Both BrianGoBlog and BWchriS commented about Michigan's decision to kick the PAT rather than go for 2 when they scored what turned out to be their final touchdown.
MGoBlog thinks M made the wrong decision and BWS disagrees.
I tend to agree that kicking the PAT was correct.
Time left: Michigan scored with 7:53 remaining, making the score 24-15. There had been 18 possessions to that point. Meaning the average possession to that point had been less than 3 minutes. M had all 3 timeouts (I think M used their first timeout on Iowa's next punt).
Keeping it at 2 possessions instead of 3: A missed 2 point conversion means M needs to score 2 times in under 8 minutes, with Iowa running clock - that's not enough time to do so without an onside kick. I know a missed 2 point conversion with no time left means you lose - I get it, but I'd rather start with a more doable option stop and score - rather than stop - score - get onside kick - score.
What if Iowa scores? 27-15 - takes a last second field goal to put us in OT out of the equation. Or forces M to go for a TD on a 4th and long goal rather than take a FG now and scramble for the tying TD. 31-15 - means M needs 2 TDs and 2 2-point conversions... 27-16 and 31-16 are much better options.
Momentum and emotion: A failed 2 point conversion would have to demoralize the team - knowing they scored but still need to score 2 more times...
BWS wanted to something like the Advance NFL stats to show:
WP(extra point) vs. WP(2-pt make)*.4 + WP(2-pt miss)*.6
But isn't really able to pull it off. Based on the comments I've seen on his post and in mgoblog - I am definitely in the minority, but that doesn't change my opinion that M made the right choice.