Pointless question but I'm curious... Who else would have gone for two

[cowboy4eva]

Would have gone for two had the Cowboys somehow scored on that last drive?? Since we lost it obviously does not matter but after the Glenn pass interference call, I started thinking if the Boys score here, they need to go for 2 IMO. No matter who got the ball in OT I just could not have seen the Boys winning last night.

Even though we lost and it matters none now, I'm quite interested in hearing if anyone shared my perspective.

 

[Doomsday101]

Would have gone for two had the Cowboys somehow scored on that last drive?? Since we lost it obviously does not matter but after the Glenn pass interference call, I started thinking if the Boys score here, they have to go for 2. No matter who got the ball in OT I just could not have seen the Boys winning last night.

Even though we lost and it matters none now, I'm quite interested in hearing if anyone shared my perspective.

Had Dallas been able to get the TD I would fully expect to kick the extra point and take it to overtime. I would not have thought for a second to do anything else.

 

[Stautner]

Would have gone for two had the Cowboys somehow scored on that last drive?? Since we lost it obviously does not matter but after the Glenn pass interference call, I started thinking if the Boys score here, they have to go for 2. No matter who got the ball in OT I just could not have seen the Boys winning last night.

Even though we lost and it matters none now, I'm quite interested in hearing if anyone shared my perspective.

No way - you go for the sure thing in that situation and take your chances in OT. That's a no-brainer.

 

[Hoov]

i would not have gone for 2 against the eagles in their own stadium, maybe against another team. But eagles defense is good at goal line.

If OT, i could see the cowboys getting another PI call on a deep throw and kicking FG

 

[Jarv]

Funny question, my buddy watching the game with me (He's a buffalo fan) kept on saying he fully expected us to go for 2 with TO catching the winning 2 pointer.

 

[Hoofbite]

I entertained the thought because I didn't think the the team would get a combination of a stop and score should they be able to force over time and lose the toss.

 

[utrunner07]

Here is what I think would have happened. Lined up to kick the EP, fake, Romo throws to TO in the corner for a game winning conversion. I seriously called for the 2 point as soon as we got down to the 5.

Obviously pre-mature, I did not think we had an Eagle at QB though and thought parcells might use his head on that second play and maybe run the ball down the middle where we had been getting five yard gains the whole game...shows what I know.

 

[Doomsday]

I wouldnt we couldnt pick up 2nd or 3rd and 1 all day no way I would let the game be decided on one play given that.

 

[Stautner]

It boggles my mind that anyone would think for even a second that Parcells would have considered going for 2.

 

[Kevinicus]

I don't think for a second Parcells would go for it, but I do wonder why there is so much reluctance to do something like that. Why the insitance of going for the "sure thing?" Are the odds really any better in OT as they are going for 2? There's nothing sure about OT. It's just delaying things. Just settle it on one play. Heck, even then if you miss it you have a chance at an onside depending on how much time is left.

 

[cowboy4eva]

I meant it more of who else would have gone for two if they were in charge or would have hoped Dallas did.

I thought there was a better chance Dallas could score on 1 play from the 2 vs Dallas being the first to score in OT.

 

[Future]

No way - you go for the sure thing in that situation and take your chances in OT. That's a no-brainer.

The way our kicking game ahs been there is no such thing as a no-brainer or sure thing. having said that, no way do we go for 2 there.

 

[Stautner]

I don't think for a second Parcells would go for it, but I do wonder why there is so much reluctance to do something like that. Why the insitance of going for the "sure thing?" Are the odds really any better in OT as they are going for 2? There's nothing sure about OT. It's just delaying things. Just settle it on one play. Heck, even then if you miss it you have a chance at an onside depending on how much time is left.

The bottom line is this - going for it you are gambling everything on one play - and it is a gamble. A single poor snap, or bobble by the QB, or missed block, or slip by your RB, or dropped pass, or misread and you lose. Or a fluke play or spectacular play by the defense and you lose.

By sending it to overtime you have the opportunity to utilize the talents of your coaches and players to influence the game in your favor without the same degree of risk that a single miscue by your team or one good play by the opposition will blow it for you.

In other words, in overtime there is more margin for error.

 

[Kevinicus]

The bottom line is this - going for it you are gambling everything on one play - and it is a gamble. A single poor snap, or bobble by the QB, or missed block, or slip by your RB, or dropped pass, or misread and you lose. Or a fluke play or spectacular play by the defense and you lose.

By sending it to overtime you have the opportunity to utilize the talents of your coaches and players to influence the game in your favor without the same degree of risk that a single miscue by your team or one good play by the opposition will blow it for you.

In other words, in overtime there is more margin for error.

Well, all it takes is one bad/fluke play in overtime to ruin things as well. With more plays, there are more chances for that. What are the percentages of 2 pt. conversions in the league? I'd say the chance of winning in OT, with how the team was playing is a lot less than the chances of them getting 2 yards on one play. It's a risk either way, I don't see OT as having any less risk, it's just potentially longer.

 

[peplaw06]

IIRC, the general rule of coaches not named Bill Parcells is that you go for the win on the road, and at home you play for OT.

I'm not saying BP would have gone for it, but I wouldn't have been surprised.

 

[WV Cowboy]

I thought about it, and if I would have decided to do it, I would have done it off of a fake EP attempt.

Romo throwing to 2nd string TE after fake kick.

I would not have lined up with my offense and let them know I was going for two.

It's takes kahunas, because it's all or nothing.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Would have gone for two had the Cowboys somehow scored on that last drive??

Who do you think you are? Dick Vermeil
:laugh2:

 

[Da Hammer]

It boggles my mind that anyone would think for even a second that Parcells would have considered going for 2.

 

[WV Cowboy]

The only reason I would have even thought about it was because they had basically handled our offense the 2nd half and were passing all over us.

I did't like our chances in OT.

Our HS won a state championship (relax, I know this wasn't HS) by faking the EP in the 4th OT because our team was spent.

I kind of thought of this like that, ... I'm not sure we had much left.

I don't think Parcells would have but then again he doesn't venture outside the box very far very often.