.  If you get it to six, a TD only ties it.  They still have to make the PAT.  Most likely they will but you still have a chance to keep it tied.  Although doing some looking it appears it's not as much of a benefit as I would have thought.  Still better to go for two but not by much.

 

And you're also ignoring that LSU would have looked at things differently after they scored.  Had Alabama kicked the second one (and made it), LSU would have been up by only one when they scored their last TD.  Then LSU would have gone for two and may or may not have gotten it.  So it changed a lot of decisions for the rest of the game.

 

There was a benefit - adding a win scenario (LSU not making the PAT, forcing overtime).  If it was a different game (Houston/SMU for instance), I could see a different choice.  But the way that game was played (i.e., low-scoring), you're thinking more of giving your defense two win scenarios - making a stop or blocking the PAT - not what you still need your offense to do if your defense doesn't make the stop.

 

[sho]

7 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

No, you misquoted me.   At that point, there is really no difference between being up four or being up five.  The other team still needs a touchdown to put them ahead.

 

There is noticeable difference between being up five and being up six.  If you get it to six, a TD only ties it.  They still have to make the PAT.  Most likely they will but you still have a chance to keep it tied.  Although doing some looking it appears it's not as much of a benefit as I would have thought.  Still better to go for two but not by much.

 

And you're also ignoring that LSU would have looked at things differently after they scored.  Had Alabama kicked the second one (and made it), LSU would have been up by only one when they scored their last TD.  Then LSU would have gone for two and may or may not have gotten it.  So it changed a lot of decisions for the rest of the game.

 

There was a benefit - adding a win scenario (LSU not making the PAT, forcing overtime).  If it was a different game (Houston/SMU for instance), I could see a different choice.  But the way that game was played (i.e., low-scoring), you're thinking more of giving your defense two win scenarios - making a stop or blocking the PAT - not what you still need your offense to do if your defense doesn't make the stop.

 

You're right, it could have impacted LSU's decision when they scored their TD.   Even then, going for two, puts them in a place where it's not a guaranteed point, and still overall gives you a better chance to win then going for 2 when Bama scored their last TD.   Risk/Reward for going for 2 at that moment had a lot more risk for, at best, minimal reward.  It was a bad decision chasing points.

[Mavric]

1 hour ago, sho said:

You're right, it could have impacted LSU's decision when they scored their TD.   Even then, going for two, puts them in a place where it's not a guaranteed point, and still overall gives you a better chance to win then going for 2 when Bama scored their last TD.   Risk/Reward for going for 2 at that moment had a lot more risk for, at best, minimal reward.  It was a bad decision chasing points.

 

The way it played out, either Alabama or LSU was going for two.  So it really doesn't matter which one did, only which one succeeded, which Alabama obviously can't know when they made their choice.

 

It actually doesn't put you in a better position.  Going for two is the better option, though it's probably not statistically significant.

 

[sho]

20 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

The way it played out, either Alabama or LSU was going for two.  So it really doesn't matter which one did, only which one succeeded, which Alabama obviously can't know when they made their choice.

 

It actually doesn't put you in a better position.  Going for two is the better option, though it's probably not statistically significant.

 

Your probability chart says 'Same' on if they should go for two..cause after their TD, it put them up 4, which put LSU up 3 after their TD/extra point.  With the time situation, even though analytics says it's 50/50, I say kicking the extra point is the better play and having them make the choice to go for two, which has lower odds of success than kicking the extra point.

 

 

EDIT, I see how it's a marginal better option to go for two, but analytics be damned (which is weird for the accountant in me  ) the smart play was kicking

[Mavric]

Interesting that there is a remarkably clear Top 4 - but not the four currently in the Playoff.

 

[admo]

Bawitdaba TULANE da-bang diggy diggy diggy 

 

My name is Kiiiiiiiiiiiiiiid Rock

 

[Mavric]

Well ... at least Nebraska hasn't done this.

 

 

Yet..

 

 

 

 

[Mavric]

 

[Huskerfollower4life]

When UConn rushes the field after they beat Liberty and they become bowl eligibility you know how far that program has fallen. Yes Liberty was 8-1 with Hugh Freeze but Liberty come on?!

[Mavric]

[Mavric]

Of course ....

 

If Nebraska had never let Bo Pelini go and he repeated his eight worst seasons from 2015-2022, Nebraska would have ~36 more wins than they have right now.

[sho]

Heartbreaking news coming out of UVA.

 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/35025779/police-seek-ex-virginia-football-player-campus-shooting

[suh_fan93]