Dumb call or Gutsy Move

[sportydude1818]

So Because a 2 point play worked 2 YEARS ago with a completely different team ,coach and QB that means it was a good call yesterday?

[Falconfreak90]

I have a friend, who is a senior at BGSU, who said the call was stupid and Clawson was just being aggressive because his job is in jeopardy. Needless to say, this guy is as ignorant as they come.

[Flipper]

When did "gutsy" become an antonym for "dumb"?

[BGSU33]

Like the Minnesota game, our two-point conversion for the win against Northwestern was a big one too. Maybe we can save them for the BCS opponents. In the press conference postgame, DC basically laid it out that he didn't feel we could match them in an OT situation. I don't disagree with that. We've missed two of the last five PAT's we've even attempted so it's by far no sure thing we'd have even tied it up had we kicked it anyway.

[Flipper]

Play to win...you had Temple back on their heels and reeling a bit. Why give them a chance to regroup and beat you in overtime. Take it to them when you can.

Since we're going down memory lane here..in 2005 when we played Toledo at home, the game went into OT. They got the ball first and scored a TD and kicked the PAT. We scored a TD. Our defense that year was shaky...at best. Our OC, Greg Studrawa was begging to go for 2, but Brandon kicked the PAT and we lost the game on the next set of possessions. I think that caused a rift between Brandon and Stud that did not heal in 2006. Studrawa then moved on after the 2006 season to LSU.

So you see...bad things happen when you play like a wuss...

[debtzoomba]

Brandon also went for 2 against Minnesota and we converted for a big time road win at the time.

[jpfalcon09]

Good call but then again if we had a kicker who can make something, BG wins on the TD thanks to the field goal earlier in the game.

[BGFan]

The wind may have played into the decision to go for 2 as opposed going to OT. It was a factor throughout the game.

[sportydude1818]

So if DC stated that he didn't feel we could match them in an OT situation why even bother showing up for the game itself. Did DC say before the game or tell his players during the week that they couldn't match up with Temple? What a lame excuse and a cover up for a missed 2pt play. If you didn't think you could match them in OT why play the game.. You just scored 27 points and took them to the wire and now oh we are scared of Big Bad Temple

[Redwingtom]

The wind may have played into the decision to go for 2 as opposed going to OT. It was a factor throughout the game.

I don't think I have ever heard of a PAT not being kicked because of wind. Heck, it's only a 20-yarder.

[Redwingtom]

My feeling is right call, but wrong call.

Either run a wildcat or play action to the rolled out TE. If the play-action roll out to the TE is thrown correctly by the QB it rarely fails to convert in college.

[factman]

I bet NO one would have said a thing about the call if it had worked, and if we had run the "wildcat" and failed, they would have been complaining more than they have about this call!

[h2oville rocket]

My feeling is right call, but wrong call.

Either run a wildcat or play action to the rolled out TE. If the play-action roll out to the TE is thrown correctly by the QB it rarely fails to convert in college.

Actually it NEVER fails if its thrown correctly.

[BGFan]

The wind may have played into the decision to go for 2 as opposed going to OT. It was a factor throughout the game.

I don't think I have ever heard of a PAT not being kicked because of wind. Heck, it's only a 20-yarder.

Not exactly what I was referring to. A flip of the coin determins if the wind is at your back or the wind is in your face. I heard several references throughout the game on the affects of the wind on play. It may have had a determination on whether to take a chance on a 2 point conversion or taking the game in to overtime.

[Warthog]

So if DC stated that he didn't feel we could match them in an OT situation why even bother showing up for the game itself. Did DC say before the game or tell his players during the week that they couldn't match up with Temple? What a lame excuse and a cover up for a missed 2pt play. If you didn't think you could match them in OT why play the game.. You just scored 27 points and took them to the wire and now oh we are scared of Big Bad Temple

sportydude, I think you are taking this out of context. He never said BG couldn't match up with Temple. he is just saying in the OT format, that it wasn't a good matchup for us. Why? #1) our starting RB was injured during the game and wasn't available if we go to OT. #2) Our kicking game is in shambles. blocked XPs, missed FGs, you don't want to play for the situtation that could result in needing to make FGs when we have struggled just to make extra points. #3) Temple was pounding the ball in the second half. We were having trouble stopping the run. The more tired our defense got, the easier it was for Temple to run the ball. Why play for the tie when you know you defense is having troubles AND you have one of the worst defenses in the FBS already?

Given our defensive struggles, our kicking game woes, and our injured RB, I would have gone for two 100 times out of a 100. And Clawson was simply stating that given the status of both teams after playing for 60 mins, that giving our offense one chance from the three yard line gave us a better chance to win the game than allowing both teams to get the ball on the 25 and try to score.