that's so weird. even though no one ever does it, i was just thinking you might go for 2 against a team as great as the patriots. the odds of them converting a 2 pointer is probably greater than 50/50 so if you feel you have a 50/50 chance maybe you go for it. conventional wisdom says make someone else earn it, not make yourself earn it, but you put more control with yourself. of course it didn't work, but i applaud the outside-the-box thinking. although the last time pete carroll thought outside the box against the patriots he got intercepted instead of taking a gimme super bowl victory, so there's that.
Yup. Just wasn't the right play call or execution. Maybe roll Russ out if you're going to throw that pass... and that was a blatant OPI on 3rd and 10...
Even though I think for lesser teams it's a good call to go for 2, here I don't. The reason being on the Pat's 2 attempt they are not going to hand it to Blount, they want it in Brady's hands, which means you know they are going throw. You have a great defense. You know what they are going to do and the Patriots only have one good physical pass catcher and u can double him. So I like the odds they can be stopped on that closing 2.
if pete carroll was going to use his timeout, why would he use it with 37 seconds left instead of with 1:19 left? because he thought belichick would use his 3 timeouts to stop the clock after seattle got the ball?
I'd have to check the numbers but Gronk and Bennett in the redzone have been near automatic in the endzone. Justice wins.
Finally PATs don't get bailed out by a lame pass interference call in the end zone. If that were the Texans the refs would have called that on us.
that last angle made it look more like gronk really ran into sherman just as much as sherman hit him.
Think if Gronk caught that pass he would have been flagged for offensive PI with a late flag. It was obvious that was the plan to bump and back shoulder. I was surprised that Seattle didn't double him though for that exact reason.
With the secondary the Hawks have, they don't double much and was the right decision there. Weird playcall for sure though by the Pats. Probably looked for the penalty more than trying to convert. From what I've seen this year, teams have doubled Gronk in the red zone, but then Bennett gets easy TDs.
Teams would double gronk because of the size difference, wouldn't they? Chancellor's only 3" shorter than Gronk, whereas most dbs are usually 6-7 inches shorter. Looks like Crick was holding down the longsnapper so that the safety could get the hurdle block. That's smart if legal, and ambiguous enough to be incidental if it's illegal.
The Cowboys - Steelers game is one of the best Cowboys wins I've seen in all my years watching this team. Some may not agree...but the fake spike play for a TD pass should not be allowed in the NFL and that was a cheap play by Pittsburgh. That type of play is for losers. If teams are going to do that, then I have no problem with defenses just going all out and potentially hurting someone on the offense because they are "faking it" on the play. They are standing around faking it and the defense is smashing them to smithereens anyway. That was a mistake on the Cowboys part for just taking it at face value. They should have gone all out. But, I still think it is cheap. And, rightfully so, the Steelers still lost. If they would have just run their offense normally, then they would have still almost definitely scored a TD and taken enough time off the clock to seal the victory. In the end, that trick play left enough time on the clock for them to still be beat. So, thank you Steelers! That...and your stupid failed 2 point conversion shenanigans...showed you'll had little faith in just winning this game straight up. I can't recall ever seeing a team go for 2 points on the first TD of a game because, like has been said so many times, you are trying to make that 1 point up the rest of the game if you fail. And, they just kept digging a deeper hole with subsequent 2 point attempt failures.
they need to change the rules, wtf was that? It's way too easy to block kicks nowadays. What's to prevent teams from signing leaping specialists just to block kicks?
Lots of college teams do it - Oregon was especially notable for it. If you have a better than 50/50 success rate on it, you should always do it early in the game, because it means that more than half the time, the *other* team is forced to chase a point. And if you fail, you have lots of time to make up for it. It's an analytics type move, but overall early in the game, it should generate more wins than losses if you're over 50% on them.
I think u would have to add to that argument that the team your playing has to be under 50% conversion too, and they have to defend the 2 point conversion at a poor rate. Otherwise you are not forcing the other team to chase anything, and your taking on unnecessary risk. So think you at least need all three of those things in order to slant the odds in your favor.
