[More Cowbell]

It is Mike Archer's job, which he is paid good money to do, to devise a defensive game plan. Allowing 28.8 points a game isn't so good. I realize that Florida could possibly have the best offense in the nation, but not putting pressure on Tebow just doesn't make sense to me. I happened to be looking at the flags on the goal post at the time of the 4th down, thinking it wasn't a good decision, but the flags were almost still. Seiber has a good enough leg to make it from 50 yards, let him kick it. It would have turned out the same if he missed it anyway.

I'm not even going to mention the Mike Archer mistake, since Beef already corrected you. But I will say that if you have watched UK football in recent years, you have to recognize that Steve Brown definitely has the defense playing better than in recent years (under Archer). Also, to say the UK defense has allowed 28.8 points per game is not true. The team may be allowing that much (28.75, to be exact), but that stat also includes points scored by the other teams' defense and kick return units. Taking those scores out (2 kick returns, 3 fumble returns, 1 safety) cuts the average allowed by the defense to 24.1 ppg. Also, LSU scored 10 points in overtime, which is set up with the offense already being in position for a field goal without even moving a yard. If you consider their scoring defense in regulation, the average is 22.9 ppg. Not amazing, but not terrible either.

Additionally, I will say again that the 4th down decision to go for it was the right call. Check Seiber's history, I can't remember him making hardly any kicks from that distance for UK in the past. I didn't think the first kick had much of a chance to go in, but we were like 4th and 25 at the time, which would've been a hard conversion to pull off. On the other hand, the play we're talking about was just 4th and 9, which is a much easier conversion to make. And again, the play call was excellent, we had a wide-open Keenan Burton in the end zone, Woodson just missed him. You mention "it would've turned out the same if he missed it anyway", but that assumes that the conversion had no chance of succeeding, which is not true. It is correct that the drive would've ended up without points whether we didn't convert the 4th down or if Seiber missed the kick. However, considering the distance of the kick versus gaining the 9 yards needed, I feel the conversion had a much higher chance of success, and was thus the right call.