Would you have gone for two? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Would you have gone for two?

May not be popular, but you are 0-4 and yes absolutely go for two and carry that momentum to the victory!
 
I would have because I'm an arm chair QB, but in reality you're 0-4, and your defense wasn't really slowing down the back up QB at all.
 
noeynox said:
I would have because I'm an arm chair QB, but in reality you're 0-4, and your defense wasn't really slowing down the back up QB at all.
Expand ...
And our offense was gashing them as well. They couldn't stop the run. On a short field, UConn's defense would have played better against the pass and Utah St. still wouldn't have been able to stop the run, especially on short yardage downs. I think we win in OT.
 
No, we would have had the momentum in OT and their DL was worn down.
 
Going for two was the best chance they had to win the game. But very few coaches would be willing to take that chance.
 
uconnbill said:
Playing for OT at home is usually a good thing, but with this team who knows?

If Mora went for two and missed the board would have killed him
Expand ...
I don’t think Mora is concerned about the board if he is he should resign. First 29 minutes tonight may have been
our best in years.
 
SuperHuski said:
This was a judgement call, so I'm not saying Mora was right or wrong. We have the benefit of hindsight which he didn't.

I would've gone for two. We had momentum. USU's defense was gassed. Their d-line looked especially so. One of the starting DBs left the previous play. We had Jelani "Mack Truck" Stafford ready to explode. 538 analytics tells you it's a good move. We haven't been able to stop USU's offense in the 2nd half, and I felt even less good about our defense vs their offense in OT.
Expand ...
No. If you were playing a far superior team, sure. Against an inferior team, not inferior to UCONN, but inferior to almost all of college football, you kick the point. You make that point 95 pct of the time.
 
CONN78SEJ said:
That’s a tough call, but if we were going for two, line up as though Stafford is getting the handoff and pitch it to Rosa.
Expand ...
I was thinking a little different, line up Stafford as a fullback, fake to Rosa and let the big man sweep. All eleven were stacked and there is no way they could stop 300# from gaining two yards on a sweep. ;)
Forte said:
PAT's shouldn't be as hard as UConn makes them
Expand ...
10 for 11 on the season. Perfect no, but not abysmal either.:)
uconnbill said:
If Mora went for two and missed the board would have killed him
Expand ...
No attack @ you bill as I realize your support of the program. Just have to think Jim could care less of what the board would think and not a single one here signs his check. He wants to win just as much as those of us still hanging in.
I understand your point though. :cool:
 
Its a lost season, you need to go for two just to try to get the win and avoid OT. A made XP gets us to lose in OT because you can't ask our offense to score over and over again.
 
At 0-4 and with momentum I was definitely hoping they'd go for two. Mora was aggressive on 4th down calls throughout the day, I was hoping for one more gamble... but I also expected that he would kick the ball, that's the standard play, you extend the game.

The blocked kick is simply absolutely unacceptable execution.. the first thing you teach any player on a kick team is you step down and block inside first. Unfortunately he stepped outside... blown play and it was just too easy for Utah State.
 
There's another factor involved with going for 2. If you went for 1 and made it, I think Utah State would have played for OT. If UConn made the 2 point conversion, Utah State would have tried to win the game with 40 seconds plus 1 time out and probably starting on their 25 yard line. They only needed a field goal to win.
 
There's no excuse not going for 2.

Aside from the fact we were 0-4, had momentum, were having a hard time containing Utah State while on D....HAS ANYONE SEEN OUR SPECIAL TEAMS THE LAST DECADE?!?
 
Did more do a post-game presser or did he sneak out the back? Nothing on the radio post game.
 
I mean the way the offense was tearing up the defense on that drive going for 2 makes sense especially with Stafford being unstoppable. But I also understand going for the PAT and tying it, taking it to overtime. The offense was able to keep up so I'm really on the frame of mind that either 2 PT or the PAT was the right answer regardless of outcome. Had the TE literally did anything to stop the defender we'd be having a much different conversation. Special teams is the reason we lost this game ultimately.
 
Woof 101 said:
I was thinking a little different, line up Stafford as a fullback, fake to Rosa and let the big man sweep. All eleven were stacked and there is no way they could stop 300# from gaining two yards on a sweep. ;)

10 for 11 on the season. Perfect no, but not abysmal either.:)

No attack @ you bill as I realize your support of the program. Just have to think Jim could care less of what the board would think and not a single one here signs his check. He wants to win just as much as those of us still hanging in.
I understand your point though. :cool:
Expand ...
I thought of that too, got tired of typing. Lol. In any event, either way works.
 
I don't trust our offense to get 2 yards on first and ten, let alone in a game-deciding two-point conversion. There was no wrong decision there, but obviously that execution on the XP was wrong.
 
I love the amount of people saying "when you're 0-4, you go for 2."

The fact that you're bringing up a bad record as justification for doing it inherently shows that you believe it's the worse option under normal circumstances. The season is never over because recruiting is never over...
 
UConnDan97 said:
I love the amount of people saying "when you're 0-4, you go for 2."

The fact that you're bringing up a bad record as justification for doing it inherently shows that you believe it's the worse option under normal circumstances. The season is never over because recruiting is never over...
Expand ...

Yes. You're dealing with players who thrive on competition and emotion. I don't think you always need to do it but I think you tell your guys who are struggling "take this win".

Look, I think there's a lot of fans here that are losing the damned minds. I wish they'd stop. But in the position they were in with an offense is humming. Do it.
 
Patman said:
Yes. You're dealing with players who thrive on competition and emotion. I don't think you always need to do it but I think you tell your guys who are struggling "take this win".

Look, I think there's a lot of fans here that are losing the damned minds. I wish they'd stop. But in the position they were in with an offense is humming. Do it.
Expand ...

If the offense is humming, then you don't need to do it. You're at home. Against a team that is not better than you. And you're "humming". Extending the game is then in your favor...
 
UConnDan97 said:
If the offense is humming, then you don't need to do it. You're at home. Against a team that is not better than you. And you're "humming". Extending the game is then in your favor...
Expand ...
Not if your defense can't hold up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
21
Guests online
1,193
Total visitors
1,214
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,069
Messages
4,381,004
Members
10,177
Latest member
silver fox


.
..
Top Bottom