0
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Finally an explanation bout why Ole Miss went for two so early
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:13 pm to BoudinChicot
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:13 pm to BoudinChicot
quote:
Golding played Lane like a fiddle.
I think that was more homefield advantage playing out than coaching
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:18 pm to KCSunshine
We will never know 100% but if it was to see a look thats a really smart strategy and obviously we had terrible discipline.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:20 pm to FireGoodell
Same, but generally you go for the tie at home and the win on the road, but I get it, you want the control.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:23 pm to KCSunshine
They definitely weren't going for 2 the first time around. If we don't jump offsides they either call a TO or just take the penalty and kick the XP.
It worked so well the first time they tried the hard count again.
After getting to the 1inch line of course they are going for it.
It worked so well the first time they tried the hard count again.
After getting to the 1inch line of course they are going for it.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:24 pm to KCSunshine
I agree totally, sounds very plausible and definitely a killer offsides(twice).
But I’m curious what makes you think the 2pt conversion changed our strategy WE still had to score a TD.
If you mean the mental aspect of having to go for 2 and not totally focusing on the initial score maybe.
But in the end we still had to score a TD- mentally not so much strategic.
But I’m curious what makes you think the 2pt conversion changed our strategy WE still had to score a TD.
If you mean the mental aspect of having to go for 2 and not totally focusing on the initial score maybe.
But in the end we still had to score a TD- mentally not so much strategic.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:40 pm to KCSunshine
I heard he was trying to get Lane to burn his final timeout then when he didn’t and he left field goal defense in it was a no brainer to go for it from the one foot line after the two false starts.
This post was edited on 9/22/26 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:42 pm to Bengal tail
quote:
Yes, but if we scored the touchdown instead of the FG, it would have been 32-31, so our last drive would of been a FG to win it 34-32 , that crappy 3rd down play came down to haunt us, just my 2cent.
That's not correct.
If we had gotten a TD instead of a FG to tie, that would have given us a 28-24 lead. This means Chambliss' TD would put Ole Miss up 30-28 prior to the PAT. Only an idiot coach would go for two up two. That would have made the last drive TD to win or FG to tie.
Not that football is that linear.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:49 pm to EvrybodysAllAmerican
quote:
It was a brilliant call.
Only with the benefit of hindsight.
quote:
At worst they are still up 6 with 6 minutes left,
No, at worst you unnecessarily left a point off the board that allowed 7 to beat you with no guarantee you would get the ball back in enough time to try a FG. Had OM not gotten the 2 points, the road coach wouldn't have to decide he was going for two. That decision would have already have been made for him. He just had to kick the XP.
Pete could say what he wants. The real reason is because he did not believe his defense could stop LSU. For good reason. In the 3 drives prior to the OM TD, LSU had gone TD, TD, FG after being stopped from the 2. It was a calculated risk to try to leave LSU with only the opportunity to tie if they (what felt like inevitably) scored a TD on their next possession. Considering LSU reached the OM 6 on its possession following the OM TD that lent credence to Pete's thinking.
He's not going to publicly say he went for two because he had zero faith in his defense. But that is the reality. It is also reality that had LSU stopped the 2 point conversion and then scored a TD to win with the XP Pete would be getting raked over the coals (understandably so) for such a bad decision to go for two.
This is an occasion where it is only "brilliant" because it worked. In the moment it was an illogically stupid risk to unnecessarily give the opponent the opportunity to beat you without having to even consider going for two.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:51 pm to KCSunshine
Total lack of discipline and intelligence in a key situation from the Baker defense.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:53 pm to Big EZ Tiger
quote:
I think they outcoached us in the game. That was a smart move.
Hindsight. If their run gets stuffed, it would have gone down as one of the dumbest calls in football history.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:55 pm to KCSunshine
quote:
but had they gone for 2 initially it would have been awful strategic call
Yep. Even the very smart announcers were caught off guard…. Uhhh analytics and uhh people are doing this now…Yeah, not true at all in a tie game. No one is going for 2 when you just went up 6 late in the fourth quarter. No one.
It was very very smart of them to see the D and try to get a penalty. It would have been horrendously stupid to go for 2 without the penalty In that situation. Like potentially lose your job stupid if you don’t get the 2 and the other team drives and wins by 1 in a high profile game.
This post was edited on 9/22/26 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:56 pm to FireGoodell
quote:
I figured they thought Lane would go for 2 if we scored the next drive, so they were just beating him to the punch.
Yeah before ole miss scored the TD I was thinking if lsu scores next then lane will go for two to win it like Kelly did in 2022.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 12:58 pm to GeauxldEye
Pretty smart on their part. Interestingly, we tried to outfox them and get them to jump the very next series when we were down at their 5. There was a stoppage in play and we had one timeout. As Leavitt headed to the field, you could lip read Lane saying "If it doesn't work, call timeout." Sadly, we outfoxed ourselves and we jumped.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 1:01 pm to JPLSU1981
quote:
Yep. Even the very smart announcers were caught off guard…. Uhhh analytics and uhh people are doing this now…Yeah, not true at all in a tie game. No one is going for 2 when you just went up 6. No one.
Exactly.
A 7 point win counts the same as an 8 point win. The ONLY reason you go for two there is that you have more confidence in getting the 2 point conversion than you do in stopping the opponent.
Posted on 9/22/26 at 1:08 pm to KCSunshine
I don’t know that I believe that.
At that point of the game what is the benefit of knowing how LSU lines up to defend a 2 pt conversion? You’re not going to need that in regulation.
That only benefits you in a drawn out OT scenario.
At that point of the game what is the benefit of knowing how LSU lines up to defend a 2 pt conversion? You’re not going to need that in regulation.
That only benefits you in a drawn out OT scenario.
This post was edited on 9/22/26 at 1:09 pm
Posted on 9/22/26 at 1:08 pm to KCSunshine
I thought I saw somewhere that they lined up to go for 2 because Golding was trying to see if he could force Lane to burn LSU's last timeout, but that OM wasn't originally planning to actually run a play before LSU jumped offsides twice.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News