Rule of Tree Rewind: Decompressing and Second-Guessing After Stanford-USC
I much prefer the overtime format in college football to the sudden death format used during the NFL's regular season, except perhaps for the prolonged period of stress it can cause. It's a good thing Terrence Stephens popped the ball loose from Curtis McNeal and AJ Tarpley pounced on it in the end zone when they did, because I'm not sure I could've stomached much more.
The most stressful moment of the game for me came after USC scored on its first possession in overtime to make the score 41-40. The Trojans had won the coin flip and, as most teams do, elected to play defense first. That way they knew exactly what they needed to do to either win the game or send it to a second overtime. Jeremy Stewart scored on a 1-yard touchdown run for Stanford and it didn't take long for USC to answer. Matt Barkley threw a 15-yard touchdown to Robert Woods and the Trojans were an extra point away from prolonging an instant classic. They were also a 2-point conversion away from pulling off the upset, dashing Stanford's BCS national championship hopes, and exacting revenge for the improbable events that unfolded on the same field four years earlier.
I breathed a huge sigh of relief when I saw USC's placekicker run onto the field to attempt the extra point. It would've been an extremely gutsy -- and some might argue stupid -- call to go for the 2-point conversion in that situation, but if anyone were going to make that call, it would be Lane Kiffin.
On the one hand, Stanford's goal line defense has been pretty stingy this season and Kiffin would've been skewered if the decision backfired. On the other hand, this was USC's bowl game, but it also wasn't. It was a regular season game and a chance to play spoiler at home. The Trojans' postseason hopes weren't in jeopardy Saturday because the NCAA had already told them they don't have any postseason hopes. What, really, did Kiffin and the Trojans have to lose by going for two? It's silly to second-guess the decision now, but was putting the ball back in Andrew Luck's hands a better option? The 110 Report wondered the same thing.
I have faith in our defense, but I can hardly imagine how stressful it would have been to watch USC keep its offense on the field for a 2-point conversion to win the game, knowing that there was absolutely nothing Luck and the Stanford offense could do to respond.
What was the most stressful moment of Saturday's win for you? If you were Lane Kiffin (there's a scary thought for Halloween) would you have considered going for two in the first overtime?
6 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Related
It didn’t cross my mind at the time that Stanford might consider going for two at the end of the second OT. That also would’ve been insane to watch. USC going for it in the 1st OT somehow seems like a more defensible decision.
by Scott Allen on Oct 31, 2025 11:56 AM PDT reply actions
That possibility
hadn’t crossed my mind, and I’m glad it didn’t. What transpired was sufficiently nerve-wracking, thank you.
Anyway, not sure it would’ve made sense for SC to go for 2, though, given that the shortened field would’ve somewhat mitigated the Stanford secondary’s vulnerability, and the run defense was (mostly) better than the pass defense.
by Cardinal&Orange; on Oct 31, 2025 1:40 PM PDT reply actions
Stanford should have gone for two at the end of 2OT
It worked out favorably to play it straight, but I think that going for two would have been the higher percentage play than waiting for 3OT. After scoring the TD in 2OT, we had one play to win the game. Going to 3OT, we were put in a position where we had to again not turn the ball over, score a TD, and then score a 2pt conversion. A lot more could have gone wrong on the six or so plays that would have taken than on the one play for all the marbles.
by farmerboy99 on Oct 31, 2025 2:35 PM PDT reply actions
Most nervewracking moments for me were from the time USC crossed midfield on their final drive or regulation until the refs declared regulation over after the review.
long live the jd.
by jksnake99 on Oct 31, 2025 6:20 PM PDT reply actions
Oh man
It seemed like that official’s review took forever!
by Scott Allen on Oct 31, 2025 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Tense moments
In a game full of tense moments, one of the toughest for me to stomach came at the end of the second overtime when I was waiting for Whitaker to kick the extra point. He hadn’t missed any kicks in the game, but he hadn’t looked strong on all of those kicks, and there would not have been any do-over had he missed.
That said, it never occurred to me that Stanford would or should go for two points at any moment in the game up until third overtime.
One note about Whitaker and the second overtime PAT. The situation reminded me of the end of the Stanford game at Northwestern at the start of the 1994 season, where Eric Abrams’ miss of a 23-yard chip shot with just seconds remaining allowed Northwestern to clinch a devastating 41-41 tie. If memory serves, Bill Walsh summoned Abrams to kick on third down, but once the play was over, Stanford by rule could not regain the ball. Obviously the Cardinal would have been finished this past Saturday had Whitaker whiffed!
by Matthew M. on Nov 1, 2025 10:37 AM PDT reply actions

by Scott Allen on 


