Go for 2

Watching the replay, it wasn't even missed blocks that caused us to fail the 2PC. Taquon should have pitched it to Benson. The pitch was there. Instead he cut up field trying to take it on himself and ran right into two unblocked guys who were both crashing in on him.

Outside of the 2 big mistakes he made (that plus fumble) he looked honestly better than JT at times because he is a tough runner. Good times will come
 
I'm sure I'll catch some hell for this, but that missed conversion is on Marshall. He read the play wrong and tried to do too much. The pitch was there, as it had been all night long.

But this loss is on Ted Roof. Again. Marshall did everything and then some. I think this is one of the rare times I've seen Paul's team lose a game they should have won.
 
Allen Koholic said:
I'm sure I'll catch some hell for this, but that missed conversion is on Marshall. He read the play wrong and tried to do too much. The pitch was there, as it had been all night long.

But this loss is on Ted Roof. Again. Marshall did everything and then some. I think this is one of the rare times I've seen Paul's team lose a game they should have won.
Click to expand...

Meh. Holding a team to 28 points and forcing six punts isn't great, but it certainly isn't bad. I'd sign up for that right now for the rest of our games this season.
 
It can be argued either way. At the time it happened, I thought it was the right call. Upon further review, I'm less certain. I always feel Tech has an advantage for OT ball because it's built for red zone TDs. The real advantage comes in the third OT, though, because both teams have to do what Tech does best. We figured odds were on GT's sides either way, but if longer it went, the more heavily probabilities tilted toward GT. Johnson took that off the table by giving UT a chance to step up and make a play in OT2. I agree both Ds were gassed, I agree the play had worked all night, but I still think UT was more likely to fail on a possession than Tech at that point. Going for the two was likely to work, but not going for it was more surefire.
 
In 2014 and 2016 we were mostly successful because of the offense. I don't think the defense will be any worse than it was in those years. UT didn't make any big mistakes last night, but most games you'd expect at least a fumble or INT. I feel good about the season, but we sure let a big W slip away.
 
We shot ourselves in the foot tonight with the two fumbles. I know we would have scored if Green hadn't fumbled and that would have put the game away. However it looks like we have a great offence and I am already looking forward to the next game. I also don't think the defense played that bad except for the two touchdowns Tenn. scored before the end of regulation. When we fumbled you could see a change in momentum and that can make all the difference. Tough one to lose, but I still have high hopes for the season.
 
TQ seemed hesitant to pitch all game. I think the early jitters (or not being comfortable with the offense yet) means you play conservatively and tend to keep. I'm not surprised that with the game on the line he just tried to power it in himself. He'll continue to get better and we should win a lot of games this season if the team doesn't fall apart.
 
JoeCakeEater said:
They just didn't execute it. The look was there. The decision to go for 2 was correct. Did not make the blocks that had to be made. I bet we convert there 80% of the time in that exact situation based on what I had seen all night.

Move on. Bring on Jax St. All of our team goals remain ahead of us.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure it was a team goal to go 1-0. And 16-0. But hey, 15-1 sounds pretty good, too.
 
Don't be a fig. Win Coastal and Beat Ga should be the top 2 team goals every year. This has zero impact on either of those.
 
andrew said:
Why not? What would make it okay to go for two in the second possession of OT but not the first?
Click to expand...
What I was saying is if you have the ball first, which we did in 1st OT, you don't go for two because if you fail, you are beat by a TD and XP.
 
andrew said:
Why not? What would make it okay to go for two in the second possession of OT but not the first?
Click to expand...
I agree with graybeard. I wouldn't go for 2 if I have first possession of an overtime period. If you don't make it and team 2 scores, they only have to kick the xp to win. It almost seems that it would even take the pressure off having to score the TD. Only time I would go for 2 in OT was if the other team possessed the ball first, I had my chance 2nd and going for 2 would win it, and I felt confident about getting 3 yards. All of those fit the description of our call.
 
Graybeard Jacket said:
What I was saying is if you have the ball first, which we did in 1st OT, you don't go for two because if you fail, you are beat by a TD and XP.
Click to expand...

Also, if you make a TD and 2pc with the first possession, the other team can still tie the game, knowing that they need to go for 2 as well. That makes it a risk with limited reward. The 2pc only makes sense when you know it will win the game if successful.
 
QuadF said:
TQ seemed hesitant to pitch all game. I think the early jitters (or not being comfortable with the offense yet) means you play conservatively and tend to keep. I'm not surprised that with the game on the line he just tried to power it in himself. He'll continue to get better and we should win a lot of games this season if the team doesn't fall apart.
Click to expand...

There was some selfishness/uneasiness, but most of the time UT was rolling out 2 deep wide into the lane and they overshot the QB keep.
 
coit said:
Because if you don't get it, the other team only needs the TD and extra point to beat you. No pressure on them.
Click to expand...
Graybeard Jacket said:
What I was saying is if you have the ball first, which we did in 1st OT, you don't go for two because if you fail, you are beat by a TD and XP.
Click to expand...
GoGATech said:
I agree with graybeard. I wouldn't go for 2 if I have first possession of an overtime period. If you don't make it and team 2 scores, they only have to kick the xp to win. It almost seems that it would even take the pressure off having to score the TD. Only time I would go for 2 in OT was if the other team possessed the ball first, I had my chance 2nd and going for 2 would win it, and I felt confident about getting 3 yards. All of those fit the description of our call.
Click to expand...

I misread, makes sense.
 
jacket67 said:
Also, if you make a TD and 2pc with the first possession, the other team can still tie the game, knowing that they need to go for 2 as well. That makes it a risk with limited reward. The 2pc only makes sense when you know it will win the game if successful.
Click to expand...
Yeah .... that too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top