HookedonGriz said:
Last night on the coaches show, Stitt talked about passing up on those field goals. His biggest point was that the Griz were down by 7 at the time and were down to their third string quarterback and he didn't know how many other opportunities they would have to try and tie the game. He said if they were down 6 points that's a different story because then another field goal ties it.
He went on to say that he passed on the second field goal due to the fact they missed out on converting that previous fourth-down. He felt at that point since he missed out on that opportunity earlier he had to make up for it and go after a touchdown.
He finished by saying that he makes decisions to try and win football games. That his decisions are trying to put his team in the best position to win.
I can see both sides of this. If he converts and they score a touchdown we are all applauding his gutsy call. If he sends the kicker out there and the kicker misses it then we are mad he didn't go for the 2 yards. If he makes a FG they are still down 4 and still need to score a TD at that point to win the game. His explanation made a lot of sense to me.
Well, Stitt showed us in Game one that this explanation is bogus. In the NDSU game, in the 4th quarter, with less time on the clock, with a much better opposing team on the field, he went for the FG instead of going on fourth down for the first down. That gave him a better chance of winning for the team????
Well, now we are in the Third quarter, down by less than in the NDSU game, against a lesser opponent, with the defense stepping up and from a much closer distance and you try to justify your actions by saying it was for the team???? That doesn't wash by his own previous decisions. We still come to the question, why not go for the FG on both drives in the third quarter. It was definitely ego and arrogance without regard for the team. Actions do speak louder than words.