Decision Science: The cognitive fallacy to avoid is "resulting". This term means that you weigh decision on the basis of results rather than on the soundness of the logic at the point-of-decision.

(1) Both coaches made decisions that backfired in the 9th, but that does not mean they were bad within the context of the situation.
(2) Basically, GH went for broke to get 3 outs. He thought Blake Smith was his firewall, but the firewall failed like Caracci failed.
(3) By the time we went to Cole Gordon - GH's idea that Neff, France, and Smith would be plenty for 3 damn outs -was a proven bad result - but those were our best 3 remaining relievers, they should have been able to get 3 outs.
(4) Let us recall the team we played has been rather successful this year, this was not a Morehead State (10 runs) or a Eastern Kentucky (12 runs) meltdown. This was a heavy-weight fight with an equally motivated opponent.

As far as epic meltdowns, we had plenty of those in 2015 with Butch and bigger meltdowns. By the way, Blake Smith was the losing pitcher against Morehead State and Eastern Kentucky. Not all Smith's fault, but he was also the losing pitcher in Arizona game-2 in 2016.

My verdict is that Smith is good, but not a true firewall. GH should have stayed with France after he got his first guy. But I did not disagree with Neff starting the 9th, he is a senior and a leader for his former team