This whole "when to go for two" thing.

[msp26505]

Either I am just stupid or Dan Dierdorf is an idiot. (Both of the above is an option here, BTW.)

We all probably know the scenario, but I'll play it out for those who perhaps weren't paying close attention.

32-14 Steelers, 6:00 left, ARI ball on about the Steelers 25 yard line.

I say to my buddy, "the Cards have to kick the FG here to make it a 2-score game, then worry about 2 TD's and a 2-point conversion later." He disagrees at first, then sees the light and thinks the Cards are stupid for going for it. They get the first down, so it's a moot point.

A few plays later, TD ARI. 32-20, about 3:30 left.

I say, "they have to kick the extra point here because if they don't make the 2-point conversion, it's still a three score game." This time, agreement from my buddy, but Dan Dierdorf says, "the chart says this is a place you go for 2".

WHAT?

What stupid effing chart is that?

Are these people this dumb or am I overlooking something obvious...you save your "must win" situation for a place where you must win it. Otherwise, assuming you can even get that far, you change your last drive from a "must score a FG or at TD" to a "must score a TD or lose".

This is simple math, folks.

[papillon]

Re: This whole "when to go for two" thing.

They should have kicked the extra point and extended the game. Missing the extra point forced the Cardinals to score 2 TDs instead of a TD/2 pt and FG. And, if it were me and I were the Cardinals, I would take the FG as soon as possible to extend the game and force the Steelers to play offense to get first downs. By failing on the two point conversion they essentially closed the game out for the Steelers by forcing themselves to need 2TDs rather than TD and FG.

Bad decision the way I see it. When you're behind you want to extend the game (force the team that is winning to continue playing and not being able to just kneel on it or run the clock down).

Pappy

[SteelAbility]

Re: This whole "when to go for two" thing.

Yes, i agree, going for one is the better option. However, you were mistaken when you told your friend that if AZ misses the two that its a 3-score game. 32-20 is a two score game. However, it's a two-TD-score game which is obviously more burdened than a TD/2pt-FG game.

[SteelCrazy]

Re: This whole "when to go for two" thing.

Not to mention not kicking onside on the ensuing kickoff....

[msp26505]

Re: This whole "when to go for two" thing.

Yes, i agree, going for one is the better option. However, you were mistaken when you told your friend that if AZ misses the two that its a 3-score game. 32-20 is a two score game. However, it's a two-TD-score game which is obviously more burdened than a TD/2pt-FG game.

Good point. I knew what I meant, just said it wrong.

[Discipline of Steel]

Re: This whole "when to go for two" thing.

What! Dierdork again?!? Former Cardinal...Luckily I didnt get the game and had to listen to WDVE which turned out to be a pleasure.

The PAT should definately have been a kick but the point was moot.

[SanAntonioSteelerFan]

Re: This whole "when to go for two" thing.

What! Dierdork again?!? Former Cardinal...Luckily I didnt get the game and had to listen to WDVE which turned out to be a pleasure.

The PAT should definately have been a kick but the point was moot.

I never listen to the TV feed, always Hilgrove and Tunch and Wolf on Steeler radio or DVE or whatever. I don't care if the video doesn't match the audio ... I just love hearing Pittsburgh Steelers call the game!!

[Northern_Blitz]

Re: This whole "when to go for two" thing.

Yep, I'd always delay the 2-pt convert as long as I can. They need new guys making those charts.

But, as we can see it was moot because they didn't get the next TD, so they weren't hurt by the fact that they were forced to go for the TD on their 3rd scoring drive in the last 4 minutes.