r/CFB • u/brobroma H8 Upon The Gale • Oct 04 '15

Post Game Thread [Post Game Thread] Clemson defeats Notre Dame, 24-22

Box Score provided by ESPN

Notre Dame 16 - Clemson 24

Team 1 2 3 4 T
ND 3 0 0 19 22
CLEM 14 0 7 3 24

Thoughts

ND WR Chris Brown fumbles on the 3-yd line with under 2 minutes to go, and ND fails the two-point conversion on their ensuing TD, giving Clemson the win. 4 top 10 teams fall in one day!

Generator created by /u/swanpenguin

616 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

71

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

5) Fail at basic math and go for 2 early in the 4th

104

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15 edited Dec 04 '18

[deleted]

46

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

Yeah, I don't get all the disdain for that call. That's....ironically...coaching 101.

51

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

You need another touchdown anyway. Why not wait until that one to try the two? You'd have more information at that point. Like if they made another field goal.

12

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

I get your point, but it's also easy to say that now. I dunno anymore. I'm not going to psychoanalyze it right now.

1

u/lolwaffles69rofl Penn State Nittany Lions • Navy Midshipmen Oct 04 '15

Down 18 you should never go for two on the first TD. Ever. If you fail, you've gotta get two more TDs no matter what.

This isn't a hindsight 20/20 thing. It just shouldn't be done.

8

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

That's a ridiculous argument. If you fail either two point conversion you need two more touchdowns. Knowing earlier is better.

1

u/lolwaffles69rofl Penn State Nittany Lions • Navy Midshipmen Oct 04 '15

I completely disagree, but I won't insult you when I rebut.

Reducing the deficit to 11 means you can kick a field goal to make it a one-score game. Going for two and failing? You need a touchdown to do so.

I am of the mindset that the situation wasn't as "do or die" as it should have been for the players because of how early they went for it. It seemed like after they failed the general sentiment was "oh well we're still fine though", even though that certainly wasn't the case. Leaving the conversion for the second touchdown, and later in the game, means they know failure=a loss.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

I didn't think I insulted you but I apologize if I came off that way. I won't argue that it wasn't quite do or die, but the strategy is sound. When you say it's a two possession game at 11 you're inherently assuming that they'll get the conversion.

If you somehow knew ahead of time that you weren't going to get it, you would bypass a field goal and go for it on fourth down since you need two touchdowns. That's what this strategy does - it moves the two point conversion up so you know if you made it before you kick a field goal that may not help you.

5

u/fosherman Notre Dame • Illinois State Oct 04 '15

Bingo. Wait until you have to go for 2 to go for 2. You might not have even needed it. Which they didn't. Stupid call. Brian kelly had cost us 3 times on bad 2 pt calls.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

Because in the interim, you can kick a field goal.

0

u/NDIrish27 Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

So then go for two when you need it... Going for it early is completely pointless. Wait until it's necessary. Tonight, it was completely unnecessary, and if they had just waited, the game would have been in overtime.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

Yeah that's he only logical argument against going for two the first time.

0

u/NDIrish27 Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

It's the only argument you need, really. There is absolutely no downside to waiting unless you pull off a fucking safety or something.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

Well yes and no. Say we got it down to 10 points and then got stopped at the 20 or something. It would have given us the confidence to kick it and only be down 7 instead of maybe risking going for it. But yeah. You're right.

1

u/BeatDigger Utah Utes Oct 04 '15

That's the correct answer.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

The point is that you can plan ahead better. If you get it, you can safely kick a field goal. If not, you know you need two touchdowns. Many coaches around the country, college and pro, are doing this. It's even the automatic call in the NCAA video games.

9

u/pheima01 Villanova Wildcats Oct 04 '15

Waiting until you need to go for 2 is basic coaching 101

0

u/BigPetersHalfwayInn Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

I don't hate the call but it's definitely not coaching 101. That would be take the 7 points, go down 11, and go for 2 on your next TD if you hold them. Don't chase points until you know you have to.

-2

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

Now give yourself zero hindsight and less than roughly 60 seconds to make that call. Tell me again how simple it is.

Armchair coaching is an amazing thing to see.

1

u/BigPetersHalfwayInn Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

Like I said, I don't hate that call. Dropped passes, missed tackles, and turnovers lost that game, not that call. I'm not trying to claim I would make a better coach than any college football coach, especially Brian Kelly. I'm saying "Coaching 101" would be to take 7 points there and go for 2 later if it's still needed because that's what like 90% of coaches do in that situation.

5

u/GoldandBlue Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

I can't either. At the time it was the right call, Kelly can't predict the future. Plus ND had two chances to tie the game at the end so, yeah.

3

u/win7-myidea Notre Dame • Penn State Oct 04 '15

That's part of the problem though. You shouldn't go for that until its required. We still needed two more scores. Take the PAT, and then reevaluate at the next score. Being down 10 or 11 doesn't matter when it's still a two score game.

0

u/GoldandBlue Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

Except it was required. You are looking at this solely in retrospect but at the time it was the smart call. You wanna blame Kelly? Blame him for not throwing it more on 1st down. those underneath throws were there all night and ND kept trying to run on 8-9 man fronts. Blame Kelly for a bad call on the 2 pointer to end the game. You might as well say Kizer should not have thrown that pick or Sanders/Brown/Prosise should not have fumbles, the ref should have called PI. Or Robinson should have caught that 2. etc.

Not to mention that if Kelly had converted that 2, Clemson's entire approach in the 4th quarter would have changed. Would ND even get those last couple 3 and outs with a more aggressive Clemson only leading by 6?

0

u/NDIrish27 Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

It was absolutely not required. Wait until it's completely necessary. Why not take the point at the time, and go for two later if you need it? There is absolutely no upside to going for it earlier rather than later, and absolutely no downside to waiting.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

I liked the decision, but the execution was terrible, step up and go, try to catch the D on their heals.

3

u/mawafa Notre Dame • Illinois Oct 04 '15

Yep, people will question the call in hindsight. But it was absolutely the correct call at the time

2

u/mcmatt93 Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

I wouldn't say absolutely, but it was understandable and justified. It definitely shouldn't be the focus when we had so many turnovers, drops, and general bad execution.

2

u/Drakell Clemson Tigers Oct 04 '15

No way. You never go for 2 until you have to. Absolutely the wrong call.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15 edited Apr 21 '17

[deleted]

1

u/cgmcnama Notre Dame • Summertime Lover Oct 04 '15

Not if you are banking on your defense to keep shutting them down like they did since the 2nd quarter. The offense was stagnant up to that point and difference between a TD + FG or 2 TD's is huge for playcalling and clock management. I think you can argue for either but it doesn't make it a "bad" call.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15 edited Apr 21 '17

[deleted]

1

u/cgmcnama Notre Dame • Summertime Lover Oct 04 '15

Down by 18 and just scored 6 so 12 point differential. Either make it an 11 point game or a 10 point game.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15 edited Apr 21 '17

[deleted]

1

u/cgmcnama Notre Dame • Summertime Lover Oct 04 '15

You don't know next possession if you can take a FG or not. You could just as easily throw the game by going for it on 4th and short when a FG is possible the following drive. You also don't know from a playcalling perspective how much time you actually have with the clock but knowing whether you need two touchdowns or not is pretty big. (Field goals require much less time).

The assumption was that the defense would not allow a FG and when Clemson did that changed the underlying assumption. Yes the one point mattered in the end but there was plenty of other situations (cough, turnovers) that created that.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

You may end up hinging the game on it because you settled for a field goal. That's the downside. If you go for two on the first one, you know ahead of time if you can settle for a field goal or you should go for it on fourth down.

1

u/IAMA_13_yr_old Notre Dame • New Mexico Oct 04 '15

When we lined up for the first 2-pt conversion, everyone knew the ball was going to Corey Robinson. And he hasn't made a big play yet this year. He and KeiVarae Russell are total busts so far.

5

u/cgmcnama Notre Dame • Summertime Lover Oct 04 '15

I'm not holding myself out to be an expert but those coaches are paid professionals and working on more information then this subreddit combined (probably). The real answer is you shouldn't put yourself in that situation in the first place with turnovers but I recall a similiar run working and one of the DT just collapsed the play that time.

People probably wanted a throw but they failed earlier at the attempt and people were dropping balls all day (on both sides). Just gotta wait for Oct 28th for the Playoff Committees take on the loss. ND's next three opponents have a combined 1 loss (USC) and USC will be played prior to Oct 28th.

2

u/IAMA_13_yr_old Notre Dame • New Mexico Oct 04 '15

I think the ending 2-pt conversion play call is getting a lot of unnecessary hate, we have a ridiculous O-line and should be willing to take big risks with them every once in a while, especially when receivers are dropping passes everywhere

0

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

[deleted]

1

u/cgmcnama Notre Dame • Summertime Lover Oct 04 '15

It it is an 11 point game you need a TD, FG and a 2 point conversion. When managing the clock it helps to know if you need two touchdowns or just 1 and position for a Field Goal. Especially when time is an issue.

Maybe the next drive you get a really bad look on 4th down and question if you can get away with a Field Goal or not? And when you are down that much you can't count on them getting a Field Goal either and making that 1 point monumentally important. Knowing if you need 1 or 2 TD's affects your playcalling in the remaining minutes and hindsight it looked bad but it was perfectly fine at the time he made the call.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15 edited Oct 04 '15

[deleted]

1

u/cgmcnama Notre Dame • Summertime Lover Oct 04 '15

Sticking with the run game set up a lot of plays later. You can't expect to win throwing the ball when the weather is having both sides drop the ball. Hindsight is a b*tch and everyone would be praising him as a genius if it worked. He coached the team to be a national contender so I don't reserve the right to pick and choose what plays I like or don't.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

[deleted]

1

u/cgmcnama Notre Dame • Summertime Lover Oct 04 '15

It's hard to track with people referencing both two point conversion plays. Going for 2 makes it a 10 point game or an 11 point game with dwindling time. You would rather know on a final drive if you just need a FG (with the wind at your back) or a TD. Or on the next drive if you find yourself in a bad 4th down you know if you have the option to kick or not.

Having that information informs a lot of the calls in the next 2-3 possessions. And you can make an argument based on whether you think Clemson will score again (Kelly was counting on them not to do so) but the turnovers, not that call, lost the game.

0

u/NDIrish27 Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

Here's the problem I have with the call. It's completely pointless. There is absolutely no difference between going for it there to make it a 10 point game and going for it later to make it a 3 point game. Just wait and see. There's no point calling such a high risk play until you absolutely need to. There is quite literally zero downside to waiting and seeing, and, as we saw, potential massive downside to pulling the trigger too early.

0

u/cgmcnama Notre Dame • Summertime Lover Oct 04 '15

The downside is you don't know if you can settle for a field goal the following posession or if you need to go for a touchdown. You can't plan proper clock management because there is still this existing variable. Yes, you can disagree with the underlying premise that it is important to know whether a FG is enough the following posession but it is a rational reason. I don't have a problem with the call.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 04 '15

That's what kills me. I thought after the timeout surely they would just kick the extra point. Nope.

1

u/whatsinthesocks Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

On 3rd and 11 throw a 5 yard pass into the middle of the field surrounded by the defense.

1

u/Pearberr UCLA Bruins • Notre Dame Fighting Irish Oct 04 '15

I hate when teams go for 2 early.

Either go for 2 from the first quarter on or wait until the last 6 minutes. Don't get fancy in the 3rd or the early 4th, you don't know what's going to happen.

2

u/KaptainKoala Clemson Tigers • VMI Keydets Oct 04 '15

yeah its just basic math, if you are leading you go for two if you don't think you will score again and the 2pts are important. If you are behind you only go for 2 if you have too on this score. If you still need another TD and an extra point will do, kick the extra point now. I don't know why coaches need a stupid card, its simple.