MM explains his thought process of going for 2

Uncle_Hank

Well-Known Member
Messages
471
Reaction score
536
That's what your defense is for. So you'd handicap your offense by slowing their tempo when that's arguably what got them back in the game.

Again, then why do teams let the clock to run down before scoring the game winning point?
 

Haimerej

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,083
Reaction score
6,776
Again, then why do teams let the clock to run down before scoring the game winning point?

"Again"? You didn't ask it once before.

You snarked about running the clock to kick a FG as if that's the same scenario as scoring a TD.
 

droopdog7

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,504
Reaction score
5,281
Right. Did I say otherwise?
Perhaps you did not but the LARGE majority of non-believers are saying exactly that, even calling the decision dumb. If you at least understand what is being said, then one can have a more nuanced but accurate discussion about it. Problem is most people on here have no clue what they are saying.

So let me know if you want to have a real discussion and we can debate.
 

Uncle_Hank

Well-Known Member
Messages
471
Reaction score
536
"Again"? You didn't ask it once before.

You snarked about running the clock to kick a FG as if that's the same scenario as scoring a TD.

Okay, it's 4th and 1 on the goal line. Do you run it with 30 seconds left and give the ball back or do you let the clock run down?
 

Haimerej

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,083
Reaction score
6,776
Perhaps you did not but the LARGE majority of non-believers are saying exactly that, even calling the decision dumb. If you at least understand what is being said, then one can have a more nuanced but accurate discussion.

Look through the thread. My position hasn't changed.

Problem is most people on here have no clue what they are saying.

I'm not most people.
 

droopdog7

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,504
Reaction score
5,281
Look through the thread. My position hasn't changed.



I'm not most people.
Alright, so let's go at it then. Go for two early (and miss like we did in this case) does a few things. First, it makes the path to victory crystal clear. You know you need two scores and you know it early. Everything you do from then on is with that in mind. Singular goal; you're hell bent on scoring as quickly as possible. You're not even remotely thinking about running any clock in case you do tie the score. You say you wouldn't but I can assure you that you would be in the minority of fans (though I can't speak for the coaches), many that would want us to run clock too. God forbid we give atl the ball back with two mins left.

One other thing is does, IMO, is relax the defense to some degree. They also know that you need two scores and, perhaps intentionally or not, are in a little more of a prevent than they might have been otherwise. They are not worried about a tie game and figure, get the onside and it's game over.

Agree or disagree with either of these points?

Now, is this the reason the team won? Of course not. Getting the onside kick was extremely unlikely and unaffected by any of this. We still needed two td's, an onside kick, and a FG. That is why we won. But understanding the path to victory early on could only help.
 

Uncle_Hank

Well-Known Member
Messages
471
Reaction score
536
Down 7? Run it. If you fail you have a chance to get a safety.

I'm talking about the go-ahead score. Do you want to win on the last play of the game, or do you want to give your opponent another shot? That's why it's an advantage to go for two early, because then you know exactly how much time to use at the end. If you don't have possession on the last drive, you probably lost anyway.

You don't want to pull a Chiefs: https://www.masslive.com/sports/erry-2018/10/5bd4eea9885857/chiefs-scored-too-fast-fans-kn.html
 

gongjr

Member
Messages
99
Reaction score
43
Right, you like how it feels to be down 1 score, even if gives you a worse chance of winning. . .
IMO, i think the argument is feelings based because a coach has feelings to account for. Each of these decisions will impact the humans involved, and while in a vacuum I understand the argument, games don't happen in a vacuum.
 

LACowboysFan1

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,996
Reaction score
7,145
Down 7? Run it. If you fail you have a chance to get a safety.

Quarterback sneak.

Speaking of which, I was wondering what the teams from the 30's, etc would think of these plays where the offensive player doesn't make the end zone, and sticks just the ball out for a fraction of a second to "break the plane" to score a td. I don't like it myself, seems chintzy, you ought to only get a score if you can get at least some of your body in the end zone.

Again, that's just me...
 

droopdog7

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,504
Reaction score
5,281
IMO, i think the argument is feelings based because a coach has feelings to account for. Each of these decisions will impact the humans involved, and while in a vacuum I understand the argument, games don't happen in a vacuum.
You know what feelings missing the two point conversion brings? It makes me feel, man we really need a stop here. Man, we better score as quickly as we can so we get a chance to get the ball back. If I'm atl, I'm thinking, whoo, we got this now!

Those are the feeling I got when we missed the conversion. What feelings do you think the players and coaches got? And how does that compare to what actually happened?
 

Runwildboys

Confused about stuff
Messages
50,240
Reaction score
94,113
CowboysZone DIEHARD Fan
How is that personal? You seem to side with a HC that you KNOW what they'll do. Problem is, so did our opponents.
Please stop with the personal nonsense. If you're that sensitive in a discussion just ignore me, it may do you some good through these hard times.
Hmm, I'm guessing that's Gregg you're talking to?
 

pansophy

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,002
Reaction score
4,112
Arent you tired yet? There is nothing you can do to convince me and nothing I can do to convince you. You guys have done a good job explaining your side, but that is definitely NEVER the way that I go. Maybe we will see more coaches doing it, but I doubt it.
I'm not tired. You are the one arguing against math.
 

Haimerej

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,083
Reaction score
6,776
Alright, so let's go at it then.

I'd rather just chat.

Go for two early (and miss like we did in this case) does a few things. First, it makes the path to victory crystal clear.

Not really.

You know you need two scores and you know it early.

*at least

Everything you do from then on is with that in mind. Singular goal; you're hell bent on scoring as quickly as possible. You're not even remotely thinking about running any clock in case you do tie the score. You say you wouldn't but I can assure you that you would be in the minority of fans (though I can't speak for the coaches), many that would want us to run clock too. God forbid we give atl the ball back with two mins left.

But they almost did if not for that bungled onside kick.

One other thing is does, IMO, is relax the defense to some degree. They also know that you need two scores and, perhaps intentionally or not, are in a little more of a prevent than they might have been otherwise. They are not worried about a tie game and figure, get the onside and it's game over.

I made a similar point earlier in the thread. Missing that 2 pointer actually worked in their favor because ATL went conservative offensively being up 2 scores.

Agree or disagree with either of these points?

See above

Now, is this the reason the team won? Of course not. Getting the onside kick was extremely unlikely and unaffected by any of this. We still needed two td's, an onside kick, and a FG. That is why we won. But understanding the path to victory early on could only help.

My point is that the clock management argument shouldn't matter. I think you'd be foolish to prioritize chewing the clock over getting the necessary points to tie.
 

Haimerej

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,083
Reaction score
6,776
I'm talking about the go-ahead score. Do you want to win on the last play of the game, or do you want to give your opponent another shot? That's why it's an advantage to go for two early, because then you know exactly how much time to use at the end. If you don't have possession on the last drive, you probably lost anyway.

You don't want to pull a Chiefs: https://www.masslive.com/sports/erry-2018/10/5bd4eea9885857/chiefs-scored-too-fast-fans-kn.html

I'd say it matters what you need as a go ahead score. FG to win? Run the clock. Down by 4 or more, run the play.
 

Runwildboys

Confused about stuff
Messages
50,240
Reaction score
94,113
CowboysZone DIEHARD Fan
Found this:

2-point-conversion-chart.jpg


So by the chart, going for 2 was the "right" call...
Actually, according to the chart, he should have gone for one. But that chart is just a basic guideline, and certainly not meant as a concrete law.
 
Top