absolutely have to, especially our kickers. Almond almost missed that one, sneaking it just inside the upright, as he almost did some extra points this game and others. Those should be automatic, but they are not with this team - yet. It's just percentages and personnel. If we have a stellar kicking game, and have only scored 7 points on their "D" and their defense is owning you, then maybe go with the kick. But when you've put up 55 points on them, you've shown that your offense vs their D is a statistically favorable option. Other examples of statistically dubious decisions were at BSU a few years ago, when our offense was only able to put up 7 points on their D, and this year at Utah, when their D was owning our offense, making going for 2 after a rare TD an emotionally anticipatory, but statistically dubious choice.

One more shot at the end-zone with Taysom rolling out and having the pre-planned option to run, pass, or throw it away would have been my preference. It is very difficult for teams to defend Taysom when he approaches the line of scrimmage, especially with his threat to run, and this can open up TE's and RB's at the last minute as they scrunch up to defend the run. The Arizona QB did it to us all night, and we could likely do it also. As it is, hindsight is an easy validation, and we ended up winning this one on the foot of Almond. That being said, going for it all with 1 minute left vs WVU and 2TO's on 2nd and 2 would not have been my preference - that hindsight was a different outcome. It's all about statistically favorable options.