Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
2 Pages12>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
sschind  
#1 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 3:57:52 PM(UTC)
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.
Cheesey  
#2 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:01:13 PM(UTC)
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.
nerdmann  
#3 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:03:01 PM(UTC)
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.
gbguy20  
#4 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:10:15 PM(UTC)
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.
DarkaneRules  
#5 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:35:19 PM(UTC)
No regrets. Next game is all I care about now.
K_Buz  
#6 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 4:52:18 PM(UTC)
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.
gbguy20  
#7 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 5:06:39 PM(UTC)
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.
DarkaneRules  
#8 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 5:30:59 PM(UTC)
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.
beast  
#9 Posted : Sunday, November 24, 2013 9:19:15 PM(UTC)
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...
Zero2Cool  
#10 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 6:12:00 AM(UTC)
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.
gbguy20  
#11 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 1:45:43 PM(UTC)
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.
beast  
#12 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 2:05:35 PM(UTC)
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).

cheeseheads123  
#13 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 2:47:16 PM(UTC)
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
gbguy20  
#14 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 4:33:22 PM(UTC)
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.
steveishere  
#15 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 7:06:11 PM(UTC)
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.
sschind  
#16 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 8:17:10 PM(UTC)
according to the play by play on CBS sports there were about 11:40 seconds left after Lacy scored. Any coach who EXPECTS to have only 1 possession with more than 11 minutes left is an idiot (Of course some might say I am on to something with that)
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#17 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2013 8:29:22 PM(UTC)
gbguy20 said: Go to Quoted Post
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.


True. Run it on 3rd; Run it on 4th; And if we don't win the game, we give it to them on the half yard line. THAT to me is more of a slam dunk than either going for 2 or not going for 2.

luigis  
#18 Posted : Tuesday, November 26, 2013 10:25:06 AM(UTC)
I didn't like it because you are assuming you will need yet another 2 point conversion to tie the game.

The odds are not good for 2 point conversions in a row so I think that statistically speaking Mike McCarthy was wrong. It would have been right with 3 minutes on the clock of course because bad odds are better than no odds at all.

With the time we had in the clock I think 3 posessions was more likely than scoring two 2 point conversions one after the other.

nerdmann  
#19 Posted : Tuesday, November 26, 2013 12:31:52 PM(UTC)
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
according to the play by play on CBS sports there were about 11:40 seconds left after Lacy scored. Any coach who EXPECTS to have only 1 possession with more than 11 minutes left is an idiot (Of course some might say I am on to something with that)


Keep in mind what happened in recent weeks vis a vis teams draining 7 and 9 minutes off the clock to seal our defeat.
gbguy20  
#20 Posted : Tuesday, November 26, 2013 2:52:30 PM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Keep in mind what happened in recent weeks vis a vis teams draining 7 and 9 minutes off the clock to seal our defeat.


exactly.
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
wpr (33m) : O no. Sorry to hear this NSD.
Zero2Cool (1h) : Rourke, sorry to hear that, but who doesn't want to help you?
Cheesey (10h) : Oh geez, nonstop. Like was said, we have your back.
TheKanataThrilla (11h) : NSD sorry your post is a bit of a mind fuck, but obviously brother those here have your back.
Nonstopdrivel (11h) : I got the test results back! I definitely have breast cancer.
Nonstopdrivel (11h) : Everything goes wrong at once. Nobody wants to help me, and I'm dying!
Zero2Cool (17h) : Zone defenses always must answer this question: is it better to invest in top CBs, or better to invest in pass rushers who can make a CB’s job easier?
Zero2Cool (18h) : Packers giving away $500 Pro Shop gift card and 11 2018 Official Draft Caps
Zero2Cool (18h) : can't restrict
Zero2Cool (18h) : you did it now
Zero2Cool (18h) : 123456
Zero2Cool (18h) : too bad you gonna cry
Zero2Cool (18h) : don't break it
Zero2Cool (18h) : something here
Zero2Cool (18h) : You can do it too!
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : Who the hell gives a shit about Sat/Sun now? 3rd to 7th round? F U
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : I thought Sat/Sun was great. You make a weekend of it. Have buddies over, cookout, etc.
TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : During the afternoons I tend to get caught up in family routines. I don't mind that for the later rounds.
TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : I now take Friday off work. It is a bit annoying, but I do find it fun at night as I can crack a few beers and enjoy. Sucks if they trade out of the first round though.
wpr (24-Apr) : I liked the Sat Sun version.
beast (23-Apr) : HELL YEAH! ... the draft was SOOOO MUCH BETTER in the ol Saturday/Sunday format... only people that I've heard disagree are those that don't really follow the draft and just random get updates on thei
beast (23-Apr) : Key word there is "proven"... not if they're true, but if you can prove it. Jerry Jones said the same thing for Greg Hardy, it wasn't "proven".
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : Flat out honesty from 49ers GM
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : John Lynch: “if these charges are proven true, if Reuben did hit this young lady, he won’t be part of our organization moving forward.”
Smokey (23-Apr) : 49ers / Bye Week / Rams
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : Brian Gutekunst: “Draft was way better when it was Saturday and Sunday.”
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : With pick #14, @CFD22 has the @Packers selecting UTSA DE Marcus Davenport.
Porforis (23-Apr) : He'll probably resort to buying and using Chicago Bears tickets.
Smokey (22-Apr) : Restrict Zero's toilet paper !
buckeyepackfan (22-Apr) : You gonna withhold your monthly dues until Zero gets the schedule posted Smokey? Lol
Smokey (22-Apr) : Zero, please post the new 2018 Packers Schedule. Thank You
Smokey (22-Apr) : DRAFT "CHAT" this Thursday night !
gbguy20 (20-Apr) : you're probably right
TheKanataThrilla (19-Apr) : I was thinking Dez gbguy20
gbguy20 (19-Apr) : Bmarsh cut. preparing for obj extension?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2018 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 9 @ 7:20 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Sep 16 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Sep 23 @ 12:00 PM
Redskins
Sunday, Sep 30 @ 12:00 PM
BILLS
Sunday, Oct 7 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Monday, Oct 15 @ 7:15 PM
49ERS
Sunday, Oct 28 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Nov 4 @ 7:20 PM
Patriots
Sunday, Nov 11 @ 12:00 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Nov 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Sunday, Nov 25 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Dec 2 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Dec 9 @ 12:00 PM
FALCONS
Sunday, Dec 16 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Dec 23 @ 12:00 PM
Jets
Sunday, Dec 30 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
6m / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

29m / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

37m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

16h / Around The NFL / dhazer

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

17h / Random Babble / Cheesey

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / warhawk

20-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

20-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

19-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

19-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

18-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

Headlines