Playing to Win

[Kyle]

I've heard a lot of criticism of Mac on the grounds that he plays not to lose instead of to win. With that in mind, did anyone else think he should have gone for two and the win in the second overtime? I personally was hoping he would do so and would not have been able to fault the decission had we lost the game as a result. Thoughts?

 

[chadm]

Not at home.IMO

 

[ISUFan22]

I think no matter what D-Mac does...folks will criticize him.

In the K-State/IL State game...IL State went for two at the end of the game for the win and didn't get it. Their coach is taking a bit of flack for it...especially being how poorly K-State was playing.

I'd bet a lot of money...had D-Mac gone for 2 in the 1st or 2nd OT and didn't get it...folks would want his head. Hell...he went for 2 in regulation, didn't get it and there have been posts criticizing him for it.

 

[price26]

I think going for two in the second overtime would have been dumb. I can't fault Illinois State for going for the win as the I-AA program coming into Kansas State and trying to pull the upset. But when you are at home and a team from the Big 12 favored to win, you most definately don't go for two.

That said I think Mac was playing not to lose late in the 4th quarter. He pretty much tried to settle for the field goal after the team got to the Toledo 26. From there it was rushes by Hicks for 2, Meyer for 3, and Meyer for 2 yars. I wished Mac and Cotton would gone in for the kill and tried to put seven on the board by taking some shots at the end zone deep in Toledo territory. But three running plays and then the botched field goal gave Toledo the opportunity to tie the game where a touchdown would have completely deflated them. But if we make that field goal it's a mute point because now we are still up two scores. But I would have liked to see us go for the kill.

 

[Bob]

Totally agree with price. I don't think people are talking about living on the edge and going for two in OT. I think that people don't like him taking his foot off the gas when he could end it by running the usual offense and gaining yards instead of running up the middle continually.

 

[HiltonMagic]

I think no matter what D-Mac does...folks will criticize him.

Uh-huh. (there needs to be a nodding smiley)

 

[HiltonMagic]

But if we make that field goal it's a mute point because now we are still up two scores.

Exactly. Mac wanted positive yards to get a FG. He didn't want to lose yards/the ball. He wasn't "playing not to lose," but instead he wanted to get the 3 pts to win.

 

[isucy86]

I Can't Fault the Play Calling Too Much

In OT & the home team no way should Mac have gone for 2. If ISU is playing a Big 12 team on the road & the game goes to OT, I would have no problem with Mac going for 2. I like the idea of winning or losing the game on 1 play where the offense needs to gain 2 yards. I was actually pretty relieved that Toledo didn't go for 2 in one of the first 2 OT periods.

The 2 pt play earlier in the Toledo game was a whole other matter. It was midway through the 3rd quarter and with so much game left, IMO Mac should have gone for 1 point. Going for 2 only makes sense if neither team kicks a FG the rest of the way. Since a FG's pretty likely, then kick the extra point.

Overall I didn't think the play calling was too conservative at the end. I think the fact that Toledo had some long drives in the 2nd half took our offense out of its rythym.

The only call that I really didn't like was the 2nd down pass to Stevie Hicks. I don't know if it was a middle screen, but Stevie Hicks has never impressed me as being even an average receiver. I Scales or Johnson are no better, then I might stick Sumrall in the backfield & throw the short screen to someone with some quickness. Heck, Austin Flynn would have been a better option than Hicks.

 

[AnkCyclone was SL Cyclone]

In the 3rd and subsequent OTs you are required to go for 2!

 

[Kyle]

Hmm, seems that I am the only one. My thinking is that I trust the veteran offense more than the young defense at that point and don't have a big problem putting the game in their hands at that point. The way things were going they were going to have to get the two point conversion to win in the next OT anyways.

On a slightly related note, at what point do they call a game a draw?

 

[HiltonMagic]

On a slightly related note, at what point do they call a game a draw?

Never. They play until someone wins.

 

[ISUFan22]

In the 3rd and subsequent OTs you are required to go for 2!

Uh, we're aware of that.

 

[Wesley]

The coach rule is go for 2 if on the road like at Iowa City. I was surprised that Toledo did not go for 2 early since their coach is colored as a gambler.

Bret has 3 TDs rushing plus a 2 pointer for 20 points. This is a pretty high clip. Last year Reggie Bush led the nation with 24 TDS (23 rushing). Last year Bret had 1 rishing TD? Sounds like a quicker more decisive Bret on running this year. :rolleyes5cz:

Predicting Big 12 Offensive player of the Week for Bret and 20 tackles for Bowen will see him as Big 12 Defensive player of the week.

 

[clone33]

I think we should have gone for the win at the end of regulation.

I know, we would risk injury and we would risk giving up an interception to be taken back for the win, but it would be easier for me to cope with had we lost going for it all instead of losing in overtime again. It would have killed me knowing we could have won and we didnt. I would much rather lose knowing we did everyhting we could have to win, than just sitting back and letting us lose again.

You may all think I'm crazy, but could a 4 reciever hail marry have hurt the game at all. At least it would have added some excitement.

 

[AirWalke]

What, the Triple OT wasn't exciting enough for you? I know, I know, not exciting in a *positive* way -- I was probably going to have a heart attack, seeing as this was the first OT game I'd ever seen in person. (Missed the Mizzou game in 2004 because of family). Maybe I should show up more often... I'm good luck for the team. :Tongue:

 

[moater]

Mac made the right calls in the overtimes. Now that I'm back from the ledge, were we even in field goal range on our last possession? With the Toledo defense playing in I do think that Mac ought to give Meyer the option to audible to a play that doesn't go straight up the middle.

 

[price26]

You may all think I'm crazy, but could a 4 reciever hail marry have hurt the game at all. At least it would have added some excitement.

Yes, I do think you're crazy. But most of us deep down in side would have liked to see us throw up some prayer to try and win, but honestly it was a very low percentage (try less than 1% probably) that we score where the opportunity of it getting picked and returned for six was probably very good.

 

[tim_redd]

When toledo called a TO after their TD in the 2 OT I thought they were gonna go for 2.