It just occurred to me..

[BermudaSooner]

Why didn't Boise go for 2 at the end of regulation?

[sooner518]

no idea. I really thought they would at the time and was really relieved that they didnt

[Reincarnate]

Why didn't Boise go for 2 at the end of regulation?
Because AD walked in on the first OT play, their defense was gassed and the longer the game went.........the odds of their winning went down.

I do see a flaw in OT regulations tho, by the second team with the ball going for 2, it keeps the other team from the opportunity to match it. 2 pt conversions should be required in the first OT possessions.

[Hamhock]

Because AD walked in on the first OT play, their defense was gassed and the longer the game went.........the odds of their winning went down.

I do see a flaw in OT regulations tho, by the second team with the ball going for 2, it keeps the other team from the opportunity to match it. 2 pt conversions should be required in the first OT possessions.


reg-u-la-tion

[Sooner Among The Pack]

I also was very relieved that Boise didn't go for two at the end of regulation because I was almost sure they were going to. Odds are, they would have run "that play" just like they did in OT.

My guess is Boise was hoping to win the toss and...that's exactly what happenned.

[sanantoniosooner]

You have a little more time to assess the situation after regulation ends.

And it was obvious they wouldn't win by trading scores at that point.

[Texas Golfer]

With the one-play TD from AD in the first OT, Petersen knew his defense couldn't stop us anymore and they'd lose the longer the game played out.

[jacru]

It was just closer to midnight for Cinderella in OT. :)