$5 mil a year to bonehead go for 2 early in the game!!!

[Hawkeye/swish]

I really just think that. BF still doesn't know what he's doing with the offense. We're making September mistakes with stupid penalties. Our defense looks worn out the last two games. I kind of knew that this was going to happen.We Can't be like KF and sit there and say we can score 30 points and we should win the game. I just don't think we have a killer instinct. Once again we're vanilla... I hope we win the next three games. KF makes way too much money for going 7 and 5 and going to the Pinstripe Bowl again. Ouch

 

[hawkeyebob62]

The odds of not converting 2 points coming back to bite you is actually pretty small. The odds of winning if you do get it raise quite a bit. That game played out in the exact wrong way, making it actually matter.

Again, if you dont get it, it rarely hurts you. But if you do get it, it really helps you. If you dont believe that statement, think about this. If you're down 4 points or 5 points in a game, how much do you really care? It means almost nothing. Now think about being down 4 points or 3 points. That's a pretty big difference.

You're wasting your time, PC. Theses brain-dead f*cks don''t understand that by kicking a FG, there wouldn't haven't been a 2-point attempt...OR a PAT. It means we are down 35-33 at the end. Meaning, of course, the EARLIER PAT would have been meaningless, as well.

If people truly want to bitch--and I can't believe I'm handing out the ammo to these cretins--kicking the FG instead of "going for it" when down 14-7 was the "ultimate" doomer. Get a TD on that drive, and the 2-point attempts don't happen. And the last TD puts us UP 42-35, with Purdue needing a TD to tie, not a FG to win.

But, yeah, KF "chasing points" caused the Hawks to lose

 

[hawkod]

I completely understand the exercise of picking apart specific plays post-game, but anytime your defense gives up 38 points to anybody not named Alabama you've got bigger issues.

 

[PCHawk]

You're wasting your time, PC. Theses brain-dead f*cks don''t understand that by kicking a FG, there wouldn't haven't been a 2-point attempt...OR a PAT. It means we are down 35-33 at the end. Meaning, of course, the EARLIER PAT would have been meaningless, as well.

If people truly want to bitch--and I can't believe I'm handing out the ammo to these cretins--kicking the FG instead of "going for it" when down 14-7 was the "ultimate" doomer. Get a TD on that drive, and the 2-point attempts don't happen. And the last TD puts us UP 42-35, with Purdue needing a TD to tie, not a FG to win.

But, yeah, KF "chasing points" caused the Hawks to lose

I agree Kirk should have chased points earlier in the game instead of kicking a field goal. We really needed those 4 extra points so that decision cost us big time. Conventional decisions never get 2nd guessed tho. That's why most coaches default to them instead of doing what gives the team the best chance to win.

 

[hawkeyebob62]

I completely understand the exercise of picking apart specific plays post-game, but anytime your defense gives up 38 points to anybody not named Alabama you've got bigger issues.

In a nutshell!

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Chasing points scored us 1 extra point this game. Good decision by Kirk to chase points. Some people play scared and take points instead of chasing them. If Kirk played like that we would have lost by 3 instead of 2.

There are some people out there who believe that going for two every time is more beneficial than kicking extra points. I don't have anything to disagree with them on this. It would be interesting to see the results of a P5 team doing this in conference play for a year as a measuring stick. I wonder what the % is in general for success on going for 2 pts?
I can try the Google thingy I suppose.

 

[hawkeyes87]

It would be interesting to see the results of a P5 team doing this in conference play for a year as a measuring stick.

Wasn't Oregon doing that a few years back? Back when they were good, obviously, so probably more than a few years!

 

[PCHawk]

There are some people out there who believe that going for two every time is more beneficial than kicking extra points. I don't have anything to disagree with them on this. It would be interesting to see the results of a P5 team doing this in conference play for a year as a measuring stick. I wonder what the % is in general for success on going for 2 pts?
I can try the Google thingy I suppose.

Yep. Very few coaches aren't scared of making unconventional decisions. They choose to kick the PAT because it's safe, not because it's the right play. Someone said you need to be down 4 instead of 5 just in case the other team scores a td. That way you will be down 11 instead of 12? What does 11 get you? A chance to get to ot with a field goal, a td, and what else? Oh yea, a 2 pt conversion. Just like the one you already tried. So I guess that means you shouldn't try a 2 pt conversion now because you may not get a chance to try one later. How is that reasoning better than trying to be down 3 instead of 4? Needing a field goal instead of a td is a pretty big deal. I can promise that anyone with even average intelligence would understand this if they took 5 minutes to educate themselves with an open mind.

 

[SteveGarvey1]

I'm too lazy to go through all the pages but just want to say Kirk isn't the only coach out there who's chased points. Gobs of NFL and college coaches do it before the consensus start-of-the-fourth quarter time.

 

[PCHawk]

I'm too lazy to go through all the pages but just want to say Kirk isn't the only coach out there who's chased points. Gobs of NFL and college coaches do it before the consensus start-of-the-fourth quarter time.

Saying it's too early to chase points is the same thing as saying it's too early to be aggressive. At least if you're aggressive early you know where you stand later.

 

[kameltoez102]

Going for two didn't have anything to with the win or loss. There were so many other plays that all contribute. At least Kirk and Brian are being aggressive with the play calling something that most people on this board were wanting. There were opportunities to make plays on the conversions and we didn't. Should Iowa have won the game? Maybe but Purdue is playing well and on the rise and are a tough match-up for our style of play.

IF Brohm stays at Purdue things could really change in their direction. Unfortunately for them I think some of the bigger schools will be calling soon and if he wants, will be gone.