MM explains his thought process of going for 2

CowboyRoy · Sep 21, 2020

droopdog7 said:
show me then

Keithfansince5 said:
Because likely there is no time left on the clock. A big part of this discussion is that Dallas had 4 minutes left in the game. If we had 8 minutes OK it is not critical yet. Scoring, then stopping ATL then scoring again all in under 4 minutes is a very tall order. Catching this lightning in a bottle is the odd anomaly that will always be the exception not the rule.

The fact that there was less time on the clock made it more pressing to only need one score then two. Wow, you guys really try hard to justify inept coaching.

Runwildboys · Sep 21, 2020

JD_KaPow said:
They missed yesterday and the game wasn't over. I mean, you just saw it happen.

If you kick the xp and then miss the 2-pointer later, the game is definitely over, because you almost certainly ran the clock down more on the second scoring drive.

I don't know why people are having trouble understanding this. After all the screaming about how bad our defense is, why would they want to go into OT?

CowboyRoy · Sep 21, 2020

droopdog7 said:
We tried to score 8 and ended up scoring 6. What part of that can't you understand? You don't get a do over on the 2-point conversion.

Exactly...……...dumb. When you could have scored 7 real easy.

Jay · Sep 21, 2020

CowboyRoy said:
Sure, so tell me why everyone goes for the 1? Waiting...………………………………..

Who is “all”? Point out the scenarios.

With the clock winding down, we needed to go for 2 to know then as to how we would approach the rest of the game. That is extremely important.

You’re wrong here. Very wrong.

rags · Sep 21, 2020

Wrong decision by MM. If you go for 2 and don't get it, you're down by 9.

CowboyRoy · Sep 21, 2020

droopdog7 said:
Finally something we can agree on. One of us is crazy.

In my universe the coaches in the NFL kick the FG time and time again. Never seen any of them go for the two like that. Why?...…………...because its dumb.

Jay · Sep 21, 2020

CowboyRoy said:
In my universe the coaches in the NFL kick the FG time and time again. Never seen any of them go for the two like that. Why?...…………...because its dumb.

Kicking a FG would have been dumb. You take the touchdown.

CowboyRoy · Sep 21, 2020

Jay said:
Who is “all”? Point out the scenarios.

With the clock winding down, we needed to go for 2 to know then as to how we would approach the rest of the game. That is extremely important.

You’re wrong here. Very wrong.

Yet everyone goes for the 1 in that exact scenario.

Have you EVER heard this discussion before in the NFL? Nope...……….why? Because everyone goes for the easy FG and punts the ball. LOL

HungryLion · Sep 21, 2020

Jay said:
Who is “all”? Point out the scenarios.

With the clock winding down, we needed to go for 2 to know then as to how we would approach the rest of the game. That is extremely important.

You’re wrong here. Very wrong.

If you go for 2 after the next touchdown, and don’t get it, you’re down by 2.

mkindred · Sep 21, 2020

CowboyRoy said:
I would rather have to score 8 points, which I can get in one drive, then have to score 9 points, which takes two drives.

Not tough stuff.

So if we missed it at the end you realize it would have been game over, right? Going for 8 first allowed us the opportunity to score 3 times. If we did 7 then 8(and failed) we would have only provided enough time for 2 scores.

Uncle_Hank · Sep 21, 2020

Keithfansince5 said:
Notice the tiny little word IF. Kinda a big deal. But to answer your question given the 4 minutes left in the game scenario, I would take being down by 8. Why? Because it is easy to kick PAT's compared to scoring 2 pointers. Not a 100% gimme but fairly close. Perhaps 98% chance? Scoring a 2 point conversion? Maybe a 25% chance? Just ask the Patriots how easy it is.

Either way, your scenario or mine still calls for making a 2 pointer. I just prefer doing it when I absolutely have to do it or lose rather than doing it just because. My biggest reason is IF (there is that word again) you DON'T make it, you are down by 9 points. Now that is a HUGE difference. 9 requires you to have 2 scoring drives. 8 doesn't. 9 requires you to have to recover an onside kick which is the hardest thing to do in football. No way am I banking on that. The risk is GIGANTIC vs the reward. It is very clear to those who can see.

I'm sorry, but this is nonsense. You have to attempt a 2-point conversion either way. That doesn't magically change the longer you put it off. You just give yourself less of a chance to recover if you wait until you're out of time.

Being down by 9 with 4 minutes to go is objectively better than being down by 2 with 4 seconds to go without possession of the ball. This isn't difficult.

Keithfansince5 · Sep 21, 2020

Runwildboys said:
Yes it does. For one thing, you know you have to allow more time for an onside kick and ensuing drive. Had they only gone for the extra point, then they would've been playing for the tie at the end, and would've been chewing up the clock. Had they done that and missed the 2 point conversion, game over. Add to that, the fact that even if they make the 2, now it goes into OT, which is still a gamble, considering our defense.

LOL. Had they made the 2 and allowed ATL to score GAME over. So many variables to show this logic is wrong. They had to give themselves the best chance. That is all anyone can ask. Setting up a situation where all you need to tie the game is 1 TD and a 2 point conversion is far and away easier than needing to score 2 times. That is the what if scenario you have to consider when making that decision. If we score great, we only need a TD to tie and a PAT. BUT if we fail, now we are really in trouble because we need 2 scores which means recovering an onside kick. That alone should make anyone come to the conclusion that any decision that could lead to a onside kick recovery is right out. Thus, kick the PAT and play defense and get the ball back with a higher chance of success. Still a tough chance because it is hard to get a 2 point conversion. But it is cake compared to recovering an onside kick.

8FOR!3 · Sep 21, 2020

JD_KaPow said:
Except for the fact that it was absolutely the right call, for exactly the reason MM gave.

I completely agree. Garrett always took the extra point to "extend the game". Not only was it the right call, but it worked. We didn't get the 2 but then we knew it was still a 2 possession game and we played with that sense of urgency and had a minute plus to get the ball back from the onside kick.

Playmaker247 · Sep 21, 2020

This is a perfect analogy

Jay · Sep 21, 2020

CowboyRoy said:
Yet everyone goes for the 1 in that exact scenario.

Have you EVER heard this discussion before in the NFL? Nope...……….why? Because everyone goes for the easy FG and punts the ball. LOL

For crying out loud, it’s not a field goal.

Keithfansince5 · Sep 21, 2020

Uncle_Hank said:
I'm sorry, but this is nonsense. You have to attempt a 2-point conversion either way. That doesn't magically change the longer you put it off. You just give yourself less of a chance to recover if you wait until you're out of time.

Being down by 9 with 4 minutes to go is objectively better than being down by 2 with 4 seconds to go without possession of the ball. This isn't difficult.

Well yes, thank you for the straw man argument. In your scenario, I would agree. However, that is not the scenario as it didn't include being down by 2 with 4 seconds left without the ball. Nice try though.

CowboyRoy · Sep 21, 2020

Uncle_Hank said:
I'm sorry, but this is nonsense. You have to attempt a 2-point conversion either way. That doesn't magically change the longer you put it off. You just give yourself less of a chance to recover if you wait until you're out of time.

Being down by 9 with 4 minutes to go is objectively better than being down by 2 with 4 seconds to go without possession of the ball. This isn't difficult.

Being down 8 with 4 minutes to go is better than being down 9 with 4 minutes to go when all you can score in one drive is 8. LOL

Simple simple math. LOL

Jay · Sep 21, 2020

DakPresgoat said:
If you go for 2 after the next touchdown, and don’t get it, you’re down by 2.

And more than likely are playing the game and counting on making it, thus not affording yourself the opportunity for an onsides kick. It’s really not tough to comprehend. You’re also playing it out and letting that clock tick away so you don’t give the other team a chance.

JD_KaPow · Sep 21, 2020

CowboyRoy said:
oh yah, nothing to do with it. LOL

None of you can answer my simple question. If going for two like that is the obvious thing to do then why does no one do it?

Waiting.....……………………………………………...

Between 2011 and 2015, this situation--down 15, score a TD to make it 9, single-digit minutes remaining in the game--happened 13 times. Teams always kicked the XP. In fact, only once from 1994 to 2015 did a team go for 2 in this situation.
From 2016 to today, the situation has arisen 21 times. Teams kicked the XP 16 times and went for 2 the other 5 times.
Coaches are learning.

Uncle_Hank · Sep 21, 2020

CowboyRoy said:
Being down 8 with 4 minutes to go is better than being down 9 with 4 minutes to go when all you can score in one drive is 8. LOL

Simple simple math. LOL

That's not the argument. You are comparing apples to oranges.

MM explains his thought process of going for 2

Well-Known Member

Confused about stuff

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

jimnabby

Well-Known Member