What logic? Your choice is like hitting on 17...Most of the time you'll bust.
Mine is based on these simple facts: 1) We were down 7 on the road. 2) It is the end of the first half. 3) We just got a TO and 4) We were on like the 8 yard line...Therefore, you take the points and your momentum into the locker room. The odds were against Dino and he lost...
But it's okay because FSU had more talent. And it doesn't matter that we lost because we played better than last year. Now, to me, that's a rationalization, period. And you won't be able to hide behind it when and if we get better talent. We were good enough to win yesterday.
"Mine is based on these simple facts: 1) We were down 7 on the road. 2) It is the end of the first half. 3) We just got a TO and 4) We were on like the 8 yard line...Therefore, you take the points and your momentum into the locker room."
Saying a handful of unrelated facts and then an erroneous statement that inexplicably begins w/ 'therefore' doesn't mean your position is based on facts.
We were down 7 on the road to a team that's widely regarded as more talented than we are, while playing in what is widely regarded as one of the most hostile environments in the nation. We went into the game as a dog, and most analysts attributed our best chance of winning to FSU locker room issues, and stressed the need to make FSU players doubt themselves early, while taking the FSU fans out of the game.
Hitting a FG (assuming that we would have made it) would have sent FSU into the half on pace to cover the spread, and it would have left us down by at TD (or at least more than a FG). Failing to score would have left us down by a TD (exactly). And scoring a TD would have tied the game.
Additionally, FSU was having a hard time covering Ish and Phillips w/o leaving running lanes open for Dungey. That's evidenced by the facts that Dungey had over 100 rushing yards (5 YPC) and Ish and Phillips each had 12 catches (11.9 and 8.9 YPC respectively). Those are full game stats, but I don't have halftime stats, and honestly, they're indicative of how the first half was going. In fact, Phillips was wide open in the endzone on the prior play.
And lastly, to the extent that you believe momentum matters, we had momentum.
It's significantly easier for me to believe that going into the half tied (and on pace to lose the spread) would have been far more destructive to the 'Nole psyche than w/ a point lead (and on pace to cover the spread). It's also extremely hard to believe that the expected value for going for it on the 5 yard line is less than the expected value for hitting a chip FG. Assuming that we hit chip shots 97% of the time, we would only need to score a TD about 40% of the time to break even. Unless you honestly believe that FSU could stop Ish + Phillips + Dungey over 60% of the time, then you shouldn't advocate for a FG.
Furthermore, given that we were underdogs w/ a significant talent disadvantage, we maximize our chance of winning by increasing the volatility of the game, as playing conservatively increases the likelihood of the expected result happening. Taking risks, however, increases the likelihood of an outlier event happening - either for better or worse. Given a loss is a loss, outlier events have a positive EV.
So in summary, going for it probably had a positive EV from a psychological perspective, which was widely regarded as a key to the game, and it almost definitely had a positive EV from a points perspective, and it also made sense from a mathematical perspective of increasing the game's uncertainty. As such, it maximized our chance of winning, and it was therefore a good idea.
Also, FWIW, if everything played out the same, the extra 3 points would have sent us to overtime, where we would have had a 50% chance to win. So arguably, going for 6-7 was the right call w/ hindsight in the form of knowing that it would be a 3 point game w/ a minute left.
"But it's okay because FSU had more talent. And it doesn't matter that we lost because we played better than last year. Now, to me, that's a rationalization, period. And you won't be able to hide behind it when and if we get better talent. We were good enough to win yesterday."
And this is incoherent rambling. Losing because someone else had more talent isn't OK, and I never said that it was. Losing when you made the right calls and got unlucky is. Pretending like you shouldn't adjust your game plan to talent differences is crazy.
