Double Extra Point
Wow, nice job Jeffie. When so many people are yelling about this from a emotional point of view, it is nice to see some real analysis.
I thought Dane Todd's other quote on this play was also insightful:
"They are very confident in their return game and they go safe block. And so you start getting up toward midfield and they start going safe, especially with our record of running trick plays. So we knew we had to do it somewhere deep in our own end, and it’s a gamble and we ended up losing on that deal."
There is much more that goes into these decisions than most people realize. Unfortunately, a lot of this gets discounted when you're looking back with 20/20 hindsight after a painful loss.
I mean, who would have guessed that we wouldn't score a point in the second half?
Thanks for your effort and keep it up!
Thanks Jason. I figured that was as close as we were going to get as far as trying to get inside Callahan's head as he made the call.
How much would you pay to wear a headset during the game and hear what they're really saying? 
Interesting analysis, though it's a little superficial. It doesn't include any analysis of context of the situation. The best example is Prince's fake. If the fake doesn't work, Tejas gets the short field and the anticipated blowout is well underway. Of course, most folks expected Tejas to win easily, so in this case, the downside is minimized. So he throws out all the stops since he figures he has nothing to lose. So what happens? The play works, and K-State gets a lot of confidence and changes the whole dynamic of the game.
Let's switch to the Cotton Bowl. Nebraska is dominating the action on both sides of the ball, though the score is tied due to bad bounce of the ball. The game theory suggests a high probability of success. However, it doesn't take into consideration the context of the situation. The failure of the play keeps Auburn in the game and gives them confidence at halftime.
Don't get me wrong. This is an interesting theory; I just think it's incomplete. I don't know if there is a way to factor in inertia or momentum into these equations to more accurately model the situation. As it is, it's a little incomplete.
Husker Mike,
I agree to some degree. However, the probability model would argue that it is the concept of momentum that is actually artificial. None of us can point to momentum, nor do we seem to be able to quantify or measure it. A coach cannot gameplan for momentum, as it is nothing more than a naturally occurring artifact of the on-field performances.
Overall, the probability model suggests that coaches should at least consider acting independently of these immeasurable factors. We all now have the benefit of knowing the outcome of that playcall, and certainly no one would argue it didn't swing things Auburn's way. If you choose to bring momentum into the equation, however, you have to consider the equally devastating effect a successful punt fake would have had on Auburn.'s defense who had finally stopped our "O".
Callahan weighed his options and made his choice in less than a minute while facing a highly stressful environment. Dr. Tom made a similar high risk decision to go for two in the '84 Orange Bowl. The probability model would suggest that this too was a "smart" decision despite the fact that it cost those players a national title.
You're right though that the model is indeed incomplete in that it fails to account for second guessing...and heartbreak.
Thanks for the great analysis. Football, like any tradition, gets pretty hidebound, but the "go for it more on 4th down" idea, like you said, is getting more and more credibility.
And there's the old saying "When people say its not about the money...its about the money."
We can modify that a bit. "When people say its not about whether the play was successful...."
Great read Jeffie...I don't question the call, but like yourself, I question the personnel. I'd see Grix or Tierre running that a lot sooner than Shanle myself, but what do I know. I question more the lack of a returner on the final punt of the game...we easily lost 10 seconds of clock and 15 yards of field there, when we haven't blocked a punt all year (at least not that I recall.) We could've set up a FG rather than the pitiful Hail mary attempt that fell at about the 20. But anyway, life goes on.
Good postgame reading. If you'd have told me in August that we'd win 9 games, win the North, sweep all the North teams (for the first time since 1999) and play in a January bowl...I'd have said that this would satisfy my expectations. Good season, let's hope the Huskers can keep up with their steady progress in '07!
I've been on a personal holiday season moratorium on the internet, so am trying to catch up now. You've got some good stuff as usual.
Happy '07!
Thanks DT. I hated having no return man on the punt as well. I'm trying my best to temper my expectations for 2007, but I'm excited nonetheless. Good to see around and commenting again.
Commenting by HaloScan
