Why not go for 2 at end?

[SoulfishHawk]

Didn't cross my mind then, and it still doesn't now. Jets needed a TD to win it no matter what. We went up 5. The whole there's NO excuse to not go for 2 doesn't really make sense. What they did was fine.

 

[Mad Dog]

Up by 4: they score a TD and go up by 3. We need a FG to tie
Up by 5: they score a TD and go up by 2. We win with a FG.
Up by 6: They score a TD. We win with a blocked PAT or a FG

I think the odds would favor up by 5 over up by 4 with a very remote chance of up by 6

 

[Nosferatu]

Yeah, as others have said, there was too much time left not to play as if the Jets might get a TD. If the TD had come with a minute or so left, sure, go for two. But at that stage I understood why he chose the XP.

Now, not kicking the FG on the 1......that's a whole 'nother story.

 

[seabowl]

Yeah, as others have said, there was too much time left not to play as if the Jets might get a TD. If the TD had come with a minute or so left, sure, go for two. But at that stage I understood why he chose the XP.

Now, not kicking the FG on the 1......that's a whole 'nother story

That’s the entire point. You need to assume that the Jets will score a touchdown. If you went for two points instead of kicking the extra point, you would be tied before the Jets attempt their extra point. If you block that extra point it’s going to overtime. Instead, Seattle kick the extra point, and if the Jets scored, they would’ve been up by one point, and Seattle would not have had a chance at a tie going into overtime.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

I think it's more you are saying there's no excuse for not doing it. There's plenty of reasons to not do it. Both opinions have merit.

IF the Jets were to get a pick 2 from gePICK, instead of being up 26-21 (the actual final score) now you're only up 25-23, and they can win with a FG.

Instead, they kicked the XP, went up 5, forcing the Jets to HAVE TO get a TD, FG was out of the equation. Plenty of reasons to NOT go for 2 there.

 

[Optimus25]

Xs & Os, boats and H@%, OP you are correct in a general, armchair QB let's play everything down to the %s kinda way.

But sometimes in reality you roll up your sleeves and say F it. If we give up a touchdown we GD deserve to lose.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda

And that's exactly what I said after the XP put us up 5. IF they go down and get a winning TD, they deserve the win.

 

[CPHawk]

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

I hate leaving points out there. Mac has to know, if you take 7 shots at it you aren’t getting in. Take the 3.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

No doubt. That many tries, take the damn 3. It just wasn't in the cards at that point. You can only bang your head against the wall so many times.

 

[TAB420]

That’s the entire point. You need to assume that the Jets will score a touchdown. If you went for two points instead of kicking the extra point, you would be tied before the Jets attempt their extra point. If you block that extra point it’s going to overtime. Instead, Seattle kick the extra point, and if the Jets scored, they would’ve been up by one point, and Seattle would not have had a chance at a tie going into overtime.

This has been said a few times now. And yes, it was an option.

 

[Wsumatt1982]

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.

watching us try and get 1-2 yards at the goal line once is punishment enough. please don't make us have to watch that a 2nd time

 

[Nosferatu]

That’s the entire point. You need to assume that the Jets will score a touchdown. If you went for two points instead of kicking the extra point, you would be tied before the Jets attempt their extra point. If you block that extra point it’s going to overtime. Instead, Seattle kick the extra point, and if the Jets scored, they would’ve been up by one point, and Seattle would not have had a chance at a tie going into overtime.

You are assuming they get the two. Since we tried nine times to get it in from the one, that is not a safe assumption. Take the one and move on.

 

[Seahawks Guy]

Going for 2 was not the right call. Neither was kicking the extra point. Taking a knee was the only correct decision.

 

[BigMeach]

If we go for two and they miraculously return a fumble or interception for a TD it's worth 2 points and now they only need a field goal. While it might be a slight chance, so is missing a PAT.

 

[Followthelegion]

The reason is (as correctly pointed out by 1 poster) it means you can still win with a walk off FG in the event Jets score a TD and leave time on the clock. They would have gone for 2 as they would go up by 1 with the TD. Either a FG means we can win the game or send it to OT.

If we go for 2 and don't get it then a TD for them means we would defo only be playing for OT in the scenario above. The chances of a missed XP and getting the 2 point conversion for us is a pretty minimal upside compared to the other situation.

 

[Fernie Hawks Fan]

No doubt. That many tries, take the damn 3. It just wasn't in the cards at that point. You can only bang your head against the wall so many times.

Someone should let Grubb in on this little tidbit.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Truth