Should Pats have gone for two-pt conversion?

[Gumby]

So, as the Pats got the TD with 2:00 left, i was thinking: with all these injuries it might just be worthwhile to go all in and go for two. Prevent any chance of OT ( rely on GOAT qb and te to score themselves or set up another red zone threat by using gronk to attract the coverage).

Then they kicked, and i thought, ok they played it safe we go to ot.

Then as the jester clock operator was running off 5 secs on 10 sec long plays, i was thinking i wish they had gone for two...... Oh Great they got the stop. XP kick was a great idea.

Great now, TB has 30 secs to throw a couple shots......oh **** they took a knee....

So i went back -forth on the thought process a couple times in ten minutes. If it was me in BB shoes, i think 60% i go for the two in THIS situation (normal other Games/other Health 100% Ghost Kick).

But just ignore the whole OT debacle (Coin toss / Bad DPI, cb injury) and saywhat you think you would Do? Did you consider a TWO in your head at the time?

 

[VectorPrime]

No

 

[SHOWTIME15]

You never go for a 2 pt conversion unless you have to

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I don't think so. It may be selective memory on my part but iirc we haven't been too great in short yardage situations this year.

 

[SammyBlueCat]

I was thinking about that at the time however *IF* you fail you are done.

 

[SomePatsFan13]

I was thinking they might, but playing the percentages I think they did the right thing.

I'd love some aggressive playcalling though. I think we need an edge, given how decimated we are.

 

[aluminum seats]

I was thinking they might for 2 at 17-12. I was glad they didn't though so I can't complain about it now.

 

[luuked]

I wrote it in another thread but will say it again.

Even if you want to, you can't go for 2 with 1:55 on the clock and the Jets still having 3 TOs.

They will have tons of time and four downs to get ~ 40-50 yards for a game winner.

Now if we had scored with less than 20 seconds on the clock it would have been fascinating to see what BB would do. And given how many issues we had on offense I wouldn't have been surprised if he would have elected to go for it.

 

[jmt57]

If going for a two-point conversion is/was the right decision, then a team should do it every time.

To look at this another way, consider this: had the Patriots gone for two but not converted, what would the reaction be? The second guessing on that decision would be far greater than the second guessing of the decision to kick.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

What the pats should have done is attempt to drive down the field at the end of the first half and gotten into field goal range

 

[SomePatsFan13]

What the pats should have done is attempt drive down the field at the end of the first half and gotten into field goal range

This man gets it.

Had we given ourselves an opportunity at the end of the half, I don't think we're having this conversation.

I trust this team in the two minute drill.

 

[bigballas]

What the pats should have done is attempt drive down the field at the end of the first half and gotten into field goal range

story of all of our losses this year..

 

[jmt57]

Hindsight is 20-20.

Patriots were without five starters on offense, playing on the road against one of the NFL's best defenses, and had been unable to do much of anything on offense all day.

The two-minute offense with backups, special teamers filling in and guys just signed off the street is not remotely close to being the same two-minute offense we saw earlier in the season.

It is a stretch to believe that an offense that scored one touchdown all game (and needed a fourth down conversion on that drive) would automatically march 45+ yards down the field in under two minutes.

 

[SomePatsFan13]

Hindsight is 20-20.

Patriots were without five starters on offense, playing on the road against one of the NFL's best defenses, and had been unable to do much of anything on offense all day.

The two-minute offense with backups, special teamers filling in and guys just signed off the street is not remotely close to being the same two-minute offense we saw earlier in the season.

It is a stretch to believe that an offense that scored one touchdown all game (and needed a fourth down conversion on that drive) would automatically march 45+ yards down the field in under two minutes.

How quickly we forget January 19th, 2002...

 

[JDot]

Yes.

 

[jmt57]

How quickly we forget January 19th, 2002...

Straw man rebuttal.

Completely different situation.

 

[SomePatsFan13]

Straw man rebuttal.

Completely different situation.

Sure, I mean it's always a different situation, but that's why it's called an analogy.

The fact is, Brady drove us down the field in an arguably tougher situation and brought us home. I'll never forget that quality of him.

He's done this many times. Why are we doubting that now?? This ain't the first team he hasn't had "weapons".

They don't call him Terrific for nothing

 

[JDot]

If going for a two-point conversion is/was the right decision, then a team should do it every time.

To look at this another way, consider this: had the Patriots gone for two but not converted, what would the reaction be? The second guessing on that decision would be far greater than the second guessing of the decision to kick.

Your probably right. I would have liked them to go for 2. But hindsight is probably pushing me toward that opinion.

Ugh, sucks losing to the Jets.

 

[SLGDEV]

Not at the last touchdown. It is too risky. You take the tie and then see what happens. However, even before they scored the first touchdown I thought they should go for two if they got one. That TD, if I recall, made it 17-12. The one point made it 17-13, still needing a touchdown. Missing it still meant needing a touchdown. OTOH, if they make it, then the score is 17-14 and all they would need is a FG to tie.

The big mistake, though, is with 1:50 to go in the half, 1st and ten at our 28, two timeouts and down by seven, we run out the clock instead of trying to at least get in FG position.

 

[jmt57]

Sure, I mean it's always a different situation, but that's why it's called an analogy.

The fact is, Brady drove us down the field in an arguably tougher situation and brought us home. I'll never forget that quality of him.

He's done this many times. Why are we doubting that now?? This ain't the first team he hasn't had "weapons".

They don't call him Terrific for nothing

We agree to disagree.

Halftime versus end of regulation in those two games.

A shredded offense today versus a gassed defense in the game 14 years ago.

Players that had been working together for months versus practicing and playing together for only a few weeks (or in some cases a few days).

While quarterback is the most important position on a pro football team, NFL football is the ultimate team sport.

As great a player as Tom Brady is, it's not as simple as Larry Bird or Michael Jordan carrying the rest of his team to a win.

Personally I just don't find the two situations comparable.