What if.... Packers had gone for 2 points?

[Southpaw]

MMQBs all over the internets are discussing this. McCarthy could have gone for 2 point conversion and either won the game or lost it on that decision.

IMNSHO Mac blew it. Cards had to be shocked by the 2 Hail Marys and may have lost any "mo" at that moment. Mac played not to lose.

BTW, thank you Mike McCarthy.

 

[Stout]

I would have died.

 

[NJCardFan]

Cards would have stopped it.

 

[Buckybird]

What if...DD sacks Big Ben on 2 & 20 on the Stealer 1 yard line? Neither happened so move on

The Big Red are about to make history!!!

 

[RON_IN_OC]

MMQBs all over the internets are discussing this. McCarthy could have gone for 2 point conversion and either won the game or lost it on that decision.

IMNSHO Mac blew it. Cards had to be shocked by the 2 Hail Marys and may have lost any "mo" at that moment. Mac played not to lose.

BTW, thank you Mike McCarthy.

Well, he broke the rule of "Go for 2 on the road, go for the tie at home"...and we thank him for it.

 

[gmabel830]

Coaches are generally risk averse.. if he goes for it and doesn't make it, it's all on him. How many people are blaming him for giving up the Cards TD? That's the nature of coaching, where one or two really bad decisions can end up costing you your livelihood.

The more interesting question to ponder is what would BA have done in that situation?

 

[conraddobler]

The Packers have a 66.7% conversion percentage that's actually really good.

So you have a 66.7% chance of winning the game outright.

http://www.todayspigskin.com/footba...e-your-team-won-an-overtime-game-on-the-road/

Road teams have a 46% chance of winning a game in OT 2015.

So if the dude is just playing the math of the situation let alone the shock value you would easily just go for two I would have and said as much.

Once you know the math of this that's exactly what SHOULD Of happened and it's only because both coaches are math deficient that we ended up with the result we did.

Had the other coach been a math genius then we would probably have lost the game. Going for the win, being aggressive is DOING THE RIGHT THING even though you may have instincts the other way.

Where I come from that's going for the kill, doing what disadvantages your opponent most and playing to your advantages to the max possible extent.

Maybe coaches just don't get math?

Arians doing the wrong thing gave Green Bay a better chance to win the game, on that one decision that's bad coaching, then Mike made an error of his own.

People are chicken and those that aren't apparently can't do quick math in their heads and know that time was on their side with a run.

You'd think for the amount they pay these guys someone could figure this out.

As to blaming the loss on the coach if they don't make the play it's still the teams fault. As a coach all you have to do is point out to the press that, hey, take out your pencil and paper and cipher this sparky and if they don't get it they are stupid and will be shown as such.

 

[thephoenixson28]

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[gmabel830]

I still think most coaches natural instinct is to make decisions that let the ultimate fate of the game lie in the players hands and not their own. If they go for 2 and the Cards draw up a perfect defense that beats his playcall, how does McCarthy look his players in the eye after that amazing comeback knowing his decision immediately cost them the game?

 

[nashman]

Regular season sure...playoffs no way!

 

[Azlen]

I think it's the perfect example of the choice between playing to win and playing not to lose.

 

[Dude]

The Packers have a 66.7% conversion percentage that's actually really good.

So you have a 66.7% chance of winning the game outright.

http://www.todayspigskin.com/footba...e-your-team-won-an-overtime-game-on-the-road/

Road teams have a 46% chance of winning a game in OT 2015.

So if the dude is just playing the math of the situation let alone the shock value you would easily just go for two I would have and said as much.

Once you know the math of this that's exactly what SHOULD Of happened and it's only because both coaches are math deficient that we ended up with the result we did.

Had the other coach been a math genius then we would probably have lost the game. Going for the win, being aggressive is DOING THE RIGHT THING even though you may have instincts the other way.

Where I come from that's going for the kill, doing what disadvantages your opponent most and playing to your advantages to the max possible extent.

Maybe coaches just don't get math?

Arians doing the wrong thing gave Green Bay a better chance to win the game, on that one decision that's bad coaching, then Mike made an error of his own.

People are chicken and those that aren't apparently can't do quick math in their heads and know that time was on their side with a run.

You'd think for the amount they pay these guys someone could figure this out.

As to blaming the loss on the coach if they don't make the play it's still the teams fault. As a coach all you have to do is point out to the press that, hey, take out your pencil and paper and cipher this sparky and if they don't get it they are stupid and will be shown as such.

Here you go again. Your math is flawed. Your stats are not game winning or go home playoff attempts agents good teams ready for it. They know it's coming. We would have been ready by the spot of the ball. Then a look at who they had on the filed. Then a time out to get set right maybe two. You have no stats for that none. So many verbals that go into your numbers that aren't there in that time and place it's just well in your words an uneducated easement that you just don't get.

You kick and take Rogers into over time.

 

[conraddobler]

I still think most coaches natural instinct is to make decisions that let the ultimate fate of the game lie in the players hands and not their own. If they go for 2 and the Cards draw up a perfect defense that beats his playcall, how does McCarthy look his players in the eye after that amazing comeback knowing his decision immediately cost them the game?

Yeah what if they don't?

That's what odds do for you, the remove the emotion of the situation and tell you the truth.

Best chance of winning the game is to go for two right there unless your conversion percentage just sucks and you rarely make one.

Its' only 94% now for an extra point it's not automatic even anymore.

Actually you should based on conversion percentages go for two every time. Here's why.

.94 x 1 is .94

..5 x 2 = 1

Even if you take the 50 50 odds of just the NFL in general converting the two point conversion you are still beating 46% visiting team success in OT.

At some point you have to make a play to win the game let it be right then makes no difference where you do it only that the odds are in your favor.

 

[conraddobler]

Here you go again. Your math is flawed. Your stats are not game winning or go home playoff attempts agents good teams ready for it. They know it's coming. We would have been ready by the spot of the ball. Then a look at who they had on the filed. Then a time out to get set right maybe two. You have no stats for that none. So many verbals that go into your numbers that aren't there in that time and place it's just well in your words an uneducated easement that you just don't get.

You kick and take Rogers into over time.

Lose the coin flip and never get the ball.

My math is not flawed.

Or you could take Rodgers for the win right then, he could run it, he could pass it, he could option it.

What do you want to drive an entire field to win or 2 yards?

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I would have gone for it if it were me.

 

[kerouac9]

Here you go again. Your math is flawed. Your stats are not game winning or go home playoff attempts agents good teams ready for it. They know it's coming. We would have been ready by the spot of the ball. Then a look at who they had on the filed. Then a time out to get set right maybe two. You have no stats for that none. So many verbals that go into your numbers that aren't there in that time and place it's just well in your words an uneducated easement that you just don't get.

You kick and take Rogers into over time.

This doesn't make any sense. Why wouldn't you have more faith in Rodgers to go 2 yards than to get the coin flip OR your D to stop a Cards offense that is first in the NFL has scored on three of its last four series?

Asking for a smaller data set makes for less reliable data, not more. Every two-point conversion attempt is expected now.

 

[conraddobler]

It's the immediate nature of the thing that scares everyone but it's no different than MJ taking a game winning shot, off or on, make and win, miss and done.

I think at the end of the day if you have Rodgers and the ball on the 2 that's as good as you can hope for let em play to win.

As a coach you can still tell the players hey it's your call which one do you want?

If they want to go to OT fine but I would expect the players to get it and ask for the ball and the one shot to win the game right then.

 

[Southpaw]

So when the NFL moved the E P back to the 30+ the thought was that it would create more drama and promote more risk. Looks like at least one coach didn't get the message. Wonder if Aaron ++has any thoughts?

I go for the 2 without hesitation. The quicker the better.

As has been said coaching to not lose. Sorta like some of these pathetic "prevent" defenses. Panthers seemed to do the same and made the game interesting. Rivera milked the clock the entire 2nd half.

 

[SO91]

The Packers have a 66.7% conversion percentage that's actually really good.

So you have a 66.7% chance of winning the game outright.

http://www.todayspigskin.com/footba...e-your-team-won-an-overtime-game-on-the-road/

Road teams have a 46% chance of winning a game in OT 2015.

So if the dude is just playing the math of the situation let alone the shock value you would easily just go for two I would have and said as much.

Once you know the math of this that's exactly what SHOULD Of happened and it's only because both coaches are math deficient that we ended up with the result we did.

Had the other coach been a math genius then we would probably have lost the game. Going for the win, being aggressive is DOING THE RIGHT THING even though you may have instincts the other way.

Where I come from that's going for the kill, doing what disadvantages your opponent most and playing to your advantages to the max possible extent.

Maybe coaches just don't get math?

Arians doing the wrong thing gave Green Bay a better chance to win the game, on that one decision that's bad coaching, then Mike made an error of his own.

People are chicken and those that aren't apparently can't do quick math in their heads and know that time was on their side with a run.

You'd think for the amount they pay these guys someone could figure this out.

As to blaming the loss on the coach if they don't make the play it's still the teams fault. As a coach all you have to do is point out to the press that, hey, take out your pencil and paper and cipher this sparky and if they don't get it they are stupid and will be shown as such.

4/6 this year. Too small a sample size to say with confidence that they had a 66.7% chance of winning by going for it. BTW I would want the Cards to go for 2 in that situation if the roles were reversed.

 

[Dude]

This doesn't make any sense. Why wouldn't you have more faith in Rodgers to go 2 yards than to get the coin flip OR your D to stop a Cards offense that is first in the NFL has scored on three of its last four series?

Asking for a smaller data set makes for less reliable data, not more. Every two-point conversion attempt is expected now.

A 2nd, 3rd or 4th quarter point spreed move to get withing a score or even two scores agents a team like the browns is in that math. The Point is you can't use that math for that play call.

They only TD we scored in three quarters came from a bad bounce for them right to Floyd. You can't take a season stat and say this is how it will be. Every game is of it's own.

Give me the stat on how many coach have done it and how it worked out and we can go from there.

You go for overtime end of story.

 

[conraddobler]

4/6 this year. Too small a sample size to say with confidence that they had a 66.7% chance of winning by going for it.

I agree you could more accurately count on 50 50 league odds.

Still beats 46% visiting team odds in OT.

Whatever reasoning you want to use, give me Rodgers on the two with the best play we can come up with against a dazed and confused D.

Stick the knife in and twist but their coach had other ideas.

 

[conraddobler]

A 2nd, 3rd or 4th quarter point spreed move to get withing a score or even two scores agents a team like the browns is in that math. The Point is you can't use that math for that play call.

They only TD we scored in three quarters came from a bad bounce for them right to Floyd. You can't take a season stat and say this is how it will be. Every game is of it's own.

Give me the stat on how many coach have done it and how it worked out and we can go from there.

You go for overtime end of story.

If you are a wuss and can't do math yes.

 

[SO91]

I agree you could more accurately count on 50 50 league odds.

Still beats 46% visiting team odds in OT.

Whatever reasoning you want to use, give me Rodgers on the two with the best play we can come up with against a dazed and confused D.

Stick the knife in and twist but their coach had other ideas.

See my edit. I would want us going for 2 as well, as nerve-racking as that would be.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

They would have lost by 1 rather than 6.

I think if the Pack had their full compliment of receivers they would have gone for 2. Janis and Abberderis had trouble getting open in the red zone all game.

Janis had the 1 TD catch from the 8 but the Pack struggled in the red zone overall. James Jones is their #1 red zone target and he had PP on him so he wasn't really an option either.

 

[Dude]

Lose the coin flip and never get the ball.

My math is not flawed.

Or you could take Rodgers for the win right then, he could run it, he could pass it, he could option it.

What do you want to drive an entire field to win or 2 yards?

It still would not matter but how many teams lost the coin flip and never saw the ball this year? Going for two as I said agents even team A is not the same stat as doing it agents team B. Do you have a team down more than two scores trying to even the points out late in the 4th to get it to a two score game. More numbers you can't put in one group. It goes on and on. How good were we at stopping a two point conversion. That would still need to be done at what score and how good each team was.

Flawed.