Would you have let Auburn score?

I know this OT but here goes--



Situation:



Game tied 19-19

1:56 left in the 4th quarter

Auburn ball at 1st and 10 at the Oregon 22 after long run and official review

Auburn has 2 timeouts

Oregon has 1 timeout

Clock will run upon referee spotting the ball on a first down



Considerations:



Auburn's placekicker is 15/20 on the year, 5/8 from 30-39, 3/3 from 40-49, and 2/2 on the last play of the game or in OT

Oregon leads the nation in points per game, averaging 46.8 a game, or a point every 1.3 minutes



Question:



If you are Oregon's coach, do you take your last time out to stop the clock at 1:56, and then let Auburn score a TD on the subsequent play to give your offense almost 2 minutes to try to get the tying TD?

No. Your offense had struggled to move the ball all game, and your defense had been playing well enough to allow you to win.

No, a blocked kick, a fumble, an interception were just as likely as Oregon scoring a touchdown.



In retrospect it seems smart considering the outcome, but it's not the highest percentage move.



Bottom line, Oregon needed to tackle better last night and it bit them badly on the last drive.

StatsCougar wrote:
No. Your offense had struggled to move the ball all game, and your defense had been playing well enough to allow you to win.

I understand your point about the offense, but the same could be said for the Auburn team that had just driven the ball down to the 22 yard line. 2-minute offenses are often different than the normal offense, so the previous 58 minutes might not be the best predictor of the next 2.



With 2 minutes left at the Oregon 22, Auburn could run the clock down to the last 20 seconds before kicking a tie-breaking field goal. Remember, Auburn had the ball at Oregon's 22 with 1:56 left--that's a guaranteed 40 yard or less field goal try no matter how good Oregon's defense was playing.

Mingjai wrote:

No. Your offense had struggled to move the ball all game, and your defense had been playing well enough to allow you to win.

I understand your point about the offense, but the same could be said for the Auburn team that had just driven the ball down to the 22 yard line. 2-minute offenses are often different than the normal offense, so the previous 58 minutes might not be the best predictor of the next 2.



With 2 minutes left at the Oregon 22, Auburn could run the clock down to the last 20 seconds before kicking a tie-breaking field goal. Remember, Auburn had the ball at Oregon's 22 with 1:56 left--that's a guaranteed 40 yard or less field goal try no matter how good Oregon's defense was playing.

They did the right thing. Oregon's whole offense is a 2 minute offense. It sputtered all night. It is much more likely that they get a stop and block a field goal or the kicker misses than going trying to drive the length of the field.

If money is involved then yes. If money is involved then no.



Quietly Signed, NCAAA

Neither team dominated all year. If I recall correctly, both came close to losing their last game. I wasn't impressed by either being "DOMINANT" against every team all year. Just another dollar for the BC$$$$$$$$$$$$ schools. For them, life is wonderful and they can just chill until the next football season starts. Buy a few new recruits, look the other way for some other recruits, trade in a 1990 used beater car for a new Lexus through a booster, and so forth.....

Here's what I do if I'm Oregon: I get a damn goal line formation. You're seriously going to run the read option from the 1/2 yard line?

Schmoe wrote:
Here's what I do if I'm Oregon: I get a damn goal line formation. You're seriously going to run the read option from the 1/2 yard line?

:lol: :lol: :lol: Good call