Mack's Mistake: Going For Two
by Peter Bean on Sep 18, 2007 8:25 AM CDT
in Texas Longhorns Football
Email
PrintOne of the great mysteries from Saturday's game was Mack Brown's decision to attempt a two-point conversion in the fourth quarter. In case you've forgotten the situation, let's recap:
Texas leads 29-24 when Jamaal Charles rips off a 46 yard touchdown run to put Texas ahead 35-24. Time remaining in the game? 3:37.
If you go for two and succeed, you lead by 13.
If you go for two and fail, you lead by 11.
If you kick an extra-point, you lead by 12.
You don't have to be a math major to figure out what to do here. The difference between leading by 12 and 13 is neglible, but the difference between leading by 11 and 12 is monumental. A team trailing by 11 can tie the game with a touchdown, two-point conversion, and field goal. A team trailing by 12, however, must score two touchdowns.
This one's a slam dunk and, if you do the math, a team should only go for two in that situation if it believes it will succeed over 90% of the time. (As everyone knows, we score from the 2-yard line about 3% of the time.)
So what the hell was Mack Brown thinking?
The short answer is that he wasn't. There do exist a number of two-point conversion charts which list going for 2 when leading by 11 as the right play. For example, this one. I've seen other conversion charts which contain blatant errors. (Or at the least, incomplete data - you really need time remaining and probability of success to make a proper calculus.)
The situation in the Texas game, though, shouldn't have even required a chart. This wasn't a borderline case, and it didn't require any fancy math to figure out. You kick the point after, take the 12 point lead, and force the opponent to score two touchdowns in three and a half minutes. Period. It's positively insane to go for two in that situation, unless you were, for example, down to the one-inch line by penalty and you thought the conversion was a certainty.
The coaches simply blew this one. There's no excuse for it and, amazingly, no reporters asked Mack about this during his Monday press conference. If anyone can find any post-game quotes on the matter, I'd love to see them. This was a critical mistake.
--PB--
22 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
But......
If the other team gets a touchdown, goes for the extra point, then gets a field goal, and then they get a safety, 13 points still wins the game.
Bone head play, or was Mack being a genius by factoring in the safety? Meh, lets just blame GD.
No, we already blamed him for the...
weather, bus breaking down, undercooked eggs at breakfast, the crisis in the middle east, global warming, poor pass protection, conjunctivitis, erectile disfunction amongst Giant Pandas, hostile working conditions for gay senators who are affraid to come out of the stall, Colt's neck, the needless deaths of two salamanders at Barton Springs, and Keeping Austin not weird enough.
If only Greg's middle name started with an O, it would explain everything. Until then, he will simply have to remain the neck-challegned, misunderstood Toad we've all come to know and love.
PB, why don't you ask Chip Brown why Mack didn't go for two? I'd ask him myself, but he's been blocking my questions ever since I asked him if Jerry Curl gave him more street cred with playas.
I don't have a link
but I believe right after the game Mack blamed it on his conversion chart.
This was one of two very curious non-Mack like moments in the game. I'm surprised the other has not been mentioned.
Did anyone notice when he gave Peter Ullman that royal rabid code red ass chewing after drawing a couple of flags? I've watched 90% of the Texas games since Mack has been on campus and I've never seen him go off like that. He never ever jumps someone's shit like that during a game -- and from what I hear, practice too.
Should either of these incidents raise an eyebrow? Has Mack internally hit the panic button with this team and his emotions are beggining to surface?
Boy did he ever...
... go absolutely nuclear on Ullman. You're right, I've never seen Mack show that much anger...ever.
by Sweed4Heisman on Sep 18, 2007 8:54 AM CDT up reply actions
i remember seeing that...
... does anyone have a video link? i also remember mack's general sideline demeanor (heavily furrowed brow, scowl, stalking around, etc.) was pretty "upset" by mack standards.
of course, no bobby stoops headphone-massacring jackassery:
Math Majors
My theory during the game Saturday was that they just flat f'd up the math, thought they were up by 12, and went for 2 trying to lead by 14.
But no one will ever admit to that. Ever.
It was the wrong call at the wrong time
I'm glad someone started this thread because of all the things that bothered me about the UCF game, Mack's decision to go for two ranks only slightly behind Jamaal's fubmles in terms of sheer boneheadedness.
The national title in 2005 quieted the critics who say Mack is not a strong game-day coach, but incidents like this reinforce that perception. Frankly I think that reputation was overblown to begin with and partly the result of jealousy on the part of coaches who have to recruit against Texas.
Either way, it was a bad call which put his team in a position to lose. Also, overall, Mack looked like he was being slowly boiled in the second half. Haven't seen him look like that since Ohio State last season. This may be the least mature group in his time at Texas; Mack's gonna earn his salary this year.
by ChicagoHorn on Sep 18, 2007 10:29 AM CDT reply actions
Just kick it!
I was so hot with the decision to go for 2. Simple math makes this an idiotic decision. Conversions charts should be outlawed. After watching Michigan fail a 2 point attempt in the 3rd quarter of the Appalachian State game, setting off a chain of events that lead to another failed 2 point conversion and a loss by 2 points, I wanted to throw something at Mack Brown for putting our season on the line with the same stupid mistake. EYESofBEVO is right about these uncharacteristic Mack Brown moments. I think we are in panic mode. This team has too much talent (even if a lot of it is inexperienced) for the coaches to be making so many horrible decisions (scheme, personnel, in-game) that will eventually cost us games. Our team needs some on-field leaders to step up and loosen this team up so we can have some fun again, because the coaches are doing a horrible job right now.
It's the timing
Earlier in the game, there's a case for going for 2. The 13 point lead protects you from a TD and 2 FGs, and you can still recover from 2 TD with an FG of your own. Late in the game, of course, it was inexcusable -- but the printed charts don't know how much time is on the clock.
Another Mack Issue...
I agree that the 2-pt attempt was just stupid. I kept trying to come up with some rationale, but could not do so during the game.
However, I have another beef with our CEO. How many "coach's challenge" play reviews has Mack actually won? If someone can think of any or has any stats on the issue, I would love to hear it. I can NOT think of a single "review" that Mack has challenged and had turned in our favor. I know this is a tough, quick call that must be made and often times the players are saying "yes, I caught it" or "no, my knee was down" or something. But still, it bothers me that he is so bad at it and often times and ridiculous points in the game.
by the usual suspects on Sep 18, 2007 12:10 PM CDT reply actions
Coach's challenge in CFB
Isn't really much of a factor now, considering that EVERY play is reviewed by the officials upstairs.
Mack....
He's a poor game day coach, no doubt. Going for two was inexcusable. The coaching staff simply screwed up.
Calling for a review is stupid too, unless you know you're going to call a timeout anyway. Not sure if Mack is that clever.
The one reason I've stuck by Mack in the past is that he ran a clean program....
Pete Carroll's coaching in the Rose Bowl
was brilliant. Challenging an undesputable incomplete pass, which allowed the Texas offense time to adjust personnel and prison rape his defense was my favorite. Using up a time out and blowing any chance of a come back was another gem.
Stoops using AD like a rented mule on kick-offs was genius. So was the decision to call a lateral pass against a team that had been feasting on turnovers, when you are down by two scores.
Tressel's half-time adjustments and challenges of plays that couldn't be reversed in the Fiesta Bowl was the stuff legends are made of.
Lot's of really good coaches make stupid decisions. Mack usually avoids incredibly bad game time mistakes. In fact, compared to some of his peers I'd say he's pretty good at avoiding gaffes.
thanks!
Pete's Rose Bowl was the first thing I thought of reading this thread.
That really was a huge blunder and on a much bigger stage. That wasn't doing the math on a two-score lead late in the fourth. It was clear-cut, and even (naturally) Vince was aware right away we were going for two - I read somewhere that his explanation for his muted reaction to the touchdown on "4th and 5" was that he wanted to avoid any penalties because they needed the two-point conversion.
Somehow, in spite of many such game-day gaffes (especially if you take his pro career into account), Pete has never been saddled with this "poor game-day coach" label. Like you said, these things happen. MacArthur left his entire air force sitting on the ground hours after Pearl Harbor too, and don't even get started with Lee at Gettysburg. Not making any mistakes at all has never been the dividing line for good/bad game-day coaches/leaders.
On the other hand, this was completely inexcusable. This was Franchione vs. Clemson stupid... This has not been a good week, er, year for Mack. I sincerely hope it gets way better way fast...
by agent orange on Sep 18, 2007 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Well said!
Thanks.
pete in the granddaddy...
Using up a time out and blowing any chance of a come back was another gem.
It was actually one of the the USC DBs that called the timeout. It looked as if the USC Defense wasnt expecting Texas to go for 2, for some reason. I remember Pete being really pissed.
Speaking of that. Does anybody remember on that final drive, David Pino had gotten up and started to practice his kicks? I was like, "Sit the %^&* down, Pino, we have to go for 2". He'd already missed that hurried PAT and a FG in the game already and I was pissed at him.
by bleed burnt orange on Sep 19, 2007 12:11 AM CDT up reply actions
Going for two was stupid
but for some reason, the thing that sticks with me was how certain the failure of that decision seemed. Isn't that the real issue?
If we make the conversion, nobody says a thing about this after the game. But on that particular day, there was NO WAY were going to get that ball in the endzone from three yards out. And we all knew it. That, sadly, is the real issue.
Give your fellow horns some credit
I think this would still be discussion even if we got the conversion.
The other real issue has been discussed plenty.
Agreed ...
A number of us alumni spanning decades sat on the couch (after many beers) and instantly exclaimed WTF!
Only thing we could think of was Mack trying to build confidence that they "could" and he believed against all reasoning that they "would" be able to score on a one-down play within 3-yards. Of course, all they proved is that they couldn't ... again ... and UCF actually almost had the opportunity to tie/win the game. Just imagine if they had recovered the onside kick and time ran down to the point they had to throw a Hail Mary vs. trying for a field goal! One play for the game was not outside the realm of possibilities at that time and then you have our wonderful secondary to preserve the win. Vegas Baby!
by CyHorn770 on Sep 18, 2007 6:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
