Green Bay Packers Forum

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
2 Pages12>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline sschind  
#1 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 3:57:52 PM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: Member
United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN
Applause Given: 182
Applause Received: 537
I was at basketball games all afternoon so I didn't see the game but in looking at the scoring summary all I can think of is why do you go for 2 when an extra point puts you down by 9.

I get that if we make the 2 point we are down by only 8 but that means we have to make another 2 pointer for the tie.

1 score vs 2 I guess I can understand it but I still don't agree with it. There was still plenty of time left. Essentially you are saying "I have no confidence at all in our defense" which may be justified but you don't come out and admit it.

I know, I know, hindsight is 20/20 but I still don't agree with the call.
Sponsor
Offline Cheesey  
#2 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:01:13 PM(UTC)
Cheesey

Rank: Honored Member
Joined: 7/28/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 353
Applause Received: 540
I can see why they did it. At the time, our
offense wasn't moving the ball very well.
Flynn was a big shot in the arm.
Offline nerdmann  
#3 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:03:01 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Select Member
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 3,194
Applause Received: 787
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
I was at basketball games all afternoon so I didn't see the game but in looking at the scoring summary all I can think of is why do you go for 2 when an extra point puts you down by 9.

I get that if we make the 2 point we are down by only 8 but that means we have to make another 2 pointer for the tie.

1 score vs 2 I guess I can understand it but I still don't agree with it. There was still plenty of time left. Essentially you are saying "I have no confidence at all in our defense" which may be justified but you don't come out and admit it.

I know, I know, hindsight is 20/20 but I still don't agree with the call.


It's controversial, given that there was more than 8 minutes remaining, but I didn't have a problem with it at the time.

Queens were running wild on the ground with Peterson and Gerhart (11 fucking yards/carry) so they were gonna drain major clock. Similar situation as being under 8 minutes.
thanks Post received 2 applause.
Cheesey on 11/24/2013(UTC), wpr on 11/25/2013(UTC)
Online gbguy20  
#4 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:10:15 PM(UTC)
gbguy20

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/28/2009(UTC)
Applause Given: 240
Applause Received: 320
Look, at the time, going for 2 was the right choice. In the end, it screwed us.

When we scored it looked like there would only be time for 1 more possession, so we had to make it a 1 possession game, which is why we went for 2.

Missing the 2 point conversion would put us in no worse position than had we just kicked the extra point to begin with. Kicking the extra point or missing the 2 point conversion would still make it a 2 possession game. So there was no harm in going for it and cutting it down to 1 possession.

As it turns out there was plenty of time and had we known that we would have kicked the extra point, scored another td and kicked another extra point, then the field goal would have been the game winner instead of game tying.

You cannot fault McCarthy for this, it was without question the right choice. With how our games had ended the last 2 weeks why would McCarthy ever even fathom that he would have time enough for 2 possessions. He did what he thought was his only choice to TIE the game. And he knew that going for it would not put him in any worse position. He made the right choice.
thanks Post received 3 applause.
cheeseheads123 on 11/24/2013(UTC), nerdmann on 11/24/2013(UTC), wpr on 11/25/2013(UTC)
Offline DarkaneRules  
#5 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:35:19 PM(UTC)
DarkaneRules

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/15/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 232
Applause Received: 392
No regrets. Next game is all I care about now.
Offline K_Buz  
#6 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:52:18 PM(UTC)
K_Buz

Rank: Member
Joined: 8/17/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 6
Applause Received: 41
I like to find fault with any McCarthy decision, but I can't with the call to go for two. I think I would have ran Lacey up the middle given he was a beast, but that doesn't change what I thought of the call to go for 2.
Online gbguy20  
#7 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 5:06:39 PM(UTC)
gbguy20

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/28/2009(UTC)
Applause Given: 240
Applause Received: 320
If you guys are going to question a decision today, don't question the call for 2. Question the decision to throw the ball on 3rd down at the goal line in overtime instead of handing it to lacy.
Offline DarkaneRules  
#8 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 5:30:59 PM(UTC)
DarkaneRules

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/15/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 232
Applause Received: 392
Too many plays in that game to go over. I will leave that to the coaches and writers. I think we can all say that given the NFC North situation that a tie was better than a loss.
Offline beast  
#9 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 9:19:15 PM(UTC)
beast

Rank: Veteran Member
Joined: 10/5/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 321
Applause Received: 368
Mike McCarthy went for it, because it would of been an 8 point game if they had got it. But I was against it and said so before the play.

My general rule for two point plays, is don't go for them unless they

1) Tie the game

2) Put you in a 3 or 7 point lead

3) Put you in a 3 or 7 point trail.

(maybe 4 if the game is over and the points don't matter)

Other wise they effect the 3 pointers, just like Mike McCarthy call did. Took the 3 points from being a winner ot making the just a tier.

gbguy20 said: Go to Quoted Post
Missing the 2 point conversion would put us in no worse position than had we just kicked the extra point to begin with..


ummm yes it did. It made getting 10 points, a tie instead of a win. That is a worse position.


gbguy20 said: Go to Quoted Post
You cannot fault McCarthy for this, it was without question the right choice. With how our games had ended the last 2 weeks why would McCarthy ever even fathom that he would have time enough for 2 possessions. He did what he thought was his only choice to TIE the game. And he knew that going for it would not put him in any worse position. He made the right choice.


without question? I questioned it very much at the time. I can't blame him for trying, but it without question was NOT the right choice.

And I promise you Mike McCarthy wasn't thinking his only option was a tie...
Offline Zero2Cool  
#10 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 6:12:00 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Gold: 2015Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

Rank: Premier Member
United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,064
Applause Received: 2,555
I liked the aggressiveness of going for two, but the Packers red zone offense is terrible this year. Even with Aaron Rodgers it was bad. So getting into the end zone twice on consecutive plays? I wanted the extra point. The only time I think you go for two is when you need it to tie the game and there's not much time left.
Online gbguy20  
#11 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 1:45:43 PM(UTC)
gbguy20

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/28/2009(UTC)
Applause Given: 240
Applause Received: 320
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
MM went for it, because it would of been an 8 point game if they had got it. But I was against it and said so before the play.

My general rule for two point plays, is don't go for them unless they

1) Tie the game

2) Put you in a 3 or 7 point lead

3) Put you in a 3 or 7 point trail.

(maybe 4 if the game is over and the points don't matter)

Other wise they effect the 3 pointers, just like Mike McCarthy call did. Took the 3 points from being a winner ot making the just a tier.



ummm yes it did. It made getting 10 points, a tie instead of a win. That is a worse position.




without question? I questioned it very much at the time. I can't blame him for trying, but it without question was NOT the right choice.

And I promise you Mike McCarthy wasn't thinking his only option was a tie...


You think mccarthy expected to have time for anything but a tie? There was what? 10 minutes or less left in the game? the last 2 weeks our opponent has been able to completely run the clock out at that point. MN was running right through us and you think he expected us to stop them twice?

He expected 1 more possession if he was LUCKY and knew he had to make it a 1 possession game.
Offline beast  
#12 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 2:05:35 PM(UTC)
beast

Rank: Veteran Member
Joined: 10/5/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 321
Applause Received: 368
gbguy20 said: Go to Quoted Post
You think mccarthy expected to have time for anything but a tie? There was what? 10 minutes or less left in the game? the last 2 weeks our opponent has been able to completely run the clock out at that point. MN was running right through us and you think he expected us to stop them twice?

He expected 1 more possession if he was LUCKY and knew he had to make it a 1 possession game.


Yes Mike McCarthy expected to WIN the game... not tie the game. You don't play to tie (or shouldn't)... maybe you're right, he was playing to tie the game (and not to win) and that's why we tied (and not won).

Online cheeseheads123  
#13 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 2:47:16 PM(UTC)
cheeseheads123

Rank: Member
Joined: 9/28/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 79
Applause Received: 153
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
Yes Mike McCarthy expected to WIN the game... not tie the game. You don't play to tie (or shouldn't)... maybe you're right, he was playing to tie the game (and not to win) and that's why we tied (and not won).



A tie leads to overtime
Online gbguy20  
#14 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 4:33:22 PM(UTC)
gbguy20

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 8/28/2009(UTC)
Applause Given: 240
Applause Received: 320
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
Yes Mike McCarthy expected to WIN the game... not tie the game. You don't play to tie (or shouldn't)... maybe you're right, he was playing to tie the game (and not to win) and that's why we tied (and not won).



If mccarthy expected to have time he wouldn't have gone for 2. it's that simple. He was playing to get those 16 points that he needed to force overtime and win it then. He clearly didn't expect to have enough time for that extra possession. Nor did anyone else, except for you, apparently.
Offline steveishere  
#15 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 7:06:11 PM(UTC)
steveishere

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2013

Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)
Applause Given: 53
Applause Received: 1,142
I dont see the problem. To kick there would be expecting to pull off 3 straight 4th q scoring drives with your 4th string qb and a defense that cant stop the run. Mike rightfully expected to probably only get the ball once more. This is a perfec case of hindsight being 20/20. Mike coached for the more likely scenario.
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error


Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : ctrl + f5 to see gooder tablet layout
gbguy20 (23-Apr) : woops
gbguy20 (23-Apr) : oh LOL
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : u started a thread for another site seeking fans an writers :)
gbguy20 (23-Apr) : welp, i don't even know what you are referring to zero. So yes, it must have been an accident :)
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : thanks, hectic right now tho
dhazer (22-Apr) : 1-0 pens
dhazer (22-Apr) : kevin you got pens
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : gbguy20 - assuming you created that by accident lol
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Early Thanksgiving!! haha
Smokey (20-Apr) : Sorry to hear about your Turkey encounter. The bird was killed and tenderized ? Clean it, pluck it , and freeze it. Tastey Eating roasted !
Zero2Cool (20-Apr) : Schedule will be available tomorrow.
Smokey (20-Apr) : Eagles to sign TEBOW !
Mucky Tundra (19-Apr) : TEBOW
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Wow, the site is freaking smoking fast
Smokey (17-Apr) : Gilbert, \_/ !!
Smokey (17-Apr) : Zero, drink one shot with me pal !
Smokey (17-Apr) : Who will drink with me ? \_/
Smokey (17-Apr) : \_/, Cheers !
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : you did it!
Mucky Tundra (16-Apr) : i guess the packernews link really was buggy
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : lol oops... those should be img and img not im and url... nm im tired bed time
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : each tag has to have a closing tag . [img]url[/url] like that
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : When a link takes over the whole post, it's because the link tags were not terminated properly.
Mucky Tundra (16-Apr) : Plus I couldn't understand why a direct copy+paste was linking somewhere else entirely...that link took over the whole post
Mucky Tundra (16-Apr) : oh okay. I was sort of panicking thinking it was something wrong with my computer
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : the packersnews stuff carries junk with it that you have to remove sometimes
Mucky Tundra (16-Apr) : hey Zero, thanks. Was it something wrong with the site or something on my end?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Darryn Colledge To Retire. NOOOOO!!!!
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Maybe we should lower the registration fee's to get them folks signed up an posting!!
Smokey (15-Apr) : GUESTS, JOIN US AND BECOME MEMBERS !
Smokey (15-Apr) : Red Bull gives you wings !
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : nah, i had wings today
Smokey (14-Apr) : Isn't everyone enjoying a large healthy salad ?
Smokey (13-Apr) : Spieth wins Masters with -18 score.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2015 Schedule
Sunday, Sep 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Sep 20 @ 7:30 PM
SEAHAWKS
Monday, Sep 28 @ 7:30 PM
CHIEFS
Sunday, Oct 4 @ 3:25 PM
at 49ers
Sunday, Oct 11 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Oct 18 @ 3:25 PM
CHARGERS
Sunday, Oct 25 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Sunday, Nov 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Broncos
Sunday, Nov 8 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Sunday, Nov 15 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 22 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Thursday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
BEARS
Thursday, Dec 3 @ 7:25 PM
at Lions
Sunday, Dec 13 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Sunday, Dec 20 @ 3:05 PM
at Raiders
Sunday, Dec 27 @ 3:25 PM
at Cardinals
Sunday, Jan 3 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS

Recent Topics
16m / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

17m / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

19m / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Bigbyfan

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

23-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

23-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / warhawk


Tweeter