MM explains his thought process of going for 2

[Rockport]

It sure didn't yesterday!

My thought is: geez, these are professional football players, not delicate flowers. I expect them to play hard whether they're ahead or behind.

I'm sure they were told of MM's thoughts on the issue.

 

[Londonboy]

The reason he gave is stupid. Knowing whether it is a one- or two-score game doesn't have to change anything in how you approach the remainder.

What if Your driving with 2 mins left and facing 4th & 15 on their 30 yard line?
If you know You need 2 scores You kick the FG then and there, if You're down by 7 points then You go for it, knowing exactly what You need has advantages.

 

[sacase]

It was a mistake and its still is a mistake.

It was the right call, going for 2 was needed no matter what. Only reason fans don't like it is they want to feel like its a one score game when time runs out.

 

[Kevinicus]

Why is this so difficult for people to grasp?

A failed 2-point conversion is the key. If it happens, whether it comes on the first TD or the 2nd, will require an onside kick recovery. The odds are extremely small in either case that you'll get a win, but they are better if you take it first.

There is ZERO advantage to waiting to go for 2.
There is a very slight advantage to going for 2 first.
Very slight > Zero

 

[Playmaker247]

 

[Kevinicus]

They question his football IQ. Last week he should have kicked the field goal and this week, he should have kicked the extra point.

The game is called FOOT ball.

He made the correct call for the best chance to win in both situations. You chose the options with the greater chance of losing.

 

[Soth]

Because if you make the XP, it's an 8 point game, if you make the 2 at that spot, it's a 7 point game.

So what? You still have to make the 2-point conversion.

His options were to go for 2 now or go for 2 next time. The odds of making that 2 point conversion are the same. People think it is better to kick the XP because it gives you the illusion that you are still in the game and defers the 2 point conversion to the last minute.

He made the right call. He was going to have to run a 2-point conversion anyway. Better to do it early and deal with the consequences having more time on the clock.

 

[droopdog7]

Kudos to one poster here ( not sure who ) for nailing this 100%

Well, I can tell you I was yelling to go for two as soon as we scored and defended in the game thread and started the first post game thread on it. The decision is plainly obvious to the point where anyone against it has completely lost their mind.

 

[Cowboy4ever]

The reason he gave is stupid. Knowing whether it is a one- or two-score game doesn't have to change anything in how you approach the remainder.

Well it does actually. There is a world of difference how you approach a drive if you have 4 minutes to score or if you know you have to score twice in those same 4 minutes. I understand what MM is saying and on some level it is logical. I just don't think it is the correct move. If you kick the extra point, you only need 1 possession to tie and with 4 minutes left in a game, getting 2 possessions is going to be tough. So basically, it comes down to this for me, with the game on the line, I would rather have my O, with all those weapons over a on-side kick attempt which has almost no chance.

 

[droopdog7]

The reason he gave is stupid. Knowing whether it is a one- or two-score game doesn't have to change anything in how you approach the remainder.

This might be the worst take of all time frankly.

 

[TX_Yid]

The reason he gave is stupid. Knowing whether it is a one- or two-score game doesn't have to change anything in how you approach the remainder.

It absolutely does. If you know you have to get 1 score because you hit on the 2 point You play that series to burn all of the clock.

if you miss on the 2 point and know you have to score twice then you play very differently, hit the sidelines and hurry up so enough time is left for an onside and another score.

knowing early is exactly the right call. There is zero advantage to waiting and missing on the 2 pt with no tine left.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

So what? You still have to make the 2-point conversion.

His options were to go for 2 now or go for 2 next time. The odds of making that 2 point conversion are the same. People think it is better to kick the XP because it gives you the illusion that you are still in the game and defers the 2 point conversion to the last minute.

He made the right call. He was going to have to run a 2-point conversion anyway. Better to do it early and deal with the consequences having more time on the clock.

I know, and I've been saying McCarthy made the right call this whole time. My only issue is the playcall, but the decision to go for 2 was spot on. I'd have gone for 2 as well if I were in that situation.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Well, I can tell you I was yelling to go for two as soon as we scored and defended in the game thread and started the first post game thread on it. The decision is plainly obvious to the point where anyone against it has completely lost their mind.

I was howling for us to go for 2 as well once we scored.

 

[Clove]

Have no problems going for 2, had a problem with the play call. So had he went for it then or later, you needed a better play call there. The punts, I'm thinking that since we were so far behind, now is the time to try to take chances. This way, you get the respect of your team, you check your teams mental fortitude. I think I came out of this knowing one thing for sure, he NOW trusts Dak 100%. Now let's see what he does with him going forward and how he decides to attack teams from here on out.

Also what I liked was how the rookie tackles responded. Trial by fire was what they received and they passed with flying colors.

Personally, I think from here out we should go with the (hurry up) passing attack, followed by sprinkling in the run. Let it fly, you can trust Dak to let it loose.

 

[droopdog7]

I'm positively convinced that the American educational system has failed us given the arguments against going for two on the first td.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Have no problems going for 2, had a problem with the play call. So had he went for it then or later, you needed a better play call there. The punts, I'm thinking that since we were so far behind, now is the time to try to take chances. This way, you get the respect of your team, you check your teams mental fortitude. I think I came out of this knowing one thing for sure, he NOW trusts Dak 100%. Now let's see what he does with him going forward and how he decides to attack teams from here on out.

Also what I liked was how the rookie tackles responded. Trial by fire was what they received and they passed with flying colors.

Personally, I think from here out we should go with the (hurry up) passing attack, followed by sprinkling in the run. Let it fly, you can trust Dak to let it loose.

Exactly on the 2 point conversion. That was the right decision, just the wrong play call. I also agree that I think he trusts Dak now. The rookie tackles did brilliantly all things considered. I have my issues with the fake punts, but I know John Fassel likes to do those. Hopefully, he picks the spots better and/or makes sure the punter can throw the ruddy ball.

 

[droopdog7]

Well it does actually. There is a world of difference how you approach a drive if you have 4 minutes to score or if you know you have to score twice in those same 4 minutes. I understand what MM is saying and on some level it is logical. I just don't think it is the correct move. If you kick the extra point, you only need 1 possession to tie and with 4 minutes left in a game, getting 2 possessions is going to be tough. So basically, it comes down to this for me, with the game on the line, I would rather have my O, with all those weapons over a on-side kick attempt which has almost no chance.

What. Are. You. Talking. About?

You have no idea what argument you're actually making.

 

[reddyuta]

I was wrong and MM is right,i didnt think it through .

 

[Cowboysfan1975]

I don't get why some of you guys are making this into a big deal. Just because something has usually been done one way doesn't mean it has to be. His explanation makes perfect sense. In my opinion the only bad decision he made was the second fake punt. Chirs Jones blew the first one

 

[buybuydandavis]

Kudos to one poster here ( not sure who ) for nailing this 100%

Basic game theory and risk management. Such a relief to have a HC with basic competence.