More Banjo: Week 8 @ Falcons

[King Friday]

I did not think the use of timeouts was the issue. Atlanta's offense was doing ANYTHING they wanted to our defense in the 2nd half. Timeouts wouldn't have changed anything...Atlanta wasn't going to give us the ball back with lots of time left when they took the ball back with 4 minutes left in the game.

The issue to me was our final TD drive. The Packers used far too much clock themselves on that drive. We had 1st and 10 at the Falcon 24 with over 7 minutes left in that game...it took us 3 minutes to go 24 yards. That 3 minutes left us no time to make something happen at the end of the game when Atlanta did the predictable and dinked and dunked their way downfield in 3-4 minutes. We had to leave 5+ minutes on the clock so we stood a decent chance of getting the ball back with enough time just in case Atlanta went down and scored.

[King Friday]

I also don't understand going for 2 to make at a 6 point game. Yeah, I know it makes the extra point a must...but in a dome against a good kicker, even the longer extra point is going to be made 98%+ of the time.

If Green Bay fails on that 2 point conversion...and Atlanta puts up 7 points...then a FG no longer wins the game, only ties.

Unless you are in a game where wind/weather/field conditions are making the extra points much less automatic, I don't get going for 2 to make it a 6 point game there.

[esoxx]

Talking 1st half, not 2nd.

[King Friday]

Talking 1st half, not 2nd.

They got a FG to end the first half, so I don't see what your point is. That everything would've been markedly different if we had another minute? Hell, in that scenario, we probably go three and out and punt.

[Rutnstrut]

Bull shit. If Rodgers didn't play as well as he did today we would have been blown out of the Georgia Dome. A depleted secondary and not enough pressure on Ryan on their last drive is what killed us.

Yes but he missed throws in the end when the pressure was on. Also known as choking.

[esoxx]

They got a FG to end the first half, so I don't see what your point is. That everything would've been markedly different if we had another minute? Hell, in that scenario, we probably go three and out and punt.

The point is, if TO's were taken there would have been more time on the clock to operate. The way the Packers were cooking on offense in the 1st half, that may have resulted in 7 instead of 3. Get it?

[esoxx]

I'm not saying they would have won the game if TO's were utilized as they should have been. But it was a coaching mistake not to take them. Period.

[pbmax]

I did not think the use of timeouts was the issue. Atlanta's offense was doing ANYTHING they wanted to our defense in the 2nd half. Timeouts wouldn't have changed anything...Atlanta wasn't going to give us the ball back with lots of time left when they took the ball back with 4 minutes left in the game.

The issue to me was our final TD drive. The Packers used far too much clock themselves on that drive. We had 1st and 10 at the Falcon 24 with over 7 minutes left in that game...it took us 3 minutes to go 24 yards. That 3 minutes left us no time to make something happen at the end of the game when Atlanta did the predictable and dinked and dunked their way downfield in 3-4 minutes. We had to leave 5+ minutes on the clock so we stood a decent chance of getting the ball back with enough time just in case Atlanta went down and scored.

C'mon. You can't complain about the go ahead scoring drive for a TD AND two point conversion. I am not sure extending the game (until the Falcons had the clock below 3 minutes on offense) would be a wise decision given the way the second half was playing out. It was their only points of the second half.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I thought Maxie the Taxi was your soulmate.

For the record: I called you a soulmate when I thought you were bitching about timeout non-usage at end of the game. When I figured out you were enraged about the end of first half I defriended you. (Actually there may be merit to your grievance, but I can't remember that far back.)

[Pugger]

I'm not saying they would have won the game if TO's were utilized as they should have been. But it was a coaching mistake not to take them. Period.

Had we used the 2 TOs how much more time do you think we could have had at the end of the game, maybe 60 seconds?

[pbmax]

I also don't understand going for 2 to make at a 6 point game. Yeah, I know it makes the extra point a must...but in a dome against a good kicker, even the longer extra point is going to be made 98%+ of the time.

If Green Bay fails on that 2 point conversion...and Atlanta puts up 7 points...then a FG no longer wins the game, only ties.

Unless you are in a game where wind/weather/field conditions are making the extra points much less automatic, I don't get going for 2 to make it a 6 point game there.

If a 2 point conversion is 50% (which is has proven to be over time, actually about 48% last I read) then there are two equal scenarios forthcoming:

You miss 2 pointer, have four point lead, ATL scores and kicks PAT. You need a FG to tie.

You make 2 pointer, lead by six, ATL scores TD, even of they go for two and succeed, you win game on FG.

Contrast to XP:

You make XP for 5 point lead, ATL scores TD and 2 pointer, need TD to win

You make XP, five point lead, ATL scores TD misses 2 pointer, need FG to win


Wth the two point option, Atlanta cannot force you to score TD unless their coach is willing to try a 2 pointer plus TD, passing on XP to make it a three point game. Your odds of being within 3 are objectively better.

[King Friday]

C'mon. You can't complain about the go ahead scoring drive for a TD AND two point conversion. I am not sure extending the game (until the Falcons had the clock below 3 minutes on offense) would be a wise decision given the way the second half was playing out. It was their only points of the second half.

There is a reason they came up with the phrase "whoever has it last is going to win" and this game felt like that ever since the first half. Atlanta basically had it last...and they won.

You aren't sure extending the game would be a wise decision? Well, shortening it sure as hell didn't work, did it? Lengthening it guarantees you have a real chance to drive down the field for a winning FG.

[King Friday]

You make XP for 5 point lead, ATL scores TD and 2 pointer, need TD to win

Is there ANY example in the NFL of a team going for 2 in a situation when they are up 2 points like you suggest...potentially leaving themselves open to LOSING to a FG?

Your scenario above is a virtual impossibility...it would NEVER happen.

EDIT...well, I suppose it could've happened in a game where weather/field conditions made kicking a near impossibility. However, in a dome, I'm guessing this has NEVER happened and feel confident enough to bet my house that it would never happen in my lifetime.

[King Friday]

Yes but he missed throws in the end when the pressure was on. Also known as choking.

So you are going to blame the loss on Rodgers being unable to drive the team 50 yards down the field in 30 seconds? Really?

[KYPack]

The "coaches chart" says to go for 2 if you lead by 4 OR 5 points.

it's only an indicator, but it isn't something that MM pulled out of his ass.