We were playing to win, we were not playing to not lose. If I am going to go down, might as well go down going for it. I like the call.
Nice discussion everyone. That sure got the blood flowing. How about using Scott, Murphy in slot, Williams in motion, Holliday on possible reverse taking handoff from Williams --- he scores!!! Thanks go to Tigerbnd05 for suggesting what I believe is the right answer. Knowing LSU has a non-fleet-of-foot QB and you are the opposing team's DC, wouldn't you call a defense geared to [1] stop RB and [2] double-team LSU's receivers??? Glad to see so many realize a BIG mistake allowing 2 points followed by a FG would be AU's least resistance to OT? And a non-conversion (like what happened) makes an AU TD an automatic winner? Anyone remember the LSU - IOWA catastrophe on the last play of the game resulting from a missed assignment by a DB? Oh, lastly a teaser. In case of a 3-way tie for the Division title, doesn't point differential between teams determine the winner at some stage of the tie-breaker? Just something else to think about. Don't you just hate five point wins? Had we converted the 2-point attempt, and AU scored a late TD to make the score LSU 28 AUBURN 27 then coach of the Plainsmen Mr. Big Ears would have to decide his Tie-or-Win play. Decisions, decisions. But that's why we play the game. :geaux: :helmet:
The last time I remember anyone ever return a post-touchdown play for any points was some game in the 1990s... oh wait. It was LSU-Auburn. Yes, it COULD have happened. But come on. Ever weigh the risks of any decision? Risks of not going for it > risks of going for it. Therefore, you go for two. And what do I mean? Much easier to at least ATTEMPT to tie it up in case they score a touchdown rather than just lay down and hope they don't score. Playcalling be darned, Crowton was hoping they were thinking we were thinking run I'm sure and decided to open in 5 wide to try and catch them off guard.
