The two point strategy and play calling

[SteelerSask2]

Another example of not knowing your opponent and understanding the situation. If you thought you were running these guys out you are high. So that means every point counts. Once the initial strategy happened and failed it created a domino and pressed them into bad situations that left 4 free points on the board. Plus the play calling before half and especially on the first and goal after the interference that put them first and goal was ***.
Again Leven Bell was misused at points. 3rd and one and they go toss. Cm'on.

 

[bermudasteel]

I was ok w/ the first two attempts...after that...I started drinking Tito's---heavily.

 

[SteelerSask2]

Unfortunately, after the first one it snowballed. No point being up by 9. Someone with more foresight would have said any point could matter. In my opinion a big part of the reason they lost was what happened before and after half. I think there was a good opportunity to take total control of that game and make the Cowboys one dimensional.

 

[Steeler Pride]

My problem with going for 2 when you don't have to is that it can hurt momentum to a degree. If you don't get it, Instead of the offense going to the sideline after scoring a TD, they go after failing to convert. It also places pressure on your defense as well at that point. To me, take the "easy" one point unless you need the 2.

 

[skialta]

see my issue with repeatedly going for two was that if you hadn't kept doing it....
you had off to bell down at the end, don't do the fake spike (which the announcers cleaim hadn't been done since marino, but for some reason i remember a cindy qb doing it to us in about 98, but i digress)
if you don't keep going for 2, you bleed the clock down and kick the field goal. game over, drive home safely

 

[MT~Forged]

Going for two was not the problem, PASSING for two EVERY TIME, was the problem. You have to be able to make the D respect the run possibility.

 

[skialta]

take the 1 point..and win the game. **** play calling

 

[Steeler Pride]

Going for two was not the problem, PASSING for two EVERY TIME, was the problem. You have to be able to make the D respect the run possibility.

Which one of our big strong RB do you suggest pounding into a stacked box? Never mind that our OL was not opening holes in the middle of the field. We don't have a good RB that can get 2-3 yards regardless of the defensive front.

 

[SteelerFan448]

Going for two was not the problem, PASSING for two EVERY TIME, was the problem. You have to be able to make the D respect the run possibility.

I disagree. The OL was getting no push in the ground game and they have had plenty of success with two-point conversions through the air. The problem is no Miller, Bryant, Wheaton in the lineup. Green was in his first game and I just can't get that excited about the young receivers quite yet.

 

[steelerscotty]

Going for 2 the first time was ok, after that it was like Tomlin is a Heroin addict chasing the dragon. If we take the 1 point tries and make them might have been looking at an OT game.

 

[stillwright]

We actually only lost 2 points. By us going for all of the four 2 pt conversions( and missing them) it dictated that the Cowboys themselves go for two 2 point conversions in which they missed both. I still didn't like going for 2 pts on all of our attempts. Cut your losses after the first one. Hopefully Tomlin got all of his 2 pt attempts out of his system after that game.

 

[SteelerSask2]

We actually only lost 2 points. By us going for all of the four 2 pt conversions( and missing them) it dictated that the Cowboys themselves go for two 2 point conversions in which they missed both. I still didn't like going for 2 pts on all of our attempts. Cut your losses after the first one. Hopefully Tomlin got all of his 2 pt attempts out of his system after that game.

I agree. You can't really just count the ones the Steelers missed and say 4. I agree it was 2. However, you also can't say that the Cowboys actually would have scored the final TD. The Steelers knew the Cowboys were within easy field goal range. They sent an all out run blitz to try to disrupt the play and possibly cause a turnover. There was no layer of the defense whatsoever. When Elliott broke the initial line it was over. Had they been up by three it would have went into overtime.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

I was ok w/ the first two attempts...after that...I started drinking Tito's---heavily.

I was gonna say the same thing. The first two you could make a case, after that no.

 

[Drink IRON City]

This is one place / example where Cowher would have made the right decision. NO QUESTION about it. He understood opponents and points better than MOST. There is a reason he was like 114-2 in games where he had a more than 10point lead. He knew how to get that lead.



Salute the nation

 

[Turd Ferguson]

This is one place / example where Cowher would have made the right decision. NO QUESTION about it. He understood opponents and points better than MOST. There is a reason he was like 114-2 in games where he had a more than 10point lead. He knew how to get that lead.

Cowher was conservative enough that he wouldn't have gone for the two-point conversions and put himself in the position of chasing points. You are correct.

 

[skialta]

We actually only lost 2 points. By us going for all of the four 2 pt conversions( and missing them) it dictated that the Cowboys themselves go for two 2 point conversions in which they missed both. I still didn't like going for 2 pts on all of our attempts. Cut your losses after the first one. Hopefully Tomlin got all of his 2 pt attempts out of his system after that game.

You are living in your fears

 

[Acereros]

My problem with going for 2 when you don't have to is that it can hurt momentum to a degree. If you don't get it, Instead of the offense going to the sideline after scoring a TD, they go after failing to convert. It also places pressure on your defense as well at that point. To me, take the "easy" one point unless you need the 2.

Haven't seen this from that angle. Your words are full of wisdom!

 

[chipped ham]

Cowher was conservative enough that he wouldn't have gone for the two-point conversions and put himself in the position of chasing points. You are correct.

In fairness, when Cowher was coaching an extra point wasn't from 35 yards out. Completely different dynamic. And after the last two touchdowns, you have to go for two in order to put yourself up by the field goal. Had we converted the last two pointer, does Dallas play aggressive enough to go for the win, or do they play for overtime?

 

[obxsteeler]

There wasn't much bitching about going for 2 when we were 8/11. Also didn't hear much about Boswell's total ineptness beyond 50 when he was a couple of feet wide.