Cutler looks like crap

[Box_O_Rocks]

Now Cutler can be a hero.

 

[Patspsycho]

How about the Packers coming back at them with a deep throw on 3rd and inches!

 

[unoriginal]

Going for two accomplishes nothing here. Why are they going for it?

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Going for two accomplishes nothing here. Why are they going for it?

:confused2: !!

 

[unoriginal]

:confused2: !!

I guess Rodgers and McCarthy just were feeling good.

 

[Patspsycho]

Going for two accomplishes nothing here. Why are they going for it?

Beat the onside kick; if Bears get within FG and nail a long one then happenstance win a onside kick.. there's enough time to do that.

 

[tsiguy96]

I guess Rodgers and McCarthy just were feeling good.

they have no reason NOT to, and say they get a deep return, FG, onside, they only ned a FG to win. unlikely yea, but there is no downside to going for two in this situation.

 

[SpiritOf76]

I'm sooo glad Green Bay just scored that TD. After seeing that knucklehead Cutler throw into quadruple coverage not to long ago, I gotta say McDaniels must be glad to have him gone. Cutler outfavres Favre in a bad way for most of this game, and I just don't wanna see him get away with such sloppy, stupid play. I don't see how this guy could ever be a champion with this sort of regular, boneheaded decision-making.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I guess Rodgers and McCarthy just were feeling good.

I was wondering if the clock might run for a two point conversion, but I guess not...

EDIT: Unless Crosby was injured?

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I was wondering if the clock might run for a two point conversion, but I guess not...

EDIT: Unless Crosby was injured?

Nope. It's a free play, off the clock. Just like an XP.

 

[letekro]

they have no reason NOT to, and say they get a deep return, FG, onside, they only ned a FG to win. unlikely yea, but there is no downside to going for two in this situation.

If the 2 gets taken to the house, then the bears would only need a FG to win, so there is a downside.

 

[unoriginal]

Beat the offside kick; if Bears get within FG and nail a long one then happenstance win a offside kick..

Yeah, maybe. Still not a very good reason for Green Bay to do it.

they have no reason NOT to, and say they get a deep return, FG, onside, they only ned a FG to win. unlikely yea, but there is no downside to going for two in this situation.

The reason not to is if they don't convert, and Chicago scores a touchdown, a Green Bay field goal only ties the game.

That is more likely than a FG, an onside kick, and another FG.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Now Cutler can be a hero.

Or the goat. LOL

 

[SpiritOf76]

Hahahaha way to go down in flames, Cutler.

 

[Patspsycho]

Somewhere Delhomme is breathing a sigh of relief..

 

[unoriginal]

They should've flagged Harris for inappropriate touching on that, just for consistency's sake.

 

[Dr Pain]

Or the goat. LOL

Baaa Baaaa Baaa

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

 

[Deus Irae]

4 picks in the game for Mr. Cutler. His first game in Chicago and he sets a personal interception record.

Congratulations, Jay.

 

[Keegs]

Ok. It's too early in the game to give away points. For example, at the time it was 10-8, if green bay kicks two field goals it's 16-8, and you wish you had gone for 1 if you didn't make the 2. If it's 10-2 and 5 minutes left, then you go for 2. Obviously 17-8 is an even worse situation.

perhaps i shouldnt have said no situation exists.

but the upside of going for 2 far exceeds the downside of missing it and then the specific situation you mentioned happening. i think he's the worst coach in the nfl