[stupac2]

There is a very simple way to determine if a 4th down decision in a game is a good one or a bad one. 

Bad decision: the fans on the other team want you to do it
Good decision: the fans on the other team hope you don't do it

In 2010 when Stanford was steamrolling Oregon and led 21-0 when The Ducks faced a 4th and 1 from their own 30 yd line.  While Stanford fans were surely saying "they're crazy to go for it," the reality is they were really hoping Oregon would punt instead.  That was a good decision to go for the first down.

When Stanford faced 4th and 6 from the Utah 35 with less than two minutes left, there isn't a Utah fan in existence that was hoping Stanford would kick the FG or go for it on 4th down.  They all were breathing giant sighs of relief that Stanford punted.  That was a bad decision.

This is crazy for a bunch of reasons. First, the fans' reactions to events in a game don't necessarily mean anything about those events. Second, fans are horrible at telling what decisions actually lead to increased win probabilities. Third, the reason fans of the other team would rather see you punt is because you generally know the outcome. Going for it involves a lot of uncertainty and uncertainty is what makes people nervous. Even though making that kick was probably less favorable to us than overtime (do you really think Williamson is >50% to nail a 50-yarder when he's barely 2/3 from much closer?), fans would generally rather see the ball punted because it means more likelihood of going to "safe" overtime, even though it's entirely possible that kicking was more likely to make us lose! So Utah fans who knew how terrible Williamson has been this year would hardly have been quaking in their boots had he trotted out to attempt that kick.

As I've been saying, it's just not clear-cut which move actually gave us our best chance to win, and being so critical of this decision smacks of not having actually thought this through.

[stupac2]

There is a very simple way to determine if a 4th down decision in a game is a good one or a bad one. 

Bad decision: the fans on the other team want you to do it
Good decision: the fans on the other team hope you don't do it

In 2010 when Stanford was steamrolling Oregon and led 21-0 when The Ducks faced a 4th and 1 from their own 30 yd line.  While Stanford fans were surely saying "they're crazy to go for it," the reality is they were really hoping Oregon would punt instead.  That was a good decision to go for the first down.

When Stanford faced 4th and 6 from the Utah 35 with less than two minutes left, there isn't a Utah fan in existence that was hoping Stanford would kick the FG or go for it on 4th down.  They all were breathing giant sighs of relief that Stanford punted.  That was a bad decision.

This is crazy for a bunch of reasons. First, the fans' reactions to events in a game don't necessarily mean anything about those events. Second, fans are horrible at telling what decisions actually lead to increased win probabilities. Third, the reason fans of the other team would rather see you punt is because you generally know the outcome. Going for it involves a lot of uncertainty and uncertainty is what makes people nervous. Even though making that kick was probably less favorable to us than overtime (do you really think Williamson is >50% to nail a 50-yarder when he's barely 2/3 from much closer?), fans would generally rather see the ball punted because it means more likelihood of going to "safe" overtime, even though it's entirely possible that kicking was more likely to make us lose! So Utah fans who knew how terrible Williamson has been this year would hardly have been quaking in their boots had he trotted out to attempt that kick.

As I've been saying, it's just not clear-cut which move actually gave us our best chance to win, and being so critical of this decision smacks of not having actually thought this through.