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
Zero2Cool (1h) : WR Davante Adams nominated for Clutch Performer of the Week
Zero2Cool (22h) : lol coach with jokes MM: "If i don't know tomorrow, they'll be putting Pat McKenzie on IR."
Zero2Cool (22h) : Rod of Airs here to fook you up!
Zero2Cool (22h) : Packers gonna play coy until Saturday night and go SURPRISE BITCHES
Zero2Cool (22h) : Mike McCarthy on Rodgers timetable: "This is in the hands of the experts. ... Let's just wait until the experts make their decision."
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : You can freaking localize ads too to region. This is NOT hard. Lazy asses.
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : I think so too, but it's time they get with it. You can have ads in streaming too.
Nonstopdrivel (11-Dec) : You've been able to stream postseason games for a few years now, I think.
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : last 4 games played, Packers have worst pass efficency, Browns 2nd worst
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : On @oath @YahooSports and @NFL Apps
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : Good news for NFL fans: starting with this season’s playoffs you can stream games on your phone. All phones. All carriers. For free. On
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : Verizon to pay NFL $500 million a year to stream games
beast (11-Dec) : Packers can't catch Eagles so it doesn't directly effect our playoff chances.
Nonstopdrivel (11-Dec) : yoffs?
Nonstopdrivel (11-Dec) : So . . . could in theory be a severe sprain. Which might still sideline him for the rest of the season, but perhaps he'd be back for the pla
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : That's regarding Carson Wentz
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : @AlbertBreer Doctors determined with manual test there was damage to ACL, extent unknown until MRI tomorrow.
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : Read reports that's what is feared and yes, you're right, usually if that's the fear = done
Nonstopdrivel (11-Dec) : MRI would me mostly a formality. He walked off on his own power, so possibly just a sprain? But I doubt it.
Nonstopdrivel (11-Dec) : Provocative tests on scene are pretty sensitive. If they fear his ACL is torn, it probably is.
Zero2Cool (11-Dec) : He has an ACL? I only heard there were running tests ... tomorrow.
Nonstopdrivel (11-Dec) : Depends on which Nick Foles arises from the ashes. If it's the 2013 Foles, Eagles could still be a powerhouse.
gbguy20 (11-Dec) : carson wentz torn acl. is that good or bad for our playoff chances?
nerdmann (10-Dec) : It's definitive, Davante is BETTER than Janis.
Zero2Cool (10-Dec) : can't believe some don't want Adams re-signed... what is wrong with you!!
Zero2Cool (10-Dec) : @WesHod The #Packers turned to Davante Adams several times during the final series and he came through each time. The evolution of a playmak
buckeyepackfan (10-Dec) : Packer Fans will take over Stadium today!
Zero2Cool (10-Dec) : @AaronNagler Packers just took the field to cheers. No Browns fans here to boo yet.
buckeyepackfan (10-Dec) : DILLY DILLY!
Zero2Cool (10-Dec) : Williams though, to answer your question :D
Zero2Cool (10-Dec) : First snap of the day don't mean didly
Zero2Cool (10-Dec) : Starting? who cares?
Zero2Cool (10-Dec) : Browns getting 1st win
dhazer (10-Dec) : who is starting at rb today ?
buckeyepackfan (10-Dec) : Perry innactive! Fackrell & Biegal step up today!
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
29m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

56m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / hardrocker950

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines