ibahawkeye
Well-Known Member
I think you kick the extra point. I just see no reason to risk the nail in the coffin if you don’t have to.
Going for 2 down by 9
- Thread starter SayHawkKid
- Start date
The Big LeHAWKski
Well-Known Member
For those that love to chime in with the basic math logic, respectfully I say you're flat-out wrong.
here's why:
Without the experience from ever having played at HS or beyond you're unaware that the only reason that matters as to why KF's decision was so ridiculously f-ing stupid is because with the made PAT, Iowa would have sustained MOMENTUM going to the on-side attempt.
And with momentum anything can happen, and often does.
With momentum and the crowd roaring, the Purdue Kickoff-Receive front line all of a sudden has the weight of the world on them...and anything can happen when young men are under great pressure.
But KF took that off the table.
VTHawk
Well-Known Member
Agreed.
Wasn't trying to be argumentative. Just wanted to add that we would have had more momentum after recovering the kick and scoring a touchdown, and the defense would be looking uphill a bit more. But yea, its just theory mostly.
Another point as to why it doesn't really matter is we still needed a highly unlikely onside kick, a highly unlikely quick td, and a highly unlikely 2 point conversion, just for a 50/50 chance in overtime.
On a side note, we got a 2 point conversion against Michigan last year. Can anyone remember another one? We fricking never convert them.
On a side note, we got a 2 point conversion against Michigan last year. Can anyone remember another one? We fricking never convert them.
hawkfan2679
Well-Known Member
We needed 2 TDs and 1 2 pt conversion by your own admission. How is going for 2 first giving you a "better" chance to win than going for it after a second TD. Especially given the likelihood of a made XP vs that of a 2 pt conversion? Either way you need a 7 pt score and an 8 pt score.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Couldn't have said it better. Hopefully this puts a lid on this dumbass argument...
Because you would take more chances if you knew you had to score with enough time to try another onside kick. If you were down 8, you would be a lot more apt to use up all the clock on your last drive. You would then have no chance once you missed the 2 pt conversion. One minute is a lot of time in college foorball.
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
you lose. but and least by waiting until the second scored touchdown to go to for 2, you gave yourself a chance to recover an onside kick, score a second touchdown and the go for 2. The object should have been scoring 15 points and not 16 points, in that situation because converting 2 pointers isn't a high probability operation.
They did give themselves a chance. They just took that chance earlier. People somehow think a failed chance is not giving your team a chance. Like when you go for 2 instead of going to overtime. If you miss it, people always say you have to kick it and give yourselves a chance. Well they did give themselves a chance. The 2 pt conversion was their chance and they missed it. Same here. He gave his team a chance. They just missed it.
Down by 8, kicking off with a minute left in the game, and you think the momentum from the TD and PAT will save us? I disagree.
Or if you're using the momentum argument, the momentum from the 2 point conversion would probably make the Purdue hands team just fall down on the field in despair.
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
ok, but by taking that chance earlier and failing, you've removed the ultimate chance of coming back to tie the game with time still on the clock. that's the point. by going for 2 and failing on the first touchdown, you literally make the second touchdown irrelevant.
What does giving yourself a chance to recover an onside kick, score a second touchdown and go for 2 do if you don't make that 2? The answer is nothing. Other people are making good arguments like momentum and wearing down the defense. Then there are people who are just saying they wanted the inevitable delayed as long as possible.
The missed onside kick made the 2nd touchdown irrelevant. If they miss the 2 point conversion after the second touchdown, the second touchdown was irrelevant. If they lose in ot, the second touchdown was irrelevant.
HawkU
Well-Known Member
How is this lost in the argument? Either way a one point PAT and a two point conversion, after a TD, had to be converted to get to a tie.
Given the time left the only play was to reduce the game to a possible one possession game by taking the PAT.
Again - the time left was the deciding factor. I'm not sure if I'm more appalled or disappointed that our B1G Ten, multi-millionaire coaching staff couldn't figure this out.
Given the time left the only play was to reduce the game to a possible one possession game by taking the PAT.
Again - the time left was the deciding factor. I'm not sure if I'm more appalled or disappointed that our B1G Ten, multi-millionaire coaching staff couldn't figure this out.
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
it gives you 2 chances instead of just 1!
ArvadaHawk
Well-Known Member
your logic is going in reverse. you're just arguing now. the world is full of "if dog rabbit" situations. If Iowa had a decent game plan and scored 25 points by the end of the 3rd quarter, then the whole 4th quarter would have been irrelevant. I mean, you know, looking back at things.
Exactly, it was a TERRIBLE coaching decision ( and many of us in the stands were saying so at the time) and doesnt it make you wonder what the f##k the other coaches were doing. Are all the other coaches as stupid or game dumb as Kirk or did none of them say anything to Kirk about they need to kick the PAT, or is the culture to just go with what Kirk wants to do, or did one of the coaches say something to KF and he ignored or overruled. Either way this whole moment of the game makes it seem there are big problems in the coaching staff.
Wait if they kick the PAT they have 2 chances?
