Because it backfired on the Jets. They weren't tied after ATL scored with 2 minutes left, they were down 1. And being down 1 and 2 makes no difference.
Lots of people posting in here who are wasting their obvious talents on a message board, I cant understand how they are not all coaching in the NFL when its so obvious and easy to see what is necessary to win
Yes when coaches have trouble making this decision and most football writers, analysts, so called experts, ex players, and ex coaches all disagree about this, we fans can't have an opinion on what Rex should have done.
It didn't backfire, we still won the game and it meant nothing in the long run as far as the game went. Either way with 2 minutes to go, we needed a FG. It wouldn't have changed, except if we missed it, but we didn't. Saying it backfired is as silly as saying JR Smith was a great signing lolz. If there were turnovers or big ST plays, there very well could have been a TD and 2 FGs, and then the Jets are down 1 if that happens and the SAME people will be in this SAME thread bitching about why they went for 2 instead of taking the guaranteed points. Some people just HAVE to complain about something. This is why so many Jets fans disgust me. If the Jets don't play an absolutely perfect game (by fans standards lol) they will get attacked by their own fans, whether it's a blowout or a 2 point win.
You would have sung a different tune if we'd lost. If the Jets continue to win games and get to the playoffs, it's these type of screw-ups that will bite us in the ass. I'm not even saying that it was a poor decision not to go for two. I'll ask people that have coached the game...but my instinct tells me it wasn't even considered at the time, and that's what concerns me. On the other hand, getting Sanchez hurt for the season looked like a horrible decision at the time, but look how great that turned out. So who knows....
If we lost I would have blamed the refs, because we did win that game on 3 separate occasions. Football is very situational. That's why it bugs me out when these alleged fans act like they know more than our coaches about coaching a football team and just state things matter of fact like "it's a no brainer, you HAVE TO" as if they've ever even stepped on a football field and had to analyze everything enough to make that call while dozens of other things are going on around you. That's what really urks me. The decision itself was debatable and could have gone either way, but the fact that people hide behind it to attack our coaching staff as if that's the ONE WAY TO DO THINGS is ridiculous.
Uhm, no, it isn't. That isn't even remotely close to what I was stating or implying. The logic of when to go for two is based on the # of possessions a team is leading by or trailing by as well as maximizing the respective lead or minimizing the respective deficit. The only debate on the issue pertains to answering the following question: At what point in the game is it too early to go out of your way to optimize your team's current score relative to your opponent's? Once more, it's common sense. If you felt it was too early in the game to go for two, that's perfectly fine. That is always debatable. But to question the logical merits behind going for 2, when you are up by 12, is rather silly. And again, my point was that it makes no difference whether an actual chart exists or not (Btw, apparently it does) because the guidelines on when to go for 2 are common sense, provided that you understand that football is a game of possessions. And once more, no one is saying coaches should blindly follow these guidelines because there is always a debate as to when it is too early to be taking chances to maximize the number of points scored on a possession. However, to pretend that no logically consistent set of guidelines actually exists (the so-called "chart") is just moronic.
Yes it did backfire, we could have lost the game on a missed FG instead of just going to overtime. It backfired. I don't see why that's hard to see. The goal of going for 2 there is so that if a team scores 2 TDs on you, they don't take a lead, and well we didn't got for 2 and the other team scored 2 TDs and took a lead on us. That is backfiring. Ah yes, in Knicks thread when we talked about that, I never said it was a great signing. Go look. You were the one who said "Fuck JR Smith. Biggest mistake of the off season was signing that scumbag loser." You can look for the quote where I said it was a great signing, you find all I said was you overreacted and that JR has a decent shot at having another good year for us. Well now you're just complaining to complain. I think we should have gone for two even if the Falcons somehow got 3 possession. The likelihood from the game showed it wasn't likely to happen. So in reality you are pulling up the extreme scenario more so than the typical scenario. This is complaining, but should we just put our hands over eyes and hears and pretend the Jets played every situation perfectly? Or can we constructively discuss how the Jets can better? I would like to talk about they can make improvements, and I thought this was a situation they could have capitalized on. If you don't want to listen to people discussing whether or not if we should go for 2, don't come in here complaining about it. What did you expect from this thread, everyone in 100% agreement? If this is getting attacked, "12 minutes is right on the edge of zone of 1 or 2, but I would have gone for two. As we saw, going for 1 there ended up backfiring for the Jets that game." you need to relearn what attacking is. It's a big discussion, it was a big discussion on Twitter when the Jets went for 1 and it was discuss in Bill Barnwell's article in the section for Thank You For Not Coaching this morning. I don't see how you can ignore it backfired. Again, the goal of going for 2 there is if the other team scores a TD on their two possessions they don't take a lead because being down 1 or 2 doesn't make a difference late in the game. In fact ATL did take the lead by 1 points because we didn't got for 2 it backfired. Did we not lose, yeah, but that doesn't mean every single decision and play was 100% correct in the game. I mean Geno got sacked on 3rd down on that one drive in the 4th to end it, but that playcall didn't backfire because we won? THat's the logic I'm getting from your post. Winning doesn't mean everything that happened in the game is okay just like losing doesn't mean everything that happened in the game is wrong. Also the question of this isn't saying Rex should be fired, it's a question saying should we go for 2 and now you go on this rant about people attacking the Jets. This is probably the most neutral thread about Rex's coaching and this is the one you decide to rant about people "attacking" the Jets? Pick a more relevant thread, like maybe can't wait for Rex to be fired thread on the first page? But no this discussion that actually not been derailed by the usual suspect topics when discussing Rex was your battleground.
I hear ya. But you gotta admit...the coaches could improve on their game time decisions. Whether it's a challenge or clock management, they've shown that there's room for improvement. How hard is it to find an alert, smart knowledgeable nerd to evaluate shit like that on the sideline. Jonah Hill would be perfect... btw...it's "irks"...not "urks".
A quote from Rex: "Obviously we were thinking about it, but I was like you know what it’s still too early in the fourth quarter, so let’s just take the one because a lot of things can happen," Ryan said. "But, yeah obviously when they scored I was like, 'Oh gosh, I should’ve gone for two.'" I think that sums it all up.
Not really. He was joking about that. That is great to hear, it means Rex gets it. he doesn't just go by some silly chart.
I did not look at any chart until the next day. I did not decide the Jets should go for 2 after the TD. As we were driving I decided very clearly that's the play. I only used the chart as an argument with the people that are Rex apologist. any coach worth his weight should be thinking of a 2 point conversion before the TD, not after. That's the point, Rex does not look ahead, he is reactionary and to damm emotional. That's great before and after the game, but its a thinking mans game between the lines during those 60 minutes. He needs to get his act together and fast.
Not going by "some silly chart" almost cost him the game. Not sure how that's great to hear? Maybe he should consider it next time.. Glad he has a sense of humor about it though. Would hate for our Coach to take something like a major 4th quarter decision seriously....
His D allowing 2 TDs almost cost him the game, his decision to not got for 2 may have won the game in regulation.
he was not kidding, he's full of crap. He never thought of it because if he did, he would have went for it. it took someone asking him to even think about it. DA DA DUMMY
