Not that it's a surprise at this juncture, but it means a lot to make it back to the tournament after such a shit 2015. I think we all needed to believe 2014 wasn't a fluke. This proved it, we have a system here, and it fucking works.Love it. First in the NFL to clinch.
I agree, it's difficult enough for a team to get a TD. But then they have a 2 point play they must convert in order to have a chance of winning in over time. Seems like pretty stacked odds.I wouldn't. Take the 8 pt lead, and force them to have to make the 2 pt try to tie.
Look at how that worked out for us just a few days ago.
We've officially clinched a playoff spot.
We could actually clinch all of that by winning our next 2 games or possibly sooner.Next week the division, week after that the bye, week after that home field throughout.
Actually, we can clinch homefield throughout next week.Next week the division, week after that the bye, week after that home field throughout.
Look at Bell's stats at the half and end of 3rd qtr when the game was <1 score. Bell gained most of his yards in the 4th quarter when game was 2+ scores.They didn't shut Bell down very well.
Why would we need three weeks? All of that can be sewn up next week.Next week the division, week after that the bye, week after that home field throughout.
All we need is Seattle and Detroit to take a loss. The Falcons have already taken a loss. I actually think Seattle has a better chance at taking the loss. The Lions get the Bears so hope the "any given sunday" rule applies.Actually, we can clinch homefield throughout next week.
We held the redskins to 6 points through 3 quarters.Look at Bell's stats at the half and end of 3rd qtr when the game was <1 score. Bell gained most of his yards in the 4th quarter when game was 2+ scores.
Again, we don't hold the Giants to zero 1st half points nor 3 points through 3 quarters.
Well damn. I forgot how far ahead we were compared to the rest of the NFC.Actually, we can clinch homefield throughout next week.
I'd say against the Vikes having the 8 point lead worked out well for us.
Whether you go for 2 or not, you still count on defense preventing a TD in the first place. So it becomes a case of comparing chances of Dak/Zeke converting a 2-pointer vs defense preventing a 2-pointer.I wouldn't. Take the 8 pt lead, and force them to have to make the 2 pt try to tie.
Look at how that worked out for us just a few days ago.
Cool. Hope we face them a third time in the playoffs then.We held the redskins to 6 points through 3 quarters.
There's a reason for that. Because it is stupid. You only go for two when you have to.but overall in the NFL, wondering if going for 2 is even considered. I don't think I've seen it once.
Glad to see there was some real consequences for the Panthers for that decision.
Newton benched on opening play for undisclosed reasons. Derek Anderson throws INT on first play from scrimmage.
Yes it does. Using hindsight we know that there is a 100% chance of winning by not going for 2. If we had gone for 2 there is probably somewhere around a 50% chance of going into overtime. So using hindsight we absolutely made the right decision.Whether you go for 2 or not, you still count on defense preventing a TD in the first place. So it becomes a case of comparing chances of Dak/Zeke converting a 2-pointer vs defense preventing a 2-pointer.
We won the Vikings game, but that doesn't mean going for 2 would've been the wrong decision.
I don't necessarily disagree with kicking the XP, especially with a Sam Bradford-led offense, but overall in the NFL, wondering if going for 2 is even considered. I don't think I've seen it once.