Kentucky kicking the extra point

[Blue_Water]

In Kentucky's 40-34 win over Louisville, Kentucky kicked the extra point with 28 seconds left instead of going for two to try and go up by seven points. Bill Curry, calling the game on ESPN Classic, is rightfully questioning the decision as they are lining up to kick the extra point.

In the six articles on the game that I saw online from the Lexington Herald Leader, I didn't see a single mention of this decision. Obviously it was a huge win for Kentucky and the newspaper coverage was correctly focused on that story, but that was a pretty major oversight by the Kentucky coaching staff. Seems like someone should have questioned Rich Brooks about his decision. Not sure how he could have defended it.

EDIT: Did see a second-day story where someone talked to Brooks about the decision. Brooks admitted he made a mistake.

 

[Football_Bat]

Lighten up Blue. Twenty-eight seconds is too early to start chasing points. :D

 

[Mmac]

That was a complete and total brain fart by Brooks. He was so busy celebrating the go ahead touchdown he forgot to think. He'd have been crucified for it if Louisville had scored a winning TD.

 

[Left_Coast]

Meanwhile, in the UCF-Texas game, Mack Brown, up 11, went for two instead of kicking, which would have forced UCF to score two touchdowns. Instead, it just needed a TD with a two-point conversion and a field goal. It got the eight points, but didn't get the onside kick down three. Big oversight there.

 

[Bob Slydell]

If Kentucky had lost the game because of that, I'm sure it would have been mentioned. But on that tight deadline with very little time for quotes, the huge win was the main thing.

They at least followed it up.

 

[micropolitan guy]

But if Kentucky goes for two and misses, it is still ahead five points and Louisville wins outright with a TD. At least up six it has to kick the extra point.

I wonder sometimes, when up 4 or 5 points and little time left, teams just don't take a knee on the PAT. I've seen PAT's blocked and returned for two points, or turnovers on two-point conversion plays, that would enable the trailing team to pull within two or three points and win/tie with a field goal.

 

[FishHack76]

Yeah, but how often does that happen?

 

[JC]

But if Kentucky goes for two and misses, it is still ahead five points and Louisville wins outright with a TD. At least up six it has to kick the extra point.

I wonder sometimes, when up 4 or 5 points and little time left, teams just don't take a knee on the PAT. I've seen PAT's blocked and returned for two points, or turnovers on two-point conversion plays, that would enable the trailing team to pull within two or three points and win/tie with a field goal.

What a ridiculous way of rationalizing a mistake.
They should have gone for 2, end of story.

 

[micropolitan guy]

What a ridiculous way of rationalizing a mistake.

Not rationalizing anything. Just presenting a reasonable alternative possibility. Teams make the 2-point conversion about 35-40 percent of the time. If they fail, and if Louisville somehow scores, the Cardinals still have to kick the PAT to win since Kentucky kicked the PAT.

Yeah, but how often does that happen?

Hardly ever. But why not take a knee and just eliminate the possibility completely?

 

[Walter_Sobchak]

Micro, when I first saw this, I had the same rationale as you. But then, what has a greater likelihood of happening? Converting a two-point attempt, or blocking an extra point? How often do you see missed PATs?

 

[Twoback]

If Kentucky had lost the game because of that, I'm sure it would have been mentioned. But on that tight deadline with very little time for quotes, the huge win was the main thing.

They at least followed it up.

You want to be the writer who asks that question after Kentucky's biggest football victory in maybe 10 years? The writer who asks that question in that situation deserves to be reamed out by the coach who is asked and rejected by his audience.
It's not always about being the smartest guy in the room. It's about telling the story of the game. When Louisville failed to score, that point became inconsequential.

 

[micropolitan guy]

How often do you see missed PATs?

Very rarely. But as I said, in certain situations, why not just eliminate the possibility altogether when you have absolutely nothing to gain by kicking the PAT, such as when you're up four points with less than a minute to play?

 

[Jake_Taylor]

If Kentucky had lost the game because of that, I'm sure it would have been mentioned. But on that tight deadline with very little time for quotes, the huge win was the main thing.

They at least followed it up.

You want to be the writer who asks that question after Kentucky's biggest football victory in maybe 10 years? The writer who asks that question in that situation deserves to be reamed out by the coach who is asked and rejected by his audience.
It's not always about being the smartest guy in the room. It's about telling the story of the game. When Louisville failed to score, that point became inconsequential.

Exactly. Now it's probably a good question to ask on the Sunday teleconference or Monday. I'm sure all the Kentucky papers are going to have more to say on that game as the week goes on.

 

[Starman]

I believe the overall conversion rate in Division I for PAT kicks is about 95 percent.

Of the 5 percent failures, almost all are blocks -- my bet is the number of missed PATs is less than one percent.

Returning the blocked kick for a defensive conversion has to be astronomically rare -- I can never remember seeing one myself, and they've had the rule for 10 years now, and I've watched probably 20 college games per season. I have seen a couple on botched 2-point conversion attempts, but never on a blocked kick.

 

[Blue_Water]

You want to be the writer who asks that question after Kentucky's biggest football victory in maybe 10 years? The writer who asks that question in that situation deserves to be reamed out by the coach who is asked and rejected by his audience.
It's not always about being the smartest guy in the room. It's about telling the story of the game. When Louisville failed to score, that point became inconsequential.

Not a question I'd be thrilled to ask, but in my mind a decision that deserves questioning. If I'm writing one game story, that's obviously not the big story. But if my paper has six stories going in about the win, I might want to hear what the coach had to say about that. If Louisville does score, you just blew the biggest win in the last 10 years because you made a decision that's basically impossible to defend.

 

[Ace]

How often do you see missed PATs?

Very rarely. But as I said, in certain situations, why not just eliminate the possibility altogether when you have absolutely nothing to gain by kicking the PAT, such as when you're up four points with less than a minute to play?

Theoretically, if you're up by four and take a knee and the opposing team scores a touchdown on the kickoff (and kicks the extra point), then you can tie with a field goal.

If you had kicked the PAT, you could win with a field goal.

 

[deskslave]

 

[micropolitan guy]

Theoretically, if you're up by four and take a knee and the opposing team scores a touchdown on the kickoff (and kicks the extra point), then you can tie with a field goal.

If you had kicked the PAT, you could win with a field goal.

That is true also.

 

[Elliotte Friedman]

I think the question is a fair one, but I'd ask it later in the week -- not in the immediate aftermath of such a big win.

Had it cost Kentucky a victory, then you go with it right away.

 

[Starman]

This, of course, is the Bizarro World playcall and then the perfect storm of worst even remotely theoretically possible outcome of the play. A flat pass/screen pass is the only possible play you could call which would have even an infinitesmal chance of resulting in defeat.

If you are up by 4-5, there is some logic in going for 2, but none whatsoever in throwing a pass. In such a situation, your only play is a HANDOFF (not a toss, not a pitch) to a running back, or probably better still, a QB keeper.

If you score, woohoo, you're up by 6-7 and at least a little safer if they pull off a miracle touchdown. If you don't score, you're still up by 4-5 and a FG can't beat you.

If you have some insane psychotic compulsion to pass, throw the ball over the middle, deep to the end of the end zone. If they pick it off there, they have to run through all 11 players on your team to bring it back for the TD. If they pick off the flat pass, they have open sailing to the end zone.