More Banjo: Week 3 vs Lions

[esoxx]

Stubby

[pbmax]

Every argument about how limited the offense was makes the decision less defensible, not more. Score from the 2.5 yard line. Or score from your own 20.

During the game day thread no one got exercised because as fans it was stunning to get the game tied. Everyone was happy the team still had a shot in a game that they were outplayed for large stretches (Defense was magnificent except for OT). That is not the coaches job, to be impressed with a tie game. The coaches job is to win. And the 2 point conversion was the best opportunity.

[Patler]

Every argument about how limited the offense was makes the decision less defensible, not more. Score from the 2.5 yard line. Or score from your own 20.

During the game day thread no one got exercised because as fans it was stunning to get the game tied. Everyone was happy the team still had a shot in a game that they were outplayed for large stretches (Defense was magnificent except for OT). That is not the coaches job, to be impressed with a tie game. The coaches job is to win. And the 2 point conversion was the best opportunity.

You know there is a big difference between an offense being able to score from the red zone, let alone from inside the 5, and being able to move the ball from farther out. Beside, they wouldn't necessarily have had to score a TD to win. A FG could have been enough. The offense wouldn't necessarily have had to do much, maybe even nothing. Another interception, a fumble recovery, a kick or punt return could have put them in position for a winning FG even if it didn't outright score itself. A defensive stand leading to a punt followed by a first down or two and a FG could have won the game.

There is absolutely no reason to jump to the conclusion that the game was unwinnable in OT just because there wasn't confidence in the offense for a two point attempt.

[pbmax]

You know there is a big difference between an offense being able to score from the red zone, let alone from inside the 5, and being able to move the ball from farther out. Beside, they wouldn't necessarily have had to score a TD to win. A FG could have been enough. The offense wouldn't necessarily have had to do much, maybe even nothing. Another interception, a fumble recovery, a kick or punt return could have put them in position for a winning FG even if it didn't outright score itself. A defensive stand leading to a punt followed by a first down or two and a FG could have won the game.

There is absolutely no reason to jump to the conclusion that the game was unwinnable in OT just because there wasn't confidence in the offense for a two point attempt.

We are talking about probabilities, not certainties. They might have been able to drive 45 yards to FG range. If they saw the ball again, if the Cardinals didn't score a TD, if the Cards turned it over, if the Packers could beat their 38.6 yards per drive in the game. Incidentally, before the Janis dual hail marys, that figure was 33.3 yards.

But none of that is as likely as scoring from the 2.5 yard line.

[yetisnowman]

There was 5-10 minutes between the extra point and OT. Plenty of time for you and others to profess how clearly they should have gone for 2 and the win. You can say that have us the best chance at a win, but what play would you have drawn up? Jammed up on the goalline I would say our limited personnel was much more glaring. He probably didn't trust a play and thought there were many different ways we could win in OT, and he didn't want to lose the game right after that miracle play. I'd say AZ winning the toss AND scoring a TD on their first posession was far less likely than us failing in the 2pt attempt. Remember he had 20 seconds to make a decision. Pretty logical that he didn't want to lose right there.

[pbmax]

There was 5-10 minutes between the extra point and OT. Plenty of time for you and others to profess how clearly they should have gone for 2 and the win. You can say that have us the best chance at a win, but what play would you have drawn up? Jammed up on the goalline I would say our limited personnel was much more glaring. He probably didn't trust a play and thought there were many different ways we could win in OT, and he didn't want to lose the game right after that miracle play. I'd say AZ winning the toss AND scoring a TD on their first posession was far less likely than us failing in the 2pt attempt. Remember he had 20 seconds to make a decision. Pretty logical that he didn't want to lose right there.

Choosing when to lose seems like a bad framework to make a decision. How about he chooses the way most likely to achieve a win? Hoping the fates are kind is a poor strategy. Even if you think the teams were even in this game, adding time to a beleaguered offense is not a good option.

I confess I was among a group that did not protest the decision during the game. But I don't do the research beforehand AND I did not know that the one play McCarthy might have been willing to call was made impossible by another injury to a WR. I found that out 3 months later. You seem to want to label me a hypocrite and that is fine. But the responsibility to be prepared for this scenario is the coach's, not mine.

I am also not the team president. I would have been more than happy if the XP was good and the Packers got the ball back and scored. But that doesn't make the decision making process any better. It obscures what clearly was a flawed process. Good teams and coaches learn from this, I am uncertain if the Packers will.

What play would I have dialed up? I would have started the discussion during the drive, including the TO before the FG at the two minute warning. If there was no other 2 point play on the list, I go to short yardage plays. And if it were me, I run play action from a heavy set. But I am not the coach, and I did not fail to prepare. I do know that the lack of options would happen again.

[Patler]

We are talking about probabilities, not certainties. They might have been able to drive 45 yards to FG range. If they saw the ball again, if the Cardinals didn't score a TD, if the Cards turned it over, if the Packers could beat their 38.6 yards per drive in the game. Incidentally, before the Janis dual hail marys, that figure was 33.3 yards.

But none of that is as likely as scoring from the 2.5 yard line.

I disagree with your conclusion given the conditions at the time.

[Maxie the Taxi]

It's funny here how so many people criticize MM kicking the extra point. In the game thread literally only one person said we should have gone for two before the OT coin toss occured. It's easy to second guess after we lose the toss, easier after we lose the game, and especially easy after 8 months of dwelling and analyzing everything. Mccarthy had 20 seconds to choose and he chose to tie. I still have no problem with it. Our goalline offense had been a mess, and if we fail we lose. It's hard to anticipate the worst possible outtcome would actually happen in OT.

Me and my big mouth. http://packerrats.com/showthread.php...l=1#post871595

[pbmax]

Quite the potty mouth I was. Don't remember if I was mad at the team, the commentators or your guys