***Philly vs Saints Game Thread***

burmafrd;1311494 said:
Once again I ask- WHAT is the difference being down one point or two? VERSUS being TIED? Just do not understand NOT going for it.

Bear with me...

The reason is because you have to consider the difference between being down "one score" and "two scores." There are many scenarios - let me elaborate on one.

Worst case scenario - the Saints don't get the two pointer. Score is 21-19.

The Saints score a TD, so it's 21-25. Regardless if you get the two pointer or not, it's still a "one score" game.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, if it's 21-25 and you want to go for a FG, it's only 21-28 and it's STILL a "one score" game.

If you just kick the Extra Point both times, the score is 21-27 and a FG puts the game into "TWO SCORES" with 21-30.
 
smarta5150;1311513 said:
You are right.

It would have hit him in the big toe.
But Garcia wouldn't have been able to do the hop with it, so that it would hit the toe at the right spot.
 
WoodysGirl;1311512 said:
See the ball bounce off Simoneau's head? McFlabb wouldn't have been able to make that throw either. :rolleyes:

Nope, he wouldn't. It takes extreme precision to hit a player's head. Just like it takes extreme precision to hit the sidebar on a FG post. Hey, where's that Vanderjagt guy now anyhow? :D
 
BUT if you get the two point you are tied and right now a TD with a conversion beats them.
 
WoodysGirl;1311512 said:
See the ball bounce off Simoneau's head? McFlabb wouldn't have been able to make that throw either. :rolleyes:

McChoke would have waited until he turned around and hit Simoneau in the chest. :cool:
 
Bleu Star;1311543 said:
McChoke would have waited until he turned around and hit Simoneau in the chest. :cool:
nah it would've hit him in the ***
 
burmafrd;1311528 said:
BUT if you get the two point you are tied and right now a TD with a conversion beats them.

I understand your point, but it's risk versus reward. The risk is bigger than the reward. What's the reward - you tie the game?

So what...you still have to score again.

NFL Coaches as a group play percentages...Again, I understand your point, but this is the NFL, not college.


In your scenario, if the Saints went for the two pointer and converted, score is tied at 21-21. Since the Saints scored again, they would NEVER have gone for a second conversion.

It's still a 'one score' game.

Again, the risk versus the reward...ONE SCORE vs. TWO SCORE.
 
Former Cowboy.. Scott Fujita.. making plays that our LBs can only hope to make one day...

More Carp and less James next year will be a very good thing.
 
phildominator;1311551 said:
I understand your point, but it's risk versus reward. The risk is bigger than the reward. What's the reward - you tie the game?

So what...you still have to score again.

NFL Coaches as a group play percentages...Again, I understand your point, but this is the NFL, not college.


In your scenario, if the Saints went for the two pointer and converted, score is tied at 21-21. Since the Saints scored again, they would NEVER have gone for a second conversion.

It's still a 'one score' game.

Again, the risk versus the reward...ONE SCORE vs. TWO SCORE.

Why are you guys debating that decision? It was early in the freaking 3rd Q. The sheet says wait til late in the game and do it when you absolutely have to. You take the sure point separation of 1 versus the possibility of being down by 2 that early in the game.. ok back to your quibbling.
 
Shanle and Fujita are both much better in the 4-3 then the 3-4.
 
burmafrd;1311557 said:
We shall see- I still would have gone for it.

My guess is this explains why we see Sean Payton on the Saints sideline running the operation and not you. Just a hunch. :cool:
 
this is one time where BP would've had success. deuce would be getting the ball until he got stopped
 

Forum statistics

Threads
464,089
Messages
13,788,203
Members
23,772
Latest member
BAC2662
Back
Top