"Actually the downside to punting was just as bad as the downside to going for it given that it could have been blocked or run back, but it really doesn't much matter because the upside of going for it was so much greater than the upside to punting. IF YOU GO FOR IT AND MAKE IT YOU WIN THE GAME. That is way better than the 20 or so yards you potentially gain from punting. The fact that Texas knifed through the USC defense like it was warm butter shows that Carroll was absolutely correct about not wanting to give Texas the ball back. Texas was not even in a true hurry-up. they had more than enough time to march the length of the field. This is not even a close call. I can't beleive the post-hoc result oriented analysis I'm seeing here."

A punt block or run back is a freak play you can live with. What is the most likely occurence from punting in that situation? Texas gets the ball at their 20 or less with about 2 minutes to play and two timeouts. Give me a five point lead and that situation and I'll win nine out of ten times.

Yes, the upside of going for it was better than the upside of punting but it's silly just to look at the upside especially considering the 3rd down play immediately prior, where White fumbled the ball and USC luckily recovered but loss a yard. Forget about that one? That made it 4th and 2 and, even after a UT timeout, they ran the EXACT same play.

Of course Texas wasn't in true hurry up. They didn't have to be because they were on their own 45 and had two timeouts. Punt the ball and you put them on their 20 wor less with the two timeouts. Since when is field position not important in football? Also, to describe Texas's last drive as knifing thourugh USC like warm butter is melodramatic. It was a vey efficent but plodding drive. Unless having to convert a 4th and 5 on your opponents 8 is now considered easy.

"Texas already had 2 80-yard TD drives in the game. The first one took 1:53, the second took 2:02. All without using any timeouts, of which Texas had 2 going into the final drive."

Yes, in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. Notice something about those earlier drives versus the last one? Check the plays. It took them 7 plays to go 80 yards earlier in the game and it took them 10 plays and two timeouts to go 55 yards on the last drive. That's why the advantage in those situations is heavily in the defense's favor. Last two minute touchdown drives are rare things.

Overall, I don't mind risk taking. When Carroll had made the decision earlier in the game to go for it, I was okay with it. He still called a bad play but it was earlier in the game and they were on UT's 18.

I meant to say, "80+ yard last two minute touchdown drives are rare things."

Good point and I mostly agree although I wouldn't have went for it in that situation. The 3rd down fumble was important though because they lost a yard on the play. Bad play call aside, White only missed it by maybe a foot on 4th down.

Huh? Where are you getting your numbers from? C'mon now, let's not make stuff up. :-) 60% conversion rate on 4th and 2!? We're all having fun here but let's not pretend there's no difference between an offense from starting from their 45 versus their 20.

How is more women than men going to and graduating from college a problem? If it is a problem, I think the issue is that certain folks (Tierney and co) are insisting that it's a problem for college educated women because they are supposedly less like to marry down. If you really care about men why is focus on who women are likely to date/marry? Why aren't they suggesting more ways to get men going to college rather than berating college educated women about their dating/marrying choices? Strange.

Yeah, imo, the play call was at least as bad as going for it. Especially since USC fumbled and lost a yard on the very same play on 3rd down. UT even called a timeout so Carroll had even more time to think about it. I guess they "froze" the coach. Oh well...

...Howard more concerned about his daughter being nude in front of strangers or how others might use it against him? If it's just a nudity thing, considering all the nude women he's had on his show, he's being a bit of a "fatherly" hypocrite. If he has concerns about her saftey because of the crazies out there, that's another matter.

While USC's special teams aren't good (although they were good yesterday), it's much more reasonable to assume they would get one off rather than have it blocked. Texas does block punts well but let's not turn that into a guaranteed block or big return. Those are still freak plays. After all, USC would've been punting from midfield. They didn't need a great punt, they only need to get one off.

I still say the 4th down play call was as bad as the decision. Everybody knew it was coming and you just muffed it on the previous play.

"Now that there is some evidence that we have replaced it with a structural bias against males (even if unintentional), we have an obligation to examine and correct it. I think that's the gist of the argument."

There a structural bias against men keeping them from going to college or getting better educated? If there is such a bias, then I would agree, but, I would really need to see some concrete evidence.