What in the world are you doing, Charlie Taafe? You have 9 minutes to go in the game and you go for a 2pt conversion? No wonder you have lost 5 games this year, that was totally brutal.
14 or 15 doesnt matter big deal he wanted to be down by a fg— are you kidding me?
Its a terrible play call-- take the one point, there is lots of time left to score more points.
I can see the logic behind it. Doesn't matter if you're down by 4 or 5 points ( miss 2 pt convert or kick the single ) they would need a touchdown to take the lead.
Down by 3 at least a field goal ties it, really a safe gamble at that point.
9 mins to go. That is a long time & a lot of scoring time available but i did not see the game just jumped into this thread. Both teams could have had easily three possessions each stil.
hmmmm being down by 4 or 5 there is no difference --is there a 4 or a 5 pt play? could backfire if they get a td and eskies kick a fg for the win....
see going for 2 looks not bad now....
I saw the TD, but I must have hit the can when they went for 2.
I noticed Taaffe was doing a lot of gambling in the fourth. When you're 1-5, I can understand it.
When you're losing I can understand it too
...hate to hang the goat-horns on the kid....but if Bauman makes the catch in the last set of down for the Cats....they might have pulled this one out....Taffe made a debatable call...the kid makes the catch...Taffe made a great call....that's the way the ball bounces.... :roll:
One might argue Taffe did not need to go for 2 at that time, but it is way over the top to call it a "brutal" call.
I think when weighing all the factors, it made more sense to go for 2, than to kick the single. It certainly did not cost them the game.
I imagine some fans will be criticising him for later kicking the fieldgoal rather than gambling on third down.
That was somewhat of a "pick your poison" play as well, but I think it was a good call as well.
I think both calls were neither "good", nor 'bad", but just choices.
I thought it was brutal because it took some momentum away from the Cats. They just scored a TD, but then you fail on the 2pt attempt. Kicking for one pt doesnt take away any momentum you got by scoring the TD. It is why with 9 minutes left and plenty of time to score another 7 pts, one point would have been the smarter play.
and if they got the 2 points momentum would have continued... it was a good call there was nothing lost by doing it.... are you playing to win or just come close?
That is a reasonable point, Sambo. Which is why I think your call is okay.
But as you see, Trey immediately counters your point.
if they get the 2 points, they increase their momentum. So I'll stand by the call being an either/or situation. Both correct.
But realistically, I think if your momentum is that easily shattered or affected by going for, or not going for two, then you have bigger issues as a team than just that call.
If there was less time in the game, I dont think its too bad of a play, but you have 9 minutes left, plenty of time to get another TD. Getting the 2pt convrsion would have meant they had tied the game, it would not have given them the win outright.
It didnt cost them the game by any means
there were plenty of other plays that did that
there is no 4 or 5 pt play like i said before but there is a 3 pt play. you have to look at possessions and how many pts that can be scored on each of those. there is actually formulas for doing it. My point is this; in the 3rd quarter it would have been too early but what if EE marched for 6 minutes and Hammy only got the ball back 1 more time?
I think most teams go for 2 in a similar situation as the Ti-cats last night. The difference between a 4 or 5 point defecit is minimal because you need a touchdown either way, but a 2 point convert pulls you to within field goal range.
If there was lots of time to get points, why was it such a terrible call.
Both the two-point convert and the fieldgoal were calls that some would have made one way and others would have made the other.
Myself, I would have made the exact calls he did in both cases.
The long pass to Baumann on third down surprised me, but they obviously noticed that he was getting wide open. Good decision to go right back to him after his inexcusable drop, but the officials are going to have to keep their eyes open.