That's the kind of thing that gets Michigan coaches fired.

Or another 10,000 seats

I agreed with him going for the win. His team was outmatched and it was a miracle they had a chance to win.

I agreed with him going for the win. His team was outmatched and it was a miracle they had a chance to win.

I agree T-Bone, I thought he took his best chance to win(don't agree with the particular play he called). Yes he is at home, but a huge underdog. With a hurt quarterback and a defense that was not going to stop Ohio State's ground game.

I agree T-Bone, I thought he took his best chance to win(don't agree with the particular play he called). Yes he is at home, but a huge underdog. With a hurt quarterback and a defense that was not going to stop Ohio State's ground game.

I used to think the same way but I'm starting to question this logic now.

If you can play them even for 60 minutes why can't you compete with them for 25 yards more in overtime?

Also, bad play call. I don't understand why you wouldn't always call a play with multiple options if the first one isn't available.

I agree T-Bone, I thought he took his best chance to win(don't agree with the particular play he called). Yes he is at home, but a huge underdog. With a hurt quarterback and a defense that was not going to stop Ohio State's ground game.

I didn't think it was a smart call. The previous goal line situations made Michigan's play call predictable.

Michigan wasn't having trouble moving the ball. With the compressed field in overtime Michigan could've sold out to stop the run since they didn't have be worried about the deep ball. Braxton's accuracy troubles are exposed in the short field.

So, if the only way they were going to win the game was probably a 2 point conversion, does it matter if you try at the end of regulation or in overtime?

That's a fair way to look at it too. I'm just starting to doubt the "underdog go for the win" strategy. It seems to mostly fail.