10-31-2011, 04:58 PM
In the 2nd OT, by choosing to tie the game, instead of going for the win, Shaw was betting that he'd have a better chance of outscoring U.SC in the next OT than in a successful 2pt conversion. An optimist would probably put the 2pt conversion success at about 50%. From a statistical point of view, it can be argued that the probability of Stanford outscoring the T.rojans in an OT is higher than that. Stanford is #1 in the country (how freakin' unbelievable is that?), scoring TDs close to 80% of the time. U.SC is 95th, scoring TDs at close to 50% of the time.
However, I was one of those calling for Shaw to go for 2 at the end of the 2nd OT. Whitaker was looking pretty shaky as a spot kicker and I was having flashbacks to his brother missing a PAT in last year's contest. I also felt that you should put the ball in Luck's hands to end the game. (I was also pleading for Shaw to just put me out of my misery.) Finally, I had lost my faith in the defense's ability to stop Barkley, Woods, et al. In the end, Shaw made the best choice, because it created an opportunity for the defense to step up to the plate and make the game ending play. Now they build on that confidence towards Nov 12.
However, I was one of those calling for Shaw to go for 2 at the end of the 2nd OT. Whitaker was looking pretty shaky as a spot kicker and I was having flashbacks to his brother missing a PAT in last year's contest. I also felt that you should put the ball in Luck's hands to end the game. (I was also pleading for Shaw to just put me out of my misery.) Finally, I had lost my faith in the defense's ability to stop Barkley, Woods, et al. In the end, Shaw made the best choice, because it created an opportunity for the defense to step up to the plate and make the game ending play. Now they build on that confidence towards Nov 12.