Two Point Conversion

by Hippoboy84 on Nov 2, 2009 12:25 PM EST Comment 8 comments

Hey, I've been following this site all season, but this is my first post. It was very briefly mentioned in the game thread but not really touched upon afterwards. Why did the Colts go for two when they were up 18-14?

The only plausible benefits were if the 49ers scored two TDs then we scored another TD and again made the TPC then we would be tied, but that didn't look like a very likely scenario. Or if the 49ers scored two FGs then we would be tied instead of down by one. But risk wise, if they would have scored one TD then the Colts now can only tie it with a FG. The way this game was going I would have been very surprised if the 49ers would have been able to score two more times in any way, but i mean a lucky TD or a good drive isn't impossible. Obviously everything worked out for the best and we got the win in the end. I have been incredibly pleased with the job that Caldwell has been doing so far but I would hate to see a loss in a big game due to some game mismanagement by a rookie head coach.

Your thoughts?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 8 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

why does it matter if were up by 4 or 5 i rather try to be up by 6 incase they got a FG and stopped us then kicked a FG to tie instead of to win. there is no difference in beeing up by 4 or 5 so might as well go up 6.

by incoltswetrust on Nov 2, 2009 12:35 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I think this is exactly why they went for it

How can you not love a team that does this?

by LovinBlue on Nov 2, 2009 12:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I just feel like the niners scoring one TD was more likely, than them scoring two FGs and we don’t score at all in between there. And if they score one TD we are down by three instead of 2. Which makes the difference between 4 and 5 fairly significant. I see the other side of the argument but, based on my many years of madden coaching experience, I prefer the PAT in that scenario.

by Hippoboy84 on Nov 2, 2009 1:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think it shows confidence in the D

As in “Field goals are all they’re gonna be getting the rest of this game”.

by slash196 on Nov 2, 2009 4:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hold the phone!!

DId you say CONFIDENCE in the Defense?? Holy cow…we haven’t been able to say that in a couple years!! Feels great being able to play great on both sides of the ball rather than biting our nails when the D comes on the field

Bob Sanders does not play Hide-and-Seek, He plays HIDE and PRAY-HE-DOES-NOT FIND-YOU!

by coltsfan723 on Nov 2, 2009 6:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

Up by 4 – you need a TD or two FGs to win
Up by 5 – you need a TD or two FGs to win
Up by 6 – you need an unconverted TD or two FGs to tie, or a converted TD to win.

At that point of the game, I say go for two every time.

by eltharion_doa on Nov 3, 2009 2:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd be curious to know who made that call. Peyton or the Coaches?

"You can't defend the perfect throw, what can I say?" Peyton quoting Marino
"As I grow older, the list of people who can kiss my ass grows longer"-Ancient Hoosier Proverb.

by Indy Lori on Nov 2, 2009 2:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs