NMSU Post Game Thoughts

CodingAggieBlue · Post by **CodingAggieBlue** » November 6th, 2010, 5:07 pm

1) Congrats to our Blue Aggies on a hard fought win.

2) Kerwynn William's special team plays were what put us in a position to score. Without him, we lose this game.

3) I hope that Bartlett is okay. For those who couldn't follow the game, Bartlett was one of the 1st guys on the team to make a catch. He tried to get more YAC by stiff arming his defender. He injured his elbow and never came back into the game.

3) Borel has been a bit streaky all year but he really seemed off today. Almost all of his throws were either way too high or way too low.

4) Alder's catch towards the end of the game was spectacular.

5) I love what our defensive ends brought to the table. Granted we only got 2 sacks (if memory serves me correctly) but both Koskan and Garner had impressive outings.

6) Speight is a machine. Whenever something seemed shutdown, he manages to use his spin move to get us an extra 2 yards.

7) Coming into this game I was extremely frustrated with Baldwin's play calling. But I don't think you can blame him for any offensive troubles this game. There were several times where I thought to myself, "I don't know what to call for this situation. Nothing is working". For the first 40 minutes of the game, our offense struggled to execute (particularly on 3rd down).

8) McClenton also seemed to be off. In the first half, the NMSU receivers were beating him time and time again. And on run support he struggled to get into position in time to make the play.

9) Thank you Quinton Byrd!

5thYearSenior · Post by **5thYearSenior** » November 6th, 2010, 5:33 pm

Bartlett dislocated his elbow.

Mclenton probably looked off because he's not very good and never really has been IMO.

The defense needs to learn how to buckle down at the start of games, rather than wait until the other team has put up 17.

I'm rapidly losing all faith in Baldwin, and I feel like I'm generally an apologist for this coaching staff.

GoldenHurricAGG · Post by **GoldenHurricAGG** » November 6th, 2010, 5:54 pm

5thYearSenior wrote:Bartlett dislocated his elbow.

Mclenton probably looked off because he's not very good and never really has been IMO.

The defense needs to learn how to buckle down at the start of games, rather than wait until the other team has put up 17.

I'm rapidly losing all faith in Baldwin, and I feel like I'm generally an apologist for this coaching staff.

I finally have an anti-Baldwin backer.

I think that the decision to punt in the 4th quarter on 4th and 3 on the 40-something yard line was extremely weak. After we punted, momentum swung the other way for a good 3-4 minutes of game time. If we convert there, great. If not, they still have the ball on their own 40-something. We only ended up gaining about twenty yards in field position off of the punt. The potential upside on the 4th down conversion is so great that you have to go for it, in my opinion. Also... even worse...

The decision to take the FG on 4th and goal on the 2 at the end of the game sealed the deal for me. I don't like Baldwin and - possibly - never will. If you have a chance to put the game out of reach with a 2-yard play, you take it. 100% of the time. If we miss, they have the ball on the 2 with 2 minutes left. They need to go all the way down the field to win.

Regardless, a win is a win and I am somewhat content with Aggie football - for a week.

QuackAttackAggie · Post by **QuackAttackAggie** » November 6th, 2010, 5:58 pm

what happened with the safety at the end? i didn't get to watch the game, i'm just looking at the play by play

Post by **GeoAg** » November 6th, 2010, 6:12 pm

GoldenHurricAGG wrote:
5thYearSenior wrote:Bartlett dislocated his elbow.

Mclenton probably looked off because he's not very good and never really has been IMO.

The defense needs to learn how to buckle down at the start of games, rather than wait until the other team has put up 17.

I'm rapidly losing all faith in Baldwin, and I feel like I'm generally an apologist for this coaching staff.
I finally have an anti-Baldwin backer. I think that the decision to punt in the 4th quarter on 4th and 3 on the 40-something yard line was extremely weak. After we punted, momentum swung the other way for a good 3-4 minutes of game time. If we convert there, great. If not, they still have the ball on their own 40-something. We only ended up gaining about twenty yards in field position off of the punt. The potential upside on the 4th down conversion is so great that you have to go for it, in my opinion. Also... even worse...

The decision to take the FG on 4th and goal on the 2 at the end of the game sealed the deal for me. I don't like Baldwin and - possibly - never will. If you have a chance to put the game out of reach with a 2-yard play, you take it. 100% of the time. If we miss, they have the ball on the 2 with 2 minutes left. They need to go all the way down the field to win.

Regardless, a win is a win and I am somewhat content with Aggie football - for a week.

Neither of those decisions are Baldwin's. They are Gary's

TheWoodshed · Post by **TheWoodshed** » November 6th, 2010, 8:04 pm

I agree with both of those things; however, it should be pointed out that Gary Andersen has said himself that he is the one who decides whether or not to go for it on 4th down or to punt/kick a FG. I feel like GA was too conservative on those two situations.

ChicAggie · Post by **ChicAggie** » November 6th, 2010, 8:18 pm

I don't think the Aggies should have punted (we had this discussion about punting a year or two ago), but I DO think they should have kicked the field goal. When you have a chance to put your team in a position to ensure no worse than a tie with a touchdown and time winding down, I think you have to take it. While I would have said they should go for the TD if ten minutes were left in the game, not with under three minutes to go.

dyedblue · Post by **dyedblue** » November 6th, 2010, 8:45 pm

I am not a huge fan of Baldwin, but those are the HC's decisions to punt/go/field goal not the OC.

I thought the safety play was very odd when I saw it happen. We kneeled down at a point in the game where we could not run out the clock because of NMSU's timeouts.

To our coaches credit, taking the safety it worked out. Snap it back to Borel and let him run around like a madman and take the safety as time expired. The game can end on a safety (I learned something new today) so rather than punt the ball away we effectively killed the clock.

GoldenHurricAGG · Post by **GoldenHurricAGG** » November 6th, 2010, 8:59 pm

TheWoodshed wrote:I agree with both of those things; however, it should be pointed out that Gary Andersen has said himself that he is the one who decides whether or not to go for it on 4th down or to punt/kick a FG. I feel like GA was too conservative on those two situations.

Well... then I now have some issues with Gary Andersen AND Mr. Baldwin.

justinmorrey · Post by **justinmorrey** » November 6th, 2010, 9:03 pm

ChicAggie wrote:I don't think the Aggies should have punted (we had this discussion about punting a year or two ago), but I DO think they should have kicked the field goal. When you have a chance to put your team in a position to ensure no worse than a tie with a touchdown and time winding down, I think you have to take it. While I would have said they should go for the TD if ten minutes were left in the game, not with under three minutes to go.

I completely agree.

BeNo · Post by **BeNo** » November 6th, 2010, 9:06 pm

Whatever the decisions were, we won so they were correct.

GoldenHurricAGG · Post by **GoldenHurricAGG** » November 6th, 2010, 9:21 pm

BeNo wrote:Whatever the decisions were, we won so they were correct.

I'm not so sure about that theory. Ultimately Baldwin and Andersen got the job done. Kudos to them. In my opinion they could have gotten the job done more efficiently if they would have gone for it on both plays. I love the win, but those decisions were certainly questionable.

QuackAttackAggie · Post by **QuackAttackAggie** » November 6th, 2010, 10:23 pm

i like the FG decision. You figure we had a 50% chance of converting (the average rate for most teams for 2 pt conversions, which is the same distance as that play would have been) so 50% of the 7 points basically makes that attempt with 3.5 points. We have basically 100% chance of a fg, worth 3 points. So they work out to basically be the same value, going for the TD or taking an automatic FG. If it is 4th and 2 from the 30, I change my mind, but that isn't the situation.

The difference that makes me want to go for a FG is that the other team STILL has to drive the whole field, but this time, they only TIE instead of DEFINITELY TAKE THE LEAD.

making a FG means at worst you will lose on a 2 pt conversion (50% chance AFTER they drive on you and score)
but you might also
win, by them not scoring
or
tie and go to overtime
or
tie and have the ball back to try to get into FG range to win.

going for the TD
-lower chance of making it
-if you don't make it, and they score on you, you HAVE to get into FG range. you don't have the luxury of going to OT if you don't have time or don't get there.
-makes the defense play too careful if you don't get it because you are trying to keep them in front of you. Prevent D loses games.

Lastly, having Turbin run the ball could probably change my mind.

SuperiorBlueDiver · Post by **SuperiorBlueDiver** » November 7th, 2010, 1:45 am

There are certain playcalls from Baldwin that I absolutely can't stand. I hate running a 3rd and 1 play from the shotgun. I hate it! But we won so I'll save most of the complaints for a different time.

As far as "only" having two sacks...... coming into the game NMSU had given up "only" 6 sacks the entire season. Two sacks is pretty darn good.

Kerwynn's kick returns were huge. NMSU's penalties in key situations killed them. The personal foul out of bounds where the guy swung Diondre down and then stood over him and said something to him was one of the dumbest things I've seen an opponent do at Romney. (I've seen our own team do ridiculous things like that alot more).

Alder's catch was awesome. Came at such a huge spot in the game. The passing game really struggled today.

I felt like we came out very un-enthusiastic. From our body language it seemed like we weren't really wanting to be out there. This team is so confusing.

When Dervinn Speight's career is over after this year he should not have a single regret. That guy leaves everything out on the field. Game in and game out. Regardless of the situation he is giving 110%. I wish we could say that about the entire team. But I don't think we can. Major props to DS on his career high 114 yards rushing!

QuackAttackAggie · Post by **QuackAttackAggie** » November 7th, 2010, 1:16 am

SuperiorBlueDiver wrote:There are certain playcalls from Baldwin that I absolutely can't stand. I hate running a 3rd and 1 play from the shotgun. I hate it! But we won so I'll save most of the complaints for a different time.

I hated this too until I saw oregon play. thing of beauty. The zone read works every single time for a yard if your o-line can hold its ground.

YouEssYou · Post by **YouEssYou** » November 7th, 2010, 7:38 am

TheWoodshed wrote:I agree with both of those things; however, it should be pointed out that Gary Andersen has said himself that he is the one who decides whether or not to go for it on 4th down or to punt/kick a FG. I feel like GA was too conservative on those two situations.

... playing to win versus playing not to lose... Which one do you think we are?

YouEssYou · Post by **YouEssYou** » November 7th, 2010, 7:43 am

Also, I thought we should have benched Borel for at least one drive. Man, that guy couldn't throw the ball for crap yesterday. It looked as though he had never thrown a football before. That was ridiculous/embarrassing.

aggiefan444 · Post by **aggiefan444** » November 7th, 2010, 8:06 am

Its funny how people whodont understand football can conplain about winning. If we go for it on 4th and 2 and dont get it instead of the field goal and now are only up by 4 and some how our d gives up a big play for a td and now were down by 3. You would be beside yourself (I can't express myself without swearing) about what a bad play call that was. And would you really want Borel trying to lead the team down the field for a game winning drive, when he can barely lead the team as it is. The coaching staff made the right call and is doing all they can with what we have. Before you start calling for peoples heads you should try and understand this game called FOOTBALL and what it takes to win, good or bad, we won the game and have the best possible coaches coaching.

NibleyAg · Post by **NibleyAg** » November 7th, 2010, 8:10 am

SuperiorBlueDiver wrote:There are certain playcalls from Baldwin that I absolutely can't stand. I hate running a 3rd and 1 play from the shotgun. I hate it! But we won so I'll save most of the complaints for a different time.

As far as "only" having two sacks...... coming into the game NMSU had given up "only" 6 sacks the entire season. Two sacks is pretty darn good.

Kerwynn's kick returns were huge. NMSU's penalties in key situations killed them. The personal foul out of bounds where the guy swung Diondre down and then stood over him and said something to him was one of the dumbest things I've seen an opponent do at Romney. (I've seen our own team do ridiculous things like that alot more).

Alder's catch was awesome. Came at such a huge spot in the game. The passing game really struggled today.

I felt like we came out very un-enthusiastic. From our body language it seemed like we weren't really wanting to be out there. This team is so confusing.
That is because our fans were slow arriving and the stadium was only 1/4 full at the start. :D

When Dervinn Speight's career is over after this year he should not have a single regret. That guy leaves everything out on the field. Game in and game out. Regardless of the situation he is giving 110%. I wish we could say that about the entire team. But I don't think we can. Major props to DS on his career high 114 yards rushing!

cowcollege · Post by **cowcollege** » November 7th, 2010, 8:30 am

aggiefan444 wrote:Its funny how people whodont understand football can conplain about winning. If we go for it on 4th and 2 and dont get it instead of the field goal and now are only up by 4 and some how our d gives up a big play for a td and now were down by 3. You would be beside yourself (I can't express myself without swearing) about what a bad play call that was. And would you really want Borel trying to lead the team down the field for a game winning drive, when he can barely lead the team as it is. The coaching staff made the right call and is doing all they can with what we have. Before you start calling for peoples heads you should try and understand this game called FOOTBALL and what it takes to win, good or bad, we won the game and have the best possible coaches coaching.

Going for it in that situation is a fireable offense. Plain and simple

superaggie · Post by **superaggie** » November 7th, 2010, 9:52 am

I think that Travis Van Lewin should play more than he does. The kid has spectacular hands. He pulled down passes that no one else on team would have caught (that is not injured). Also his physicality at the receiver spot is refreshing. I also think Austin Alder should play more. At the very least these two catch the ball.

Post by **AGinNEIowa** » November 7th, 2010, 10:26 am

aggiefan444 wrote:Its funny how people whodont understand football can conplain about winning. If we go for it on 4th and 2 and dont get it instead of the field goal and now are only up by 4 and some how our d gives up a big play for a td and now were down by 3. You would be beside yourself (I can't express myself without swearing) about what a bad play call that was. And would you really want Borel trying to lead the team down the field for a game winning drive, when he can barely lead the team as it is. The coaching staff made the right call and is doing all they can with what we have. Before you start calling for peoples heads you should try and understand this game called FOOTBALL and what it takes to win, good or bad, we won the game and have the best possible coaches coaching.

I haven't seen a complaint about winning the game, only questioning situational decisions and play calls. Just because we won, doesn't mean everything was done correctly. The point people are questioning in this thread was when we PUNTED on 4-2 from the 40 and the game was tied at the beginning of the 4th. We didn't get a FG in that situation, we got a touch back, net 20 yards. That's a question-worthy situation,IMO. If anyone's questioning the FG from 4th goal with 4:42 and up 4, they need a head examination.

justinmorrey · Post by **justinmorrey** » November 7th, 2010, 11:26 am

I agree with AginNEIowa. The punt-Brent Guy like decision. The field goal-you are insane if you think that was the wrong choice.

Empire of Dirt · Post by **Empire of Dirt** » November 7th, 2010, 1:20 pm

justinmorrey wrote:I agree with AginNEIowa. The punt-Brent Guy like decision. The field goal-you are insane if you think that was the wrong choice.

Me too. I was screaming for them to go for it from the 40 yard line with everyone around me. Then when it was on the 2 yard line, everyone around me was screaming and I was thinking, no way. Then, I thought that maybe I was wrong the first time. That is why we are fans, and they are coaches.

WasatchAggie · Post by **WasatchAggie** » November 7th, 2010, 3:48 pm

GoldenHurricAGG wrote:
5thYearSenior wrote:Bartlett dislocated his elbow.

Mclenton probably looked off because he's not very good and never really has been IMO.

The defense needs to learn how to buckle down at the start of games, rather than wait until the other team has put up 17.

I'm rapidly losing all faith in Baldwin, and I feel like I'm generally an apologist for this coaching staff.
I finally have an anti-Baldwin backer. I think that the decision to punt in the 4th quarter on 4th and 3 on the 40-something yard line was extremely weak. After we punted, momentum swung the other way for a good 3-4 minutes of game time. If we convert there, great. If not, they still have the ball on their own 40-something. We only ended up gaining about twenty yards in field position off of the punt. The potential upside on the 4th down conversion is so great that you have to go for it, in my opinion. Also... even worse...

The decision to take the FG on 4th and goal on the 2 at the end of the game sealed the deal for me. I don't like Baldwin and - possibly - never will. If you have a chance to put the game out of reach with a 2-yard play, you take it. 100% of the time. If we miss, they have the ball on the 2 with 2 minutes left. They need to go all the way down the field to win.

Regardless, a win is a win and I am somewhat content with Aggie football - for a week.

The field goal was the safe and correct tactic. It forced NMSU to get a touchdown to tie. If we had gone for it and not made it (a distinct possibility) a NMSU touchdown would have a won them the game.

ChicAggie · Post by **ChicAggie** » November 7th, 2010, 7:14 pm

justinmorrey wrote:I agree with AginNEIowa. The punt-Brent Guy like decision. The field goal-you are insane if you think that was the wrong choice.

Exactly.

NVAggie · Post by **NVAggie** » November 7th, 2010, 7:19 pm

Boneheaded plays: I can remember one of our players taking off his helmet and getting flagged.

I'm glad that we won, but GA and DB really need to get things going. They must win the next two and compete with Boise or they are going to lose even more fans. Aggie fans want to root for their team, so bad their teeth hurt. All we need is something to be proud of. After BYU there were many proud Aggies. After yesterday's performance, there isn't much left to root for.

GoldenHurricAGG · Post by **GoldenHurricAGG** » November 8th, 2010, 12:52 am

Going for it on the goal line is a "fire-able offense?" Puhhhhhh-lease. I believe that many coaches, like [insert a highly paid, aggressive play calling coach here], even with our offense, go for the TD and win there. All you have to do is make one average play at home to end the damn game. Even if we had screwed the pooch on 4th and 2 - I really don't see NMSU coming all of the way back down the field (98 yards) for a TD with 2 minutes left. A 58 yard FG for the Raggies wouldn't have done it, folks.

I wouldn't have (I can't express myself without swearing) and moaned if we had gone for it there and ended up losing because of it. Again - if we can't get 2 yards on a crappy NMSU defense at home when it is crunch time, we don't deserve to be winning games. Thanks for the judgmental "people that don't know anything about football making calls" crap. I live in Oklahoma. Football is religion here. Ultimately, both calls are - debatable.

Mr. Sneelock · Post by **Mr. Sneelock** » November 8th, 2010, 8:16 am

cowcollege wrote:
aggiefan444 wrote:Its funny how people whodont understand football can conplain about winning. If we go for it on 4th and 2 and dont get it instead of the field goal and now are only up by 4 and some how our d gives up a big play for a td and now were down by 3. You would be beside yourself (I can't express myself without swearing) about what a bad play call that was. And would you really want Borel trying to lead the team down the field for a game winning drive, when he can barely lead the team as it is. The coaching staff made the right call and is doing all they can with what we have. Before you start calling for peoples heads you should try and understand this game called FOOTBALL and what it takes to win, good or bad, we won the game and have the best possible coaches coaching.
Going for it in that situation is a fireable offense. Plain and simple

I 100% agree. When the fans around me started booing the field goal attempt, I couldn't believe it. Then they all started (I can't express myself without swearing) about taking the 5 yard delay of game penalty to give Caldwell a better angle.

You have to kick the field goal in that situation. Every time. I would definitely question GA and Baldwin if they had not kicked the field goal. If there had been more than a couple of minutes left, I would be more inclined to go for it, but with 2+ minutes left, you have to kick.

Post by **treesap32** » November 8th, 2010, 8:32 am

Mr. Sneelock wrote:
cowcollege wrote:
aggiefan444 wrote:Its funny how people whodont understand football can conplain about winning. If we go for it on 4th and 2 and dont get it instead of the field goal and now are only up by 4 and some how our d gives up a big play for a td and now were down by 3. You would be beside yourself (I can't express myself without swearing) about what a bad play call that was. And would you really want Borel trying to lead the team down the field for a game winning drive, when he can barely lead the team as it is. The coaching staff made the right call and is doing all they can with what we have. Before you start calling for peoples heads you should try and understand this game called FOOTBALL and what it takes to win, good or bad, we won the game and have the best possible coaches coaching.
Going for it in that situation is a fireable offense. Plain and simple
I 100% agree. When the fans around me started booing the field goal attempt, I couldn't believe it. Then they all started (I can't express myself without swearing) about taking the 5 yard delay of game penalty to give Caldwell a better angle.

You have to kick the field goal in that situation. Every time. I would definitely question GA and Baldwin if they had not kicked the field goal. If there had been more than a couple of minutes left, I would be more inclined to go for it, but with 2+ minutes left, you have to kick.

Agreed.

AgMac · Post by **AgMac** » November 8th, 2010, 8:43 am

I think for sure kick the field goal at the end. The punt on the 40 is a tougher call. Oh, and if you don't agree with every post that I ever put on this board, you must not know anything about football.

NVAggie · Post by **NVAggie** » November 8th, 2010, 8:57 am

GoldenHurricAGG wrote:Going for it on the goal line is a "fire-able offense?" Puhhhhhh-lease. I believe that many coaches, like [insert a highly paid, aggressive play calling coach here], even with our offense, go for the TD and win there. All you have to do is make one average play at home to end the damn game. Even if we had screwed the pooch on 4th and 2 - I really don't see NMSU coming all of the way back down the field (98 yards) for a TD with 2 minutes left. A 58 yard FG for the Raggies wouldn't have done it, folks.

I wouldn't have (I can't express myself without swearing) and moaned if we had gone for it there and ended up losing because of it. Again - if we can't get 2 yards on a crappy NMSU defense at home when it is crunch time, we don't deserve to be winning games. Thanks for the judgmental "people that don't know anything about football making calls" crap. I live in Oklahoma. Football is religion here. Ultimately, both calls are - debatable.

I think that we played inconsistently on both sides of the ball all game. That makes the decision very tough on a coach. Which team was going to show up on 4th and 2? Which defense was going to show up if we didn't make it and gave them the ball with 98 yards to go.

I imagine it has been just as tough for the coaches to watch as it has been for us fans. On this occasion it all worked out and we won the game, so I guess we "deserved" to win the game.

AgMac=Lombardi, he is never wrong when it comes to football.

In my mind this team is very confusing. I honestly don't know what I would have done in either situation. I just want to see some consistency.

AGGZILLA · Post by **AGGZILLA** » November 8th, 2010, 8:59 am

treesap32 wrote:
Mr. Sneelock wrote:
cowcollege wrote: Going for it in that situation is a fireable offense. Plain and simple
I 100% agree. When the fans around me started booing the field goal attempt, I couldn't believe it. Then they all started (I can't express myself without swearing) about taking the 5 yard delay of game penalty to give Caldwell a better angle.

You have to kick the field goal in that situation. Every time. I would definitely question GA and Baldwin if they had not kicked the field goal. If there had been more than a couple of minutes left, I would be more inclined to go for it, but with 2+ minutes left, you have to kick.
Agreed.

Also agree. Unless you have an unstoppable offense ala Oregon or Boise State, you kick the FG and take the three points. Also, when you consider how easily the saggies drove down the field late in the game, I have no doubt that they could've gone the 98 yards and punched in the winning score had we gone for it on 4th down and failed.

cowcollege · Post by **cowcollege** » November 8th, 2010, 9:44 am

GoldenHurricAGG wrote:Going for it on the goal line is a "fire-able offense?" Puhhhhhh-lease. I believe that many coaches, like [insert a highly paid, aggressive play calling coach here], even with our offense, go for the TD and win there. All you have to do is make one average play at home to end the damn game. Even if we had screwed the pooch on 4th and 2 - I really don't see NMSU coming all of the way back down the field (98 yards) for a TD with 2 minutes left. A 58 yard FG for the Raggies wouldn't have done it, folks.

I wouldn't have (I can't express myself without swearing) and moaned if we had gone for it there and ended up losing because of it. Again - if we can't get 2 yards on a crappy NMSU defense at home when it is crunch time, we don't deserve to be winning games. Thanks for the judgmental "people that don't know anything about football making calls" crap. I live in Oklahoma. Football is religion here. Ultimately, both calls are - debatable.

Going for it on a fourth down is never a sure thing, and although I did not get the opportunity to see or hear the game, simple math suggests that if we were faced with a 4th and Goal at the 2 that means we got no more than 8 yards in 3 plays (and maybe less depending on where the 1st down was spotted). That doesn't inspire me to believe that 2+ yards are gonna happen on 4th down. Gary did the only thing that someone who's paycheck is on the line can - he kicked the ball. There's no reason to go out swinging his manhood around and trying to step on the other team's neck when you can guarantee yourself a chance to not lose in regulation.

I don't know what the odds for each are, but I'd say that getting a TD would be less than 50/50. That field goal was probably 95%. He may not have upset you or the 500 fans in the stands by going for it, but I'm sure that the coaching staff and the players on his team would start to doubt his decision-making if he went for it and something catastrophic happened. The risk-reward is all out of whack if you go for it.

GoldenHurricAGG · Post by **GoldenHurricAGG** » November 8th, 2010, 12:33 pm

cowcollege wrote:
GoldenHurricAGG wrote:Going for it on the goal line is a "fire-able offense?" Puhhhhhh-lease. I believe that many coaches, like [insert a highly paid, aggressive play calling coach here], even with our offense, go for the TD and win there. All you have to do is make one average play at home to end the damn game. Even if we had screwed the pooch on 4th and 2 - I really don't see NMSU coming all of the way back down the field (98 yards) for a TD with 2 minutes left. A 58 yard FG for the Raggies wouldn't have done it, folks.

I wouldn't have (I can't express myself without swearing) and moaned if we had gone for it there and ended up losing because of it. Again - if we can't get 2 yards on a crappy NMSU defense at home when it is crunch time, we don't deserve to be winning games. Thanks for the judgmental "people that don't know anything about football making calls" crap. I live in Oklahoma. Football is religion here. Ultimately, both calls are - debatable.

Going for it on a fourth down is never a sure thing, and although I did not get the opportunity to see or hear the game, simple math suggests that if we were faced with a 4th and Goal at the 2 that means we got no more than 8 yards in 3 plays (and maybe less depending on where the 1st down was spotted). That doesn't inspire me to believe that 2+ yards are gonna happen on 4th down. Gary did the only thing that someone who's paycheck is on the line can - he kicked the ball. There's no reason to go out swinging his manhood around and trying to step on the other team's neck when you can guarantee yourself a chance to not lose in regulation.

I don't know what the odds for each are, but I'd say that getting a TD would be less than 50/50. That field goal was probably 95%. He may not have upset you or the 500 fans in the stands by going for it, but I'm sure that the coaching staff and the players on his team would start to doubt his decision-making if he went for it and something catastrophic happened. The risk-reward is all out of whack if you go for it.

Kicking the field goal didn't guarantee a damn thing. Were you watching the game? If NMSU goes down and gets a TD - and gets a 2 pt. conversion (which I would do if I were them - on the road, probably facing a better team) - the game is over. We lose. This is the main reason that I am so behind going for a TD. Three points doesn't put the game out of reach - it only forces NMSU to make a "tough" decision - if they get their 6.

As for your "odds" in the first paragraph - you make a decent point, but you are only taking 3 DOWNS into consideration. What about the entire drive up to that point? How many yards did we average per play on that drive? For the game?

If you are talking "risk-reward," it seems that you go for the TD, because the reward is essentially a guaranteed win - and the risk is turning the ball over on the 2 yard line with 2 minutes left when field goals won't cut the mustard. My risk-reward analysis is perfectly "in whack."

Also: I have always wanted to use this emoticon, so I will do it now:

Upcoming Events

Event Results