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
gbguy20 (20-Apr) : you're probably right
TheKanataThrilla (19-Apr) : I was thinking Dez gbguy20
gbguy20 (19-Apr) : Bmarsh cut. preparing for obj extension?
Zero2Cool (19-Apr) : Week 1: at Packers — Sept. 9 (SNF)
Cheesey (19-Apr) : I don't know. I don't have HBO. I only have regular BO.
Smokey (19-Apr) : Who is HBO's 2018 "Hard Knocks" team ?
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Jimmy Graham on choosing Packers -- Why Green Bay instead of New Orleans? "#12 is hungry
DarkaneRules (17-Apr) : When he talked about missing guys he didn't mentioned Greg Jennings :)
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : it won't though. thus, off-season = hate season
gbguy20 (17-Apr) : these quotes from arod should shut people up
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Jimmy Graham on whether he's still the same Jimmy Graham: "I'm still 6-foot-7 and still run a 4.55 (40)."
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : TE Jimmy Graham said he turned down a lot of money to sign with a team he said he feels can win it all. “12 is hungry,” he said.
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Aaron Rodgers on potential extension with Packers: "There's interest on both sides in getting something done"
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : "You have to trust the process. And the process works." Aaron Rodgers
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : I think Barkley would be crazy good with Aaron Rodgers.
porky88 (15-Apr) : If the Packers trade into the top 10, I think it's for Saquan Barkley.
buckeyepackfan (15-Apr) : Lololol
buckeyepackfan (15-Apr) : Need to use this statement "The Packers have wasted enough years of AR's career"
TheKanataThrilla (14-Apr) : New GM with a new qb. History repeats.
TheKanataThrilla (14-Apr) : I had that fuck that idea about Rodgers..turns out I was wrong.
gbguy20 (14-Apr) : fuck that idea.
TheKanataThrilla (14-Apr) : Rosen?
Nonstopdrivel (14-Apr) : An unnamed source told Daniel Jeremiah the Packers will trade into the top ten to snag a quarterback.
Zero2Cool (13-Apr) : The #Cowboys have released WR Dez Bryant, source said. It’s done.
Zero2Cool (13-Apr) : Sources: Cowboys expected to release Bryant The Cowboys, who are meeting with Dez Bryant on Friday, plan on "moving on" and release the star receiver, sources told ESPN
Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : Today's Birthdays: ThePrey (29)
Nonstopdrivel (11-Apr) : I'm easily offended.
Zero2Cool (11-Apr) : but, if you're easily offended, stay the hell out
Zero2Cool (11-Apr) : for some good laughs, read Let's Offend Everyone! in The Back Alley
gbguy20 (11-Apr) : give him a prove it deal here for that money. ridiculous
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : I think he wanted a prove it year, to cash in next season.
Nonstopdrivel (9-Apr) : Detail in Patriots' deal with WR Jordan Matthews shows the bargain: one-year, $1 million, plus $700K in incentives. Only $170K is guaranteed.
Porforis (9-Apr) : You're my favorite customer.
Nonstopdrivel (9-Apr) : Oh, hi, Mark.
TheKanataThrilla (8-Apr) : I like our current RBs. If we have an injury or 2 maybe sign Lacy on a cheap 1 year deal.
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
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

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

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

16-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / warhawk

15-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

15-Apr / Around The NFL / Cheesey

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

Headlines