Going for 2 costs us Guyton

[nhcowboyfan]

It's terrible strategy and stupid. You end up chasing that 2 points you don't make and it compounds the error.

Analytics are flat out wrong on this. You make sure you don't lose first, then you go for the win.

I have no doubt that in the coming years this analytics fad will be shown to have been stupid. It doesn't see the forest for the trees nor does it take into account momentum or the unique situations.

As far as I am concerned, the advocates of analytics can shove this nonsense up where the sun doesn't shine. I wonder if analytics also suggested that Bowles go for it on 4th down and goal on the 1 when a FG there was the far superior call because it would have made it a three-possession game and essentially shut the door on any hope the Cowboys had of winning. Lucky for the Bucs, our HC is as bad as theirs.

 

[Captain43Crash]

https://www.dallascowboys.com/news/...-continue-injury-roundup-and-more-from-week-5

Bowles and Tampa Bay loved that you went for 2 also. They had you confused all game. You played right into their hands going for 2.

Shottenheimer is a moron if this is his “philosophy” for every game.
In this particular game, against this particular defense, it was moronic to go for 2.
Question to Shottenheimer.
Did you make the 2 point conversion vs a defense that had you and Dak confused most of the game?

 

[EPL0c0]

Slightly-Off Topic: Broderick Jones look OK in there in relief?

I remember focusing on a couple of plays where he did OK

one play iirc he started double-team with Smith on one guy, then released and hit another guy to keep Dak clean.

I guess we'll see

 

[LouBrown]

Noooooooo. U need two TD for sure. Going for two is riskier than a PAT. So, with the first TD, if u kick it, then if you score the next time, u STILL have the chance to go for two and win, OR, u can kick a field goal and go to OT…..two options. What if their QB got injured on their position? We stop them and then drive for that second TD and ALL the momentum is in our favor…..so kick it and go into OT with a humming offense while their O fell apart….its an option. Again, u can still just go to 2 at the very end, the SECOND touchdown.

If you go for 2 the first TD, the risker choice….and you don’t make it, then u painted yourself into a corner…,now u MUST make the 2 just to freakin tie the game! U have no second option. Why would u take the risker play the first time when u can be safe and more secure and STILL have the same opportunity to win the game with a 2pt conversion with the second touchdown? Why not give yourself options at the end and see how the last 5 min goes? Anything can happen…as I said their QB could go out the next time they have the ball or something. This was a dumb choice by Schotty, no reason to do the risky play on the first TD and possibly sabotage the second td when u can still do the 2 on the second td….none.

Yea but if you're 50% on 2-point conversions you're going to get one of them so you might as well try get the first.

I know what you're saying but the risk is that you have to get two stops instead of one to actually win the game if you just take the XPs. By kicking, you're voluntarily giving the opponent another possession.

You don't go for 2 the second time because then you're basically just letting the game come to a coin flip after the second TD.

 

[TheMightyVanHalen]

well, sometimes you got to lose to win.....dak 101

Says the resident troll who's obsessed with Dak. Everyone of your posts is about Dak even when the thread isn't about Dak. We get it lady; you lust for him but you're too ugly to get Dak look your way.

 

[LouBrown]

Slightly-Off Topic: Broderick Jones look OK in there in relief?

I remember focusing on a couple of plays where he did OK

one play iirc he started double-team with Smith on one guy, then released and hit another guy to keep Dak clean.

I guess we'll see

He looked mostly fine but it looked like he got pushed into the pocket. He's not as physically strong as I kind of would think.

 

[JustChip]

Actually. It is totally relevant because it tells you, historically, what the better call is. What more often leads to a win.

So situational coaching would lead you to a different decision?

Nice hindsight. Go take a few statistics courses and maybe you will better understand.

So, tell me this. The actuarial life expectancy of a male born to today in the US is something like 76.4 years. That's based on a very large sample size of past male births. Does that mean every male born today will live to be 76.4 years old? Of course not. The individual circumstances determine how long one lives.

A male born today that is diagnosed with end-stage renal cancer on his 65th birthday does not still have the same 76.4 year life expectancy at that moment in time. The original assumptions at birth have changed for this specific individual. Not for the entire population, but for this specific individual at that moment in time.

Analytics can be useful, but the coach has to be able to "read the room" if you will and make a reasonably educated decision what is the correct course of action based on what has transpired in a game up to that point.

 

[MajesticRey]

That was the safe way, but when you are behind and your QB is choking up a storm, you have to gamble because you're afraid he can't beat the other team.

If you’re not trusting the QB, why not run over pass then?

 

[JustChip]

As far as I am concerned, the advocates of analytics can shove this nonsense up where the sun doesn't shine. I wonder if analytics also suggested that Bowles go for it on 4th down and goal on the 1 when a FG there was the far superior call because it would have made it a three-possession game and essentially shut the door on any hope the Cowboys had of winning. Lucky for the Bucs, our HC is as bad as theirs.

I was at the game and telling my grandson at that moment I hoped Bowles went for it. The only way Dallas had a chance was them going for it and not getting it. We were prepared to leave had he kicked the field goal.

In general, the rationale of going for it is that, even if you don't get it, you're making the opposing team drive 99 yards which is not likely. And, if they go 3 and out and punt, you're getting the ball back in very good field position. There's merit to that earlier in the game but at that point where time is of the essence, it's more important to go up 3 scores.

 

[Creeper]

At first I was against the decision but after thinking it over I think going for 2 was not a bad idea. I am usually a "get the tie, then go for the win" person but in this case I have no problem going for two. If you make it another TD wins the game. If you don't you can still go for 2 and tie. It is an aggressive play and I won't be a hypocrite. I like being aggressive especially at home. As it turned out, if Dak makes the throw the conversion would have been good. Dak did not have one of his better games last night, but I could say that about every Cowboys player.

 

[Captain-Crash]

If you’re not trusting the QB, why not run over pass then?

dak doesn't get stats letting the RB run. Shatty doesn't want to hurt his feelings or confidence anymore.

 

[Creeper]

Initial X-rays taken were seen as positive news but further tests will be taken to determine how long he's out.

Isn't it just a matter of time with Guyton? He is injured all the time. It appears the Cowboys are snakebit with injuries this year again.

 

[nhcowboyfan]

I was at the game and telling my grandson at that moment I hoped Bowles went for it. The only way Dallas had a chance was them going for it and not getting it. We were prepared to leave had he kicked the field goal.

In general, the rationale of going for it is that, even if you don't get it, you're making the opposing team drive 99 yards which is not likely. And, if they go 3 and out and punt, you're getting the ball back in very good field position. There's merit to that earlier in the game but at that point where time is of the essence, it's more important to go up 3 scores.

Even the most casual fan knows you take the FG in that situation with just over 8 minutes to go in the game, because it's almost improbable that a team is going to score three times in that time span. Bowles had to have been breathing a sigh of relief when they got that last INT because he could have lost them the game. I'm sure that even Bucs fans - although happy with the win - are calling out their HC on this decision.

 

[Creeper]

I believe in momentum in sports and creating stress for your opponent. Don't take unnecessary risks. The Cowboys were rolling, they had all the momentum, the crowd was into it, and Tampa was shook. By taking the risk to go for 2 and not converting, it swung some of the momentum back to Tampa's side. You could even sense it in the crowd because they were confused and it was like a buzzkill.

Then that allowed Tampa to have a little more confidence on their final drive to seal the game. Less pressure and stress when you know your opponent has to get a stop, get the ball back, score a TD, AND convert a 2-point conversion just to tie

Except the Cowboys came right back down the field after holding Tampa Bay and getting the ball back. It was the tipped/drop by Ferguson that ended the game. Had they made the 2 point conversion and gotten that second TD, they would have won the game. Otherwise it goes into overtime and Bucky Irving probably runs for another 75 yards. to win it.

 

[Captain-Crash]

Says the resident troll who's obsessed with Dak. Everyone of your posts is about Dak even when the thread isn't about Dak. We get it lady; you lust for him but you're too ugly to get Dak look your way.

I wish I were slow and a touch tarded, like some of you guys. You guys think Jerry will find 53 guys to carry him. lmao.. You guys make Jerry happy. Hey it's only year 11. *chuckles*

 

[TheMightyVanHalen]

I wish I were slow and a touch tarded, like some of you guys. You guys think Jerry will find 53 guys to carry him. lmao.. You guys make Jerry happy. Hey it's only year 11. *chuckles*

So you make light of mentally handicapped people and you troll here, both offenses but since this site caters to losers like you, I'm not surprised you're allowed to do what you do.

So it's Jerry that you're in love with and not Dak, or it is both of them you're in love with? Lady, maybe if you weren't such a loser one of them would look your way. I'm sure you look just like Jerry but a female version of him.

 

[Captain-Crash]

So you make light of mentally handicapped people and you troll here, both offenses but since this site caters to losers like you, I'm not surprised you're allowed to do what you do.

So it's Jerry that you're in love with and not Dak, or it is both of them you're in love with? Lady, maybe if you weren't such a loser one of them would look your way. I'm sure you look just like Jerry but a female version of him.

Sorry, you are one of those slow learners. I don't know what to say.

 

[Reverend Conehead]

Yeah, going for two was just plain stupid. If we missed, we would need 8 points to tie instead of just 7. It locks you into having to go for 2 next time. We should have just kicked the extra point, and then we would be down by 7. Then, if you get the next TD that's needed, you decide at that point if you want to kick the point and try to win in overtime or if you want to go for the win right then.

 

[pansophy]

Why not kick the extra point first and then, IF you scored a second TD, decide if you want to go for 2?

Going for 2 and failing, IMO, is a huge momentum swing cause it puts unnecessary pressure on your team to play perfect going forward.

I'm just telling you the probabilities. If you go for 2 on the second TD and you miss you lose the game. So you can only win or lose. If you go for 2 on the first TD and miss, you can still tie because you get a second try at the 2 point conversion. that's basically the difference.

 

[Kevinicus]

It's terrible strategy and stupid. You end up chasing that 2 points you don't make and it compounds the error.

Analytics are flat out wrong on this. You make sure you don't lose first, then you go for the win.

I have no doubt that in the coming years this analytics fad will be shown to have been stupid. It doesn't see the forest for the trees nor does it take into account momentum or the unique situations.

Except they are not. People fighting against this are wrong.

To them, prolonging defeat is somehow better than defeat. To them, it's not about what is the best chance to win, it's what is the best way to potentially prolong the outcome.