[lex24]

Agree on all five.  But Shaw doesn’t believe in forcing the issue.  He only will go for two when he has to.  His words, not mine.  So it was in character. And expected.  As was Kelly going for 2.

Shaw made it clear he would prefer to kick the extra point until he can't do so by rule. He will only go for 2 when he has to. Kelly going for 2 was driven significantly (if you take him at his word) because he was running out of bodies. In other words, his ability to play "the long game" was degrading on each series faster than Stanford's was. It can be argued that when a team reaches that point, one "has to" go for 2. I think there is no question that we had momentum. We had just come back from the dead and clearly "believed". I think that if Shaw felt the same way about his team's capabilities, he would do the same. It was "now or never" for UCLA.

 I would have gone for 2. Cause I didn’t see Stanford stopping UCLA . But kicking is a completely defensible decision.  And in the end, Stanford did “stop” UCLA on the one play they absolutely had to.  Shaw is, given the choice, going to take the “safe” route.  I know many don’t like that. (And he takes it too far - 33 yard line punts coming to mind). But it has worked for Shaw.  So I don’t expect that to change. Riverboat Ron he ain’t!!

[lex24]

Agree on all five.  But Shaw doesn’t believe in forcing the issue.  He only will go for two when he has to.  His words, not mine.  So it was in character. And expected.  As was Kelly going for 2.

Shaw made it clear he would prefer to kick the extra point until he can't do so by rule. He will only go for 2 when he has to. Kelly going for 2 was driven significantly (if you take him at his word) because he was running out of bodies. In other words, his ability to play "the long game" was degrading on each series faster than Stanford's was. It can be argued that when a team reaches that point, one "has to" go for 2. I think there is no question that we had momentum. We had just come back from the dead and clearly "believed". I think that if Shaw felt the same way about his team's capabilities, he would do the same. It was "now or never" for UCLA.

 I would have gone for 2. Cause I didn’t see Stanford stopping UCLA . But kicking is a completely defensible decision.  And in the end, Stanford did “stop” UCLA on the one play they absolutely had to.  Shaw is, given the choice, going to take the “safe” route.  I know many don’t like that. (And he takes it too far - 33 yard line punts coming to mind). But it has worked for Shaw.  So I don’t expect that to change. Riverboat Ron he ain’t!!