Here's the reality. Sure, BYU had a slim lead. But Stanford had had a decent drive in the 4th and there was a sense that if Stanford got the ball back, their offense had figured some things out and had a chance to get into scoring position and win. Being down by only 2 points, Stanford only needed a FG.

So Crowton took the approach of being aggressive and trying to move the ball and get 1st downs. Maybe even move down the field and score. BYU called a relatively "safe" pass play - unfortunately a young QB held the ball too long and threw it late back across the middle resulting in an interception.

If BYU had simply ran the ball up the middle 3 plays and punted - allowing Stanford to get the ball, march down the field, and win the game - everyone still would've been calling for Crowton's head. There was no guarantee that BYU was going to win by 2. And BYU had -5 rushing yards FOR THE GAME! That's right, negative rushing yards on offense.

Everyone agrees that what Crowton said - a poor explanation in an emotional moment after a loss - was dumb. The question as to whether or not BYU should've run it up the middle three times and punted? Yeah - that's a LOT more difficult to answer.

And I'm betting that - in the moment and if the outcome was unknown - 90%+ of CB would prefer that a coach be aggressive and play for the win instead of playing "not to lose".