Why not go for 2 at end?

[seabowl]

In my opinion, there is no excuse for not going 2 at the end to potentially go up by six points. Instead, they kicked the extra point to have them go up by five. Even if they missed the two point conversion they would’ve still been up by four. I would love to hear the reason as to why they didn’t go for two.

 

[Hollandhawk]

Yeah I didn’t get it either.

 

[sutz]

Percentages. I see your logic but either way, they needed a TD on their final drive and our D had been pretty much owning them in the 2nd half.

 

[seabowl]

Percentages. I see your logic but either way, they needed a TD on their final drive and our D had been pretty much owning them in the 2nd half.

Sorry, but there is no excuse for not going for two points. If Seattle makes the two point conversion they go up by six points. If the Jets score a touchdown after they still need to make the extra point. Instead, Seattle kicks the extra point and goes up by five points, which does absolutely nothing for them.

You are an NFL franchise worth billions of dollars. Somebody in the organization should be in charge of situational decisions. The decision to kick the extra point was 100% incorrect. 100%!

 

[GetNjigbaWithIt]

Why not kick a FG instead of going for it on 4th down? Do that, and this question wouldn't need to be asked.

 

[kidhawk]

Percentages. I see your logic but either way, they needed a TD on their final drive and our D had been pretty much owning them in the 2nd half.

It is true they needed a touchdown either way but if we go for two and get it we have a 6 point lead meaning if they score at the end we could still get a block or miss for OT. The 5 point lead isn’t really different than the 4 point lead IMO

 

[seabowl]

Why not kick a FG instead of going for it on 4th down? Do that, and this question wouldn't need to be asked.

Agree, but since that had already happened, this was the situation.

 

[sutz]

Sorry, but there is no excuse for not going for two points. If Seattle makes the two point conversion they go up by six points. If the Jets score a touchdown after they still need to make the extra point. Instead, Seattle kicks the extra point and goes up by five points, which does absolutely nothing for them.

You are a You are a NFL franchise worth billions of dollars. Somebody in the organization should be in charge of situational decisions. The decision to kick the extra point was 100% incorrect. 100%!

Don't know the exact numbers, but I'm pretty sure the odds of making a 2 pt conversion are probably less than those of winning with a 5 point margin, and the probablistic difference between a 5 point lead and 6 point lead in that situation is pretty negligible. We sucked on short yardage offense all day. We had like 8 tries from inside the one and came away empty. I don't blame MM for the call.

I know you want what you say to be true, but I'm not buying it. You do you, though.

 

[chrispy]

We had 8 downs on the 1 earlier in the game and turned it over on downs with a sack and loss of 10 yds. 1 more chance for the Jets D to show they dominate us on short yardage seems like something I'd choose against, personally.... MMac, obviously, felt like it would have just been giving up a point. Argument is only relevant if there's some possibility of getting the 2 pts. The O showed that chance was very close to zero.

 

[Sperrydogg]

They probably woulda took the ball from Geno and returned it for their own two

 

[olyfan63]

They probably woulda took the ball from Geno and returned it for their own two

This. And now a 4 point lead becomes a 2 point lead, and NY wins with a FG.
There is no upside to going for 2 here. It would be better to "go for 2" with a kneel-down play that can't possibly be returned for 2 points by the D.

 

[Sperrydogg]

This. And now a 4 point lead becomes a 2 point lead, and NY wins with a FG.
There is no upside to going for 2 here. It would be better to "go for 2" with a kneel-down play that can't possibly be returned for 2 points by the D.

And the jets were literally playing in our backfield most of the 4th quarter, plus Geno was just itching to turn the ball over, that fumble that wasn’t, was that a fumble? I know the penalty negated it anyway but was that the tuck thing, seems like he clearly was trying to hold on to it and couldn’t, that should be a fumble, but I’m not totally clear on what the tuck rule says….

nevermind I looked it up there’s no more tuck rule, but I still don’t know if that was a fumble

 

[seabowl]

This. And now a 4 point lead becomes a 2 point lead, and NY wins with a FG.
There is no upside to going for 2 here. It would be better to "go for 2" with a kneel-down play that can't possibly be returned for 2 points by the D.

Of course there’s an upside for going for two points. If they make the two point conversion, they go up by six points. If the Jets score a touchdown, they would still need to kick the extra point. Seattle already blocked one extra point in the game, so at least you have a shot at it being a tie game going into overtime. I just don’t get what you all don’t understand about this. In my mind and others that I was talking to at the game it’s pretty obvious.

 

[Sperrydogg]

Of course there’s an upside for going for two points. If they make the two point conversion, they go up by six points. If the Jets score a touchdown, they would still need to kick the extra point. Seattle already blocked one extra point in the game, so at least you have a shot at it being a tie game going into overtime. I just don’t get what you all don’t understand about this. In my mind and others that I was talking to at the game it’s pretty obvious.

Mathematically I get what you’re saying but it’s not as egregious as the 4th and 1 no kick, and it’s not completely impossible that McD didn’t worry about a geno fumble

 

[getnasty]

There was over 5 minutes left.

Let's say your up by 5 and the Jets score with 1 minute left. They go for 2 and make it a 3 point game. Much better to need a FG to tie with 1 minute instead of needing a TD.

Kicking the extra point was right.

 

[cymatica]

There was over 5 minutes left.

Let's say your up by 5 and the Jets score with 1 minute left. They go for 2 and make it a 3 point game. Much better to need a FG to tie with 1 minute instead of needing a TD.

Kicking the extra point was right.

Agree and the way that game was going you take every point you can get

 

[Rat]

Because they make you do those from the red zone.

 

[Natethegreat]

One reason is that if the Jets score a TD and get a two point conversion we are down only a field goal rather than 4 points if we don't score.

 

[seabowl]

It is true they needed a touchdown either way but if we go for two and get it we have a 6 point lead meaning if they score at the end we could still get a block or miss for OT. The 5 point lead isn’t really different than the 4 point lead IMO

Exactly

 

[olyfan63]

Of course there’s an upside for going for two points. If they make the two point conversion, they go up by six points. If the Jets score a touchdown, they would still need to kick the extra point. Seattle already blocked one extra point in the game, so at least you have a shot at it being a tie game going into overtime. I just don’t get what you all don’t understand about this. In my mind and others that I was talking to at the game it’s pretty obvious.

The downside is too DOWN. IF Geno doesn't throw a 100-yard return pick-6... (2 points for Jets) ...like he recently did against the Rams...
IF-IF-IF Hawks make the 2-point conversion... ...Which IMO is well below 50% chance in that situation
IF Seattle blocks or kicker misses the PAT if Jets score a TD... ...which seems unlikely as Jets would have made adjustments on FG team to prevent repeat

Seattle goes for 2, doesn't make it, still up by 4. ...IF Jets score another kickoff return TD (or Rodgers+Adams+G. Wilson get a quick score) and get the 2 point conversion, now Seattle trails by 4 with very little time left, FG doesn't tie, have to score a TD.

The percentages and likely outcomes don't favor going for 2. MikeMac made the correct call for the situation. Probably had an analytics chart or consultant in his ear.