Chasing Points Early

[DannyP]

Where are the “balls”?
Why the ____ do you go for two when we did?

[Big Tyme]

Where are the “balls”?
Why the ____ do you go for two when we did?

Because being down by 4 and being down by 5 are the same thing. The reward to go down by 3 is greater than the risk of being down 5.

[Turbine]

Because being down by 4 and being down by 5 are the same thing. The reward to go down by 3 is greater than the risk of being down 5.

Panicking that early sends the wrong message to your team and theirs.

Formed this opinion when John Fox cost Jake Delhomme a Super Bowl ring.

[zeppelincajun]

Because being down by 4 and being down by 5 are the same thing. The reward to go down by 3 is greater than the risk of being down 5.

But then say you fail, get a stop, and a TD. All of a sudden your lead is no longer FG proof. I don’t get the decision of chasing points that early in a game. JMO. I know it’s all analytics. If the card says go for 2, the card must not be ignored.

[BabbForHeisman]

That was definitely a 5 min left in the game move, not a 14 min left in the third quarter move

[Duggie35]

I agree. Way too early to go for 2! If you make it great, but if you don’t, you find yourself chasing the missed point the rest of the game. Don’t go for two until you have to and/or much later in the game.

[CajunJack55]

Where are the “balls”?
Why the ____ do you go for two when we did?

Can we also talk about the play call? A reverse??

[Big Tyme]

Panicking that early sends the wrong message to your team and theirs.

Formed this opinion when John Fox cost Jake Delhomme a Super Bowl ring.

Do not think it was panic just a risk versus reward decision

[facelessjonmoon]

Can we also talk about the play call? A reverse??

The were trying to run a version of the "philly special" with Woolridge becoming a receiver.

Problem was he got knocked down in the backfield

I agree with others that it was premature to go for 2 there

[DannyP]

No
Wrong