PDA

View Full Version : The 2-Point Conversion Attempt



krygny
02-06-2012, 02:09 AM
I thought scoring the TD was more important than taking more time because if Bradshaw stops at the 1 yard line, there's no guarantee of a TD.

But on the 2-point conversion, what if Eli just took a 35 step drop?!! Just run back all over the field and let them chase you while time comes off the clock. That would have drove the Patsies crazy!! You have a whole football field behind you. If anybody comes close to Eli, he could just heave it over the end zone. No telling how much time you can eat up. 15-20 seconds, easy. Probably more.

GmenFan1980
02-06-2012, 02:11 AM
time doesn't run during two-point conversions http://boards.giants.com/emoticons/emotion-4.gif

Bigg Bluee
02-06-2012, 02:11 AM
I don't believe the clock runs on PATs

Lutynskinatr
02-06-2012, 02:12 AM
Time doesn't run out on extra points or 2-point conversions.

jjj45
02-06-2012, 02:14 AM
I thought scoring the TD was more important than taking more time because if Bradshaw stops at the 1 yard line, there's no guarantee of a TD.

But on the 2-point conversion, what if Eli just took a 35 step drop?!! Just run back all over the field and let them chase you while time comes off the clock. That would have drove the Patsies crazy!! You have a whole football field behind you. If anybody comes close to Eli, he could just heave it over the end zone. No telling how much time you can eat up. 15-20 seconds, easy. Probably more.

lol get some sleep my man. Its been a long night. [;)]

RagTime Blue
02-06-2012, 02:19 AM
I want to know why attempt a 2-pt conversion anyway?

I know some people in pools who were pissed at that.

krygny
02-06-2012, 02:20 AM
NEVER MIND

It's the delirium.

bflo23
02-06-2012, 02:23 AM
I want to know why attempt a 2-pt conversion anyway?

I know some people in pools who were pissed at that.



A 4 or 5 point game is pretty much the same.... If it is 6 point lead, Pats can only tie on 2 FGs.

RagTime Blue
02-06-2012, 02:32 AM
I want to know why attempt a 2-pt conversion anyway?

I know some people in pools who were pissed at that.



A 4 or 5 point game is pretty much the same.... If it is 6 point lead, Pats can only tie on 2 FGs.


After thinking about it, I guess if the Pats would've got the ball behind by 6, they'd need to actually convert an extra point to take the lead. Once again, Coach Coughlin knows more than I do.

jjj45
02-06-2012, 02:50 AM
NEVER MIND

It's the delirium.

No problem brother. Honest mistake ;)

buffyblue
02-06-2012, 02:58 AM
Who really cares?
Why analyze this?

NY Giants are SuperBowl XLVI Champions.
NY Giants are the better team.
NY Giants performed when it counted.
NY Giants won the game.

The better QB is Eli Manning.

I bELIeve.

chuckedafter5yards
02-06-2012, 07:40 AM
It's an untimed down, however the thought of Eli running around the filed to the tune of Benny Hill would have been an all time moment.

bLuereverie
02-06-2012, 08:00 AM
I thought scoring the TD was more important than taking more time because if Bradshaw stops at the 1 yard line, there's no guarantee of a TD.

That Bradshaw TD occurred on second down. If he had downed it at the one yard line, it would have wasted the Patriots' final timeout. The Patriots would most have likely allowed the TD on third down again anyway.

CTLadyBlue
02-06-2012, 08:03 AM
If the point of the TPC was just to take more time off the clock as opposed to a PAT then I guess it didn't hurt. Either way, the Pats would've needed a TD to win rather than a FG to win/tie

frankb
02-07-2012, 01:59 AM
Sorry - still don't get it

Pats down by 4 - they STILL need a TD

Pats down by 6 - they also need a TD - and they get to win with the almost automatic PA (why talk about needing to make 2 FGs?)

Only logic for the 2 pt attempt is for the negligible chance they miss the PA -- Gronowski made 59 of 59 during the season.

bansaw
02-07-2012, 02:10 AM
put pressure on the PAT

TC always coaching

bansaw
02-07-2012, 02:11 AM
would have had JPP, Tuck Osi the whole farm out there on that try

HeGoesDeep
02-07-2012, 02:12 AM
Gronowski made 59 of 59 during the season.

yeah and Wes Welker lead the nfl with 122 catches this season, but dropped a pass that he probably caught 99.9% of the time. :)

smart football to try and get the lead to 6 imo.

jhamburg
02-07-2012, 02:16 AM
Sorry - still don't get it

Pats down by 4 - they STILL need a TD

Pats down by 6 - they also need a TD - and they get to win with the almost automatic PA (why talk about needing to make 2 FGs?)

Only logic for the 2 pt attempt is for the negligible chance they miss the PA -- Gronowski made 59 of 59 during the season.

Is the chance of missing/blocking a PA greater than zero? That's why we went for 2.

jeffreyos
02-08-2012, 03:46 AM
1. The two point conversion does not eat the clock. so no matter how long the play takes the ball is dead even if there is a fumble and the Patriots recover.
In addition the need for the two point conversion was to gain that six point lead so just in case NE did score they would have to kick the extra point to guarantee the win .
Now for those of you who state that the NE kicker was 59-59 on the extra point conversions let me remind you of two plays from the 1986 SB with the Giants and Broncos.
On the Giants final touchdown they did MISS the extra point, which is how they finished with 39.
Second, in that SB, Broncos missed a FG from 22 yard out , the shortest miss ever in SB history.
(who's to say that Tynes may have missed the FG.) Which is why I believe that when given the chance get the TD and rely on the defense. Also Bradshaw could have just stood on the 1 yardline and let more time expire , but in play action that's rare and hard to do.
Finally , in the Ravens NE game the Ravens missed from 32 yard out - a kick that they hadn't missed all season.

Bing Crosby
02-08-2012, 04:54 AM
Only logic for the 2 pt attempt is for the negligible chance they miss the PA -- Gronowski made 59 of 59 during the season.

That's the reason, slim chance or not. Why not go for it? We are automatically up by four, so a field goal can't win the game, 5 points ahead means nothing, but 6 there is still a chance that we could block the PA if heaven forbid the Pat's had scored. It probably wouldn't of mattered had they scored, but I understand why they went for it.

They lost nothing by going for it, and had something slim to gain by it. Why not?

nygfanmaybe
02-08-2012, 05:07 AM
When you have someone like JPP on your team and you are trying to win a world championship, you play every angle. Trying to get a 6 pt lead was not an effort to keep them from being able to tie with 2 fg's as someone suggested earlier. There was less than a minute on the clock.

Trying to get a 6 pt. lead was just playing the %'s. If Brady does magically find a way to get them into the endzone, they still have to deal with kicking the point, which is never guaranteed when you got a guy like JPP on the other side of the ball. JMO, though.

Bing Crosby
02-08-2012, 05:22 AM
When you have someone like JPP on your team and you are trying to win a world championship, you play every angle. Getting a 6 pt lead was not an effort to keep them from being able to tie with 2 fg's as someone suggested earlier. There was less than a minute on the clock.

Getting a 6 pt. lead was just playing the %'s. If Brady does magically find a way to get them into the endzone, they still have to deal with kicking the point, which is never guaranteed when you got a guy like JPP on the other side of the ball. JMO, though.

Exactly. It's a no lose situation. What do you gain by being up five? Nothing. Being up by five is no better then being up by four. Why not go for 6? Slim chance or not it is a chance. Had we been up by 5, the Pats scored and then by some miracle we blocked the PA the entire discussion this whole off season would be "Why not go for two!! Coughlin cost us the game!!"