Right decision - Wrong Call?

[blue42]

I think it was the wrong decision. The time to go for two was the first touchdown when we were down 12-14. At least if you gamble and lose then you still have the entire second half to recover.

As for emptying the backfield--that worked on long fields when you were motioning Jamaal out of the backfield. It's a completely different situation on a two-point conversion from 3 yards away when the back you are motioning out is Algie instead of Jamaal.

BYU was never down 14-12, BYU was up 13-7 before scored just before the half.

I like the decision but I would have liked to see a roll out to the right with a pass/run option out of that. I would have like trips to the left of the field with one receiver far right, send the right receiver in motion and hike the ball with him still on the right side turn up field and go left taking the DB with him, then have either the RB or TE run about 5-7 yards deep in the end zone running right with Taysom. That play would have either a safety or LB backer on your RB or TE and a LB on Taysom, he either outruns if he stays or if he breaks on Taysom he then can SOFTLY dump it off for the score!

I love being a Monday morning QB!

[redneckjedi]

I like the call to go for two. With how bad our run defense had gotten, I didn't like our chances in OT.

I didn't like the play call. I get that you want the ball in Taysom's hands, but if you're going to run him, why not run him behind the right side of the line, which is where we've had most of our rushing success? Or why not run a play where your options have a little more time to develop? I know based on interviews that they thought they had an advantage when going empty, but Hill needed to have a way to check out of that once he saw the weak side being overloaded like that.

My call would have been to place the ball on the left hash, two WRs left, TE and WR to the right, under center, single back. Play action boot to the right. RB goes through the line and tries to find an open spot. One WR on the left gets to the back of the endzone and drags across, the other goes just over the goal line and drags across. The TE blocks and releases, runs a drag route about 5 yards deep. The WR on the right edge takes the CB to the corner and posts him up with a curl, working back towards the ball afterwards.

Hopefully you get a defender or two to bite on the play action. Hill sprints out right. The D-line is not going to be fast enough to catch him, so they are out of the equation. The MLB will probably be spying Hill if he doesn't bite on the play action, and he may get there in time if he doesn't hesitate, but Hill probably wins that race. A CB and the FS are going to be occupied by the left side WRs. So, you've basically got a 3-on-3 situation. TE, QB, and WR vs. OLB, CB, SS. If the OLB covers the TE, Hill walks into the endzone, game over. If he doesn't, and the SS is late getting to the TE or helps with the WR, that's an easy completion, game over. If the coverage is good on the TE, you've got man-to-man with the WR, and if the CB plays the fade, easy completion, game over. If not, the WR will work back to the ball and you can hit him if he comes open. And if none of that is open and Hill can see he's going to get caught, he can improvise and hopefully find one of the WRs or the RB from the other side as they get lost as the defense flies to the ball.

Second-to-worst case scenario, it's a footrace between the OLB and Hill to the pylon. The OLB will have an angle, but my money is on Hill there, and he's got time to evaluate other options if he sees he's going to lose that race.

Worst case scenario, the OL misses a block and Hill is running for his life on the rollout. That's not much different than what actually happened, except that Hill has some space and time to react to that problem, rather than only having the option to break 3 tackles to score.

[stuckinbig10country]

I like the call to go for two. With how bad our run defense had gotten, I didn't like our chances in OT.

I didn't like the play call. I get that you want the ball in Taysom's hands, but if you're going to run him, why not run him behind the right side of the line, which is where we've had most of our rushing success? Or why not run a play where your options have a little more time to develop? I know based on interviews that they thought they had an advantage when going empty, but Hill needed to have a way to check out of that once he saw the weak side being overloaded like that.

My call would have been to place the ball on the left hash, two WRs left, TE and WR to the right, under center, single back. Play action boot to the right. RB goes through the line and tries to find an open spot. One WR on the left gets to the back of the endzone and drags across, the other goes just over the goal line and drags across. The TE blocks and releases, runs a drag route about 5 yards deep. The WR on the right edge takes the CB to the corner and posts him up with a curl, working back towards the ball afterwards.

Hopefully you get a defender or two to bite on the play action. Hill sprints out right. The D-line is not going to be fast enough to catch him, so they are out of the equation. The MLB will probably be spying Hill if he doesn't bite on the play action, and he may get there in time if he doesn't hesitate, but Hill probably wins that race. A CB and the FS are going to be occupied by the left side WRs. So, you've basically got a 3-on-3 situation. TE, QB, and WR vs. OLB, CB, SS. If the OLB covers the TE, Hill walks into the endzone, game over. If he doesn't, and the SS is late getting to the TE or helps with the WR, that's an easy completion, game over. If the coverage is good on the TE, you've got man-to-man with the WR, and if the CB plays the fade, easy completion, game over. If not, the WR will work back to the ball and you can hit him if he comes open. And if none of that is open and Hill can see he's going to get caught, he can improvise and hopefully find one of the WRs or the RB from the other side as they get lost as the defense flies to the ball.

Second-to-worst case scenario, it's a footrace between the OLB and Hill to the pylon. The OLB will have an angle, but my money is on Hill there, and he's got time to evaluate other options if he sees he's going to lose that race.

Worst case scenario, the OL misses a block and Hill is running for his life on the rollout. That's not much different than what actually happened, except that Hill has some space and time to react to that problem, rather than only having the option to break 3 tackles to score.

Anyone coming through the line is getting tackled, so the RB isn't gonna be an option, but that does take out at least one defender on the tackle.

And you put Hill in shot gun because the QB needs to be comfortable, and he's much more comfortable in the gun.

Going back, I would bet they would put him on the move. But the play that was called works if one more person does their job and gets the block.

[redneckjedi]

Absolutely agree. In general, though, your go-to 2PT / 4th down plays needs to have as much tolerance for people not doing their job as possible, and it needs to have a good probability of success regardless of what the defense does. But what those plays are is something you learn with experience, and the current staff is still very, very young. I guess it's good that they're getting so much crunch time experience so early.

[scott715]

I would had liked to see Francis Bernard come in at RB for that play to mess with Utah

[vancouvercougar]

I would had liked to see Francis Bernard come in at RB for that play to mess with Utah

I like the idea of messing with Utah, and that would give them something to think about.

[frdbtr]

Ty Detmer apologized for not having more options for Taysom on that play. He is still a new Ocoordinator and will learn from his mistakes. I have a feeling that a better play will be called the next time we need a 2 point conversion to win the game.

[scott715]

I was kind of surprised. When Ty was QB he ran a lot of 2 point conversions and was successful on many of them. I expected a better play call.

[KingCoug]

The more I think about it, the more I lean towards it not only being the right call but also the right play. And, at the risk of sounding like you-know-who, it just wasn't executed properly.

It was the right call because we were on the road in a hostile environment, Williams was out, 2 of our defenders were out, our D was tired, and I'm not sure we could have hung in there in OT.

It was the right play because, even though Utah later said it was what they were expecting, who else do we feel comfortable with other than Taysom? He's the only rushing threat at that point. Our receivers, not to mention Taysom's accuracy, are suspect. So a run/pass option with Hill keeping the ball makes sense. He just did nothing to try and fool the Ute D and he had insufficient help from his blockers.

On a side note, if I remember right, we were much closer to the end zone but got backed up 5 yards because a stupid delay of game penalty on our part. One wonders if Taysom would have gotten in with less distance to go. I think so.

[lawngnome]

Delay of game was on the play before Hill ran in for the touchdown. The two point conversion was from regular distance.