[teejers1]

76LSJUMB, please answer this one question in your defense of Shaw:

If kicking the FG from 34 yards out was "the right call," then why did Stanford even bother to run a "real play" on second and 6 (Taylor ran for 2 yards IIRC)?  Is there some magical dividing line between 36 yards (too far) and 34 yards (good enough)?  Stated differently, if Shaw was so worried about the risk of fumble, or a false start, or whatever on third down, then why didn't he have have AL take the second down snap and just center the ball, and then let the clock tick tick tick for the 36 yarder?

C'mon now. 

The way events unfolded it strikes me that Shaw clammed up for some inexplicable reason on third down.  I have termed this elsewhere as a "reactionary" decision, as opposed to a "conservative" one (and that may be generous).  The "conservative" approach would have been to run the ball on third down and see if you get a first down.  If so, take a TO and run the ball again.  Repeat until you get into the end zone or as close as you can before burning your last TO and trying the game winner as time expires.

The more gutsy (and admittedly riskier) approach would have been to let Luck try and throw the ball once (or more) for a first down/TD before trying the FG.

I would have been okay with either approach (really would have liked a bootleg by Luck on third down, giving him option to run/pass for first down or TD).

What I don't understand - and never will - was the "do nothing" approach.  As I've stated ad nauseum, that did not give Stanford the best chance to win.  I will forever believe that, and I think those defending Shaw are doing so based more on emotion (he's our coach) than on logic.

Hey, I like Shaw, too.  Really.  But that doesn't mean he should be insulated from criticism when he makes bad decisions.  And that end-game was misplayed by Shaw, even if you think being "conservative" was the right call. 

[teejers1]

76LSJUMB, please answer this one question in your defense of Shaw:

If kicking the FG from 34 yards out was "the right call," then why did Stanford even bother to run a "real play" on second and 6 (Taylor ran for 2 yards IIRC)?  Is there some magical dividing line between 36 yards (too far) and 34 yards (good enough)?  Stated differently, if Shaw was so worried about the risk of fumble, or a false start, or whatever on third down, then why didn't he have have AL take the second down snap and just center the ball, and then let the clock tick tick tick for the 36 yarder?

C'mon now. 

The way events unfolded it strikes me that Shaw clammed up for some inexplicable reason on third down.  I have termed this elsewhere as a "reactionary" decision, as opposed to a "conservative" one (and that may be generous).  The "conservative" approach would have been to run the ball on third down and see if you get a first down.  If so, take a TO and run the ball again.  Repeat until you get into the end zone or as close as you can before burning your last TO and trying the game winner as time expires.

The more gutsy (and admittedly riskier) approach would have been to let Luck try and throw the ball once (or more) for a first down/TD before trying the FG.

I would have been okay with either approach (really would have liked a bootleg by Luck on third down, giving him option to run/pass for first down or TD).

What I don't understand - and never will - was the "do nothing" approach.  As I've stated ad nauseum, that did not give Stanford the best chance to win.  I will forever believe that, and I think those defending Shaw are doing so based more on emotion (he's our coach) than on logic.

Hey, I like Shaw, too.  Really.  But that doesn't mean he should be insulated from criticism when he makes bad decisions.  And that end-game was misplayed by Shaw, even if you think being "conservative" was the right call.