Here’s why the Falcons’ Smith should have gone for two
To borrow from the great Louisianan Joe Dean Sr.: "Tony G. plays a little stufferino." (AP photo)
This post is an adjunct to the Falcons-Saints game column, which can be found here.
1. Mike Smith erred in not going for two after the Falcons cut the lead to 28-23. Smith’s position was that, with 13:57 remaining, it was too early. “You don’t even start looking at the 2-point chart until there’s seven minutes to go,” he said. But a 2-point conversion would have drawn the Falcons within a field goal, and the successful 1-pointer pulled them only within four, which is essentially the same as being down five: You still need a touchdown (or two field goals) to take the lead. And a successful 2-pointer would have left the Falcons within tying range on their final three possessions.
2. You might never see a better duel of tight ends. The Saints’ Jimmy Graham caught seven passes for 146 yards and two touchdowns. The Falcons’ Tony Gonzalez caught 11 passes for 122 yards and two touchdowns. (Gonzalez’s were the 100th and 101st touchdowns of his distinguished career.) Both tight ends played college basketball — Graham at Miami, Gonzalez at California — and both punctuated touchdowns this given Sunday by dunking over the crossbar. Asked if he ever worries about getting too old to dunk, Graham said: “I’m 6-foot-7. I’ll always be able to do that.”
3. The league’s least-penalized team hurt itself badly. Asante Samuel intercepted Drew Brees’ first pass and returned the ball to the Saints’ 12 but was flagged for excessive celebration, a penalty not often assessed in the NFL. Pushed back to the 27, the Falcons wound up kicking a field goal to lead 10-0 after five-plus minutes. As any coach will tell you, there’s a big difference between 10-0 and 14-0. And when the Saints punted inside the final minute, a holding penalty on Lawrence Sidbury moved the Falcons from their 41 to the 31 with 37 seconds remaining — another significant reversal at another significant moment.
Further reading: Bill Barnwell of ESPN’s Grantland on why Mike Smith should have gone for two.
Further still: Chase Stuart of Football Perspective — I really like Football Perspective, by the way — on why Mike Smith should have gone for two.
And even further: Jason Lisk of The Big Lead on why Mike Smith’s bigger error was on the next possession.
And further again: A Football Commentary chart on when you really should go for two.
By Mark Bradley
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
197 comments Add your comment
Short yardage solution
November 12th, 2012
9:19 am
Our problem with short yardage is very frustrating – but what’s worse is how we approach those situations.
Whenever we need 3rd or 4th and 1 we put in our BIG package – two tights big fullback and one wideout. We give the defenses permission to bring 10 in the box. Offensive line is not built for power game and d- line ALWAYs gets penetration giving backers and safeties chance to blitz gaps – too much traffic to get through and Turner rarely does anything after first low contact except fall down. So we end up losing yardage and never come close.
SPREAD the field with 4 wides – make the defense play coverage and roll safeties into 2 deep – clear the box and give your line a chance for crying out loud. It is not rocket science to figure out. If they still stack box hit Julio or Roddy on two yard stop or slant because corners will have to give some cushion. Come on Koetter. Figure it out for crying out loud.
TB
November 12th, 2012
9:22 am
When they got down to the one or two yard line, they wasted a down with a running play. Why insert a running play when it hadn’t worked for you all game. My thought was Ryan should have rolled ou, and if no one was open, ran it in himself.
Stevereeno
November 12th, 2012
9:22 am
They should have lost three other games this season. Same problem, can’t score in the red zone.
Mike from the Coast
November 12th, 2012
9:24 am
Evidently we don’t have a running play that goes outside on 3rd and one. I agree with a poster or two on here, a quick pitch once in a while. If you run the exact same play up the middle and it has failed 3 times earlier in the game, why would you expect a different result?
Jimhatl
November 12th, 2012
9:27 am
If Roddy had kept running on the next to last play instead of back peddling, touchdown Falcons, game over.
KC Falcon
November 12th, 2012
9:27 am
They will certainly be re-evaluating certain short yardage running plays in film session and for practice this week. We’ll probably see some new formations and personel packages as a result.
Probably less Turner in those situations, and more Quizz.
As has been discussed already, if the Falcons go for 2 and make it at 28-25, leaving them with needing just a FG to tie at 31-31, I believe Brees takes the Saints down in just over a minute for the game winning FG anyway. He would have had enough time himself.
There were several plays that could have been made, including Ryan not throwing up high to Julio Jones on an earlier 3rd down play in the left end zone. He had single coverage there like he wanted and didn’t make a good throw.
On the last throw to Roddy in the end zone over the middle, Ryan was rushed hard and threw off one foot, so he didn’t have the full 100% zip on the ball to get it there a split second earlier, so as not to be knocked down. He couldn’t get a little more lead on the throw either.
It’s all frustrating because even down 28-17, the Falcons still could have and should have taken this game. The Saints were pretty inspired to knock off their undefeated rival in their stadium. They made a lot of plays that they haven’t been consistent at making through the early part of the season, especially on defense.
The Falcons need to be ready for payback back at home in a few Thursdays.
Don’t overreact to one loss, even though it had several familiar plays that let the Falcons down. Better to correct this stuff now, rather than have it come up again down the stretch or in January.
Eli and the Giants couldn’t win in Cincinnati. The 49ers couldn’t take care of the Rams at home. The Bears couldn’t beat the Texans in Bear weather in Chicago. The Eagles couldn’t stop their skid at home against a beatable Cowboys team. Just remember all that when piling on the Falcons. They weren’t the only high quality team to lose a game on Sunday.
That game should be a great teaching tape game and sort of a wake up for the players. Smith always talks about little things. Samuel’s penalty after the INT changed the complexion of the scoreboard. Those extra 4 points wound have come in handy later on.
Should be lots of motivation for next week and the Saints 2nd game, and to get things right for the playoffs.
Wutehvah
November 12th, 2012
9:29 am
If you can’t run the ball vs. the Saints, then we’re going nowhere in the playoffs. We need to address this now. Go Falcons!!
Cpt Kirk in Arkansas
November 12th, 2012
9:30 am
How about holding Dimitroff & those who acquire players accountable?
I realize Ive harped on this in the past but, assuming the committee responsible for the players draft, aint smoking crack..who would draft:
Peria Jerry when Clay Matthews and/or BJ Raji are available
AND who would allow Julius Peppers to slip thru ones fingers when he bacame available for free agency
The list of players Missed By TD & CO who became All pro or stars elewhere would fill a wing in the Smithsonian.
How bout some accountability Dimitroff?
How bout doin your job ??? or is your definition of success is amassing an *-1 record against numerous sub >500 teams
Is success also winning seasons and one n done toastings in the playoffs..
Perhaps if you hired me for your job, Id have passed on you in favor of Ken Herock or Jerry Glanville
get it?
You hvae a short window to win it all with the cuurent offensive playmakers we have.
In a few yrs Gonzalez, Roddy White, and Julio will be gone and youll have to aatempt and I say that grudgingly to draft for both sides of the ball, instead of whatever youve been doing..
One gem in the Julio quest and I give credit where its due, doesnt make up for passing over potential stars for cupcakes and non impact players
It was a nice idea to go and draft 2 big stud linemen this past April but we’d hope that both would be starters, given the places we gave up to get to where they were evfen available but
Has it led to a better run game, especially when the games on the line and they cant punch it in from 2 yards on 4 plays and instead we attempt another cute pass play in a reduced red zone???
That really sends a message to the entire ballclub, the fans, and your opponent about the ferocity of your O line
Get it? the Saints did.. Tony G can only resue our bacon so many times inside the 5 before hes rendered ineffective by multiple coverages/
or are will you still be pleased with a winning season then one n done again?
Dilla
November 12th, 2012
9:34 am
I defended Turner before, blaming the offensive line for not opening holes. Not anymore, It’s the same thing against the Saints last year and against the Giants in the playoffs. We cant run for critical short yards. He runs directly into tackles, he gets brought down too easy for a power back and he’s slow. Time to run somebody else.
Red Zone football
November 12th, 2012
9:35 am
This loss is not on Mike Smith….
before I rant…@NORRIS CHUCK – I was talking about the Saints defense, which has been label and statistically backed as the WORST DEFENSE IN THE HISTORY OF THE NFL!!!! That’s pretty bad.
Heck, anyone should be able to rack up 450 yards and 35 points on those clowns…Everyone else is, by the way…Not to take anything away from Matt Ryan’s performance yesterday, but it does put it in perspective. We knew Brees was going to be tough to stop, and he was. No pressure on him did not help.
1. Red Zone – 50% TD conversion in RZ vs the worst defense in the history of the NFL, and this years weakest run defense – ranked 32nd. The worst. period.
2. 46 yards rushing – 18 of which came on one run. So, that’s 28 yds rushing on 17 attempts. 1.5 a carry won’t get it done. Is it Turner or the O-line or both??? All I know is it will not get much better if you can’t run it on the Saints.
3. Key situations – Yes. Matt Ryan’s numbers looked gaudy. But, when we needed big plays/throws – the balls have to be in front of the receivers in a catchable spot. He had little if any pressure on him yesterday – he’s got to be more accurate, make better reads in redzone to win big games. How else did the NFLs worst defense ever break up 11 passes??? Maybe Bradley has an explanation.
The reality is we can’t run it – so it’s on Ryan to make Red Zone plays, plain and simple. We can move it down the field, just can’t get it in when it counts. That’s why Matt Bryant has kicked 12 FGs of less than 40 yards.
Is Ryan better than last year? Yes. But, it’s the Saints type game that will be played on the post-season. Hopefully we can learn from it or we are one and done again.
Dawglasville
November 12th, 2012
9:35 am
Every time we get within the 5 we need to take a delay of game penalty and throw for the end zone.
Cpt Kirk in Arkansas
November 12th, 2012
9:38 am
Stevereeno,
spot on..those situations couldve been handled with a decent run game.. Three seasons ago, scoring from inside the 5 via the run wouldve been routine, instead of the fade and other cute pas plays in a much shorter goal line red zone..some of those passes to the corner-ie fade routes, can if underthrown, be run back for pick 6’s..
Whatever happened to trap blocks with a fullback lead blocker..do we even have a fullback or is he only for special teams beef?
and what about a pass rush other than Abraham, who must be kept fresh for the postseason run, if that will ever get beyond the first game
Joey
November 12th, 2012
9:38 am
Mark, as it turns out, we surely wouldn’t have gotten the 2-points anyway, as lousy as we were in goal line situations.
Just sayin . . .
WhatNoOneWillSay
November 12th, 2012
9:40 am
This has to be said. I REALLY like Michael Turner. Turner was an important weapon in the Falcon’s 4 years of winning records.
But Turner can’t play anymore. Look at the Saints runners breaking tackles and making yards. Turner can’t do that anymore. He only makes yards now when the blocking is great.
Give Turner his kudos but we need to replace him.
Steve762
November 12th, 2012
9:40 am
I have no problem with Smith not going for 2, it was too early. Falcons didn’t loose because of that.
They lost for two reasons: (1) Couldn’t get the ball in from 1 yd line. (2) Poor tackling from defense, 2nd week in a row they couldn’t make easy tackles. Need Witherspoon back big time.
Walter
November 12th, 2012
9:43 am
Bradley, sounds to me like you think you ought to be the coach. Nothing but complaints about what should have been done and that this team is not good enough to have won eight games.
.
Home of the Braves
November 12th, 2012
9:44 am
The Falcons just seemed a little too tense. It was a big game against the hated Saints to keep the perfect season alive and they let the pressure get the better of them. Now that the loss is behind them they can losen up a little bit and just play football without worrying about being perfect.
LASH LAROO
November 12th, 2012
9:45 am
“I defended Turner before, blaming the offensive line for not opening holes. Not anymore, It’s the same thing against the Saints last year and against the Giants in the playoffs. We cant run for critical short yards. He runs directly into tackles, he gets brought down too easy for a power back and he’s slow. Time to run somebody else.”
THAT. PLUS1
Falcon66
November 12th, 2012
9:45 am
The Monday morning QB’s are out today–it is amazing when we lose our first game that so much is wrong with a great team and a great coaching staff. Yes we should have won that game but to blame not going for two or to blame Michael Turner is kind of silly. If there is any blame it should be the silly penalties particularly the early one on excessive celebration (Samuel) HUge difference to lose ten yards due to penalty and have to settle for a FG, Make the TD there and you are up 14-0 and also have 4 more points which could have made for a tie at the end. Let’s stick together and keep supporting this excellent team–not without issues but still doing rather well I would say
abby normal
November 12th, 2012
9:45 am
It’s not all Turner’s fault. Yes, he seems slow but the offensive line has never been the same since Harvey Dahl left town.
rc35
November 12th, 2012
9:50 am
If you can’t get it in from 1 yard out in four tries, what makes you think we could get it in from 3 yards out on one try? We lost it on the TD that wasn’t, not the 2-point conversion that wasn’t.
D man
November 12th, 2012
9:56 am
Very frustrating, they looked afraid to win and take the next step. Someone needs to kick them in the butt today… They should have won this game.
JP
November 12th, 2012
9:56 am
Wow, Mark. I think this is the biggest reach for writing material that I’ve seen out of you in a very long time. Lets say the Falcons go for the 2-point conversion and fail. No way to know how that would have changed the flow of events. Maybe they later score a TD and pull ahead, 29-28. If they hadn’t gone for two earlier, an extra point puts them up by three. Instead, they have to go for two again. They miss again and the Saints drive down and kick the winning field goal. I have no problem with Smith not going for two with that much time remaining, especially considering how poorly both defenses were playing. There was no way to know how many more times each offense might score or how the final might play out. Complaining about a coach not going for a 2-point conversion early in the fourth quarter only distracts from what was the real fatal wound: being unable to score a touchdown after having second-and-goal at the 1.
older1
November 12th, 2012
9:57 am
Remember when running backs could dive over the top for a score, H. WALKER could have scored yesterday even at his age.
drew
November 12th, 2012
10:00 am
It doesn’t bother me so much that we didn’t go for two (although I agree with you, Mark). But I do have a problem with Smitty saying ““You don’t even start looking at the 2-point chart until there’s seven minutes to go.” The chart is s good “guideline”, but a coach should use his head, and his gut, to determine when he should go for two, not some freakin’ “chart”. Who’s smarter, the coach, or the chart? Every game is different…a coach needs smarts, the ability to think outside the box, and a good sized set of balls.
And on the short yardage failures…we’ve proved all year long (and several times last year) that we cannot bunch-up and push eleven players back for yard. When we line up like that EVERYBODY knows what’s coming. How about going five wide, spreading the field, and trying something DIFFERENT? Hell, even a run up the middle has a better shot if you don’t have 9 in the box. Maybe a QB sneak or QB draw? Come on Dirk…you’re better than this.
I’m satisfied that this staff is smart enough to figure it out. And in the meantime, 8-1 isn’t a bad place to be.
Booker T
November 12th, 2012
10:02 am
The Falcons are who we thought they were.
CSB
November 12th, 2012
10:03 am
Look…be real…Turner aint getting it done Falcon coachees. IF we want to improve our chances a change at running back MUST take place immediately. IF NOT….”what is the definition of insanity?”..Keep doing the same thing expecting a different result! Turner the burner is BURNT UP! The time to make a change is now if we want to make a serious progress towards making the Super Bowl and winning it!
Staying the Course
November 12th, 2012
10:05 am
This all doens’t matter since the Birds can’t get one yard … on multiple occasions … and the won’t win a play-off game
take it from me.
November 12th, 2012
10:05 am
The Falcons don’t match the intensity the saints play with! .Thats why they could not gain a yard when they had to have it with 2 minutes left in the game,thats why they have lost something like 11 out of 13 to the saints.the falcons have got to match the intensity of the saints or the outcome will be the same everytime.
Jo
November 12th, 2012
10:09 am
Dont agree Mark. The Falcons have no run game. The Falcons cant win in the playoffs without a run game period. There is time to fix the problem still but first the coaches must acknowledge it (Turner already has).
William
November 12th, 2012
10:11 am
and here’s why the Falcon’e will lose their first playoff game.. AGAIN
- can’t run the ball
-can’t stop the pass
can’t stop the run
my 14 year old could have scored with 7 tries from the 1 … WEAK!!!
beezit
November 12th, 2012
10:11 am
woulda’ shoulda’ coulda’…..even a guy like me can place a simple game like that…got any sports related commentary..??..
Monday morning one-liners
November 12th, 2012
10:13 am
[...] Bradley of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution thinks Falcons coach Mike Smith erred by not going for two early in the fourth [...]
beezit
November 12th, 2012
10:15 am
Forgot to ask, what the hell do #2 and #3 have to do with a two point conversion attempt….are you getting journalism classes from Suguira..??..
Peter
November 12th, 2012
10:35 am
Mark going for two meant getting 2.5 yards….. and so why if you can’t get 1 yard ?
Our offensive line must be too small or too weak ? Turner must be too slow ?
Peter
November 12th, 2012
10:37 am
With out a doubt both lines got beat on Sunday…… can’t make a yard on the ground, and zero pass rush.
Falcon Man
November 12th, 2012
10:41 am
We gave the game to them!!! Ryan played great…but should have utilized 88’s size and threw those balls up high for him to go up and grab….
10per
November 12th, 2012
10:44 am
Maybe I have been watching Tech too much all year, but the Falcons really could use a pitch/zone read in their playbook. Getting down inside the 5 and not being able to get out pads low and run it up the middle is killing us.
willdave
November 12th, 2012
10:49 am
Man, so many things went wrong yesterday. I don’t think you can pick just one instance as making all the difference. However, my biggest concern is our inability to gain short yardage when we really needed it. What was up with that crap?
Anyway, I just want to thank and congratulate the Falcons for beginning the season 8-0 and flirting with immortality. This is by far their best start ever, and we true fans are da*n-proud of this team.
GO FALCONS!!! (Saints still suck!)
Gordon
November 12th, 2012
10:49 am
Mark,
On going for two, if we fail the score is 28-23. If we then score a touchdown we have to go for two again just to get up by a field goal. If we fail the second time, a field goal beats us. Going for two too soon is called chasing the point and it rarely works out, especially at the highest levels. We lost, as you wrote yesterday, because we couldn’t score from so close at the end. We need a guy that can always get us 1 or 2 yards.
Falcon Brass
November 12th, 2012
10:57 am
So what if Turner failed to gain an inch on the goal line against the Saints? So what if Turner only gained 42 yards against Arizona in the playoffs? So what if he only gained 39 yards against Green Bay in the playoffs? So what if he only gained 41 yards vs New York in the playoffs? So what if he always fails to gain even a yard in critical situations? So what if he puts us in 2nd and long 10-20 times a game? So what if we are 0-3 in the playoffs? We are 8-1. We know what we are doing. Is that arrogance?
Gatorman
November 12th, 2012
11:14 am
Am I the only one who thinks the Falcons have no running back now. I really get tired of seeing a slow oaf running sideways to be consistently hit behind the line. I notice on several occasions yesterday the line opened a hole, but it closed before the the back even got there.
Tommy Maddox
November 12th, 2012
11:16 am
With NO running game, I’m surprised the Falcons have gone this far without a loss.
Angus
November 12th, 2012
11:16 am
Plain and simple, we had plenty of chances to win, but never took advantage of the opportunities.
I thought the three and out with 3:30 to go in the first half (which started with a horrible Turner carry) put us behind the 8-ball, and set the tone for the rest of the game. We needed a big play at some point to make up for it, but never got it.
Oh well, let’s get ready for the next one.
Monday morning one-liners | Sport Snapback Hats Sport Snapback Hats
November 12th, 2012
11:18 am
[...] Bradley of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution thinks Falcons coach Mike Smith erred by not going for two early in the fourth [...]
Old Granddad
November 12th, 2012
11:19 am
We could not score from the one. How could we have gotten the two point conversion? We need some very quick pass plays. Snap and throw.
SAL
November 12th, 2012
11:22 am
Everyone just chill!!!!!!!!
james
November 12th, 2012
11:37 am
The 4th and goal play call was abysmal. They needed to roll Matt Ryan out to the right, bootleg style, to shift the receivers and defenders that direction. Matt would have had the option to an open Tony Gonzalez, or may even have headed straight to the pylon himself and gotten in with the winning touchdown. Why not play to the strengths of this team rather than rehashing over and over what has become a low percentage play for them (Turner up the middle)?
flagger
November 12th, 2012
11:59 am
READ THIS CAREFULLY!!!! WE ARE IN DESPERATE NEED OF A RUNNING BACK THAT CAN GET A YARD WHEN NEEDED…. AND A DEFENSE THAT CAN TACKLE….
dan
November 12th, 2012
12:04 pm
We are the Saints Little Brothers, and this is what Little Brothers do, find ways to lose games to Big Brother. Ridiculous! The Saints have the worst defense in the freakin league, and we can’t score TD’s on our last two offensive possessions???? Its good to know that we can still lose to the Saints even without their head coach. How about this…how about I just go ahead and assume that we lose to the Saints every year. Just automatically chalk up 2 losses. Falcons finish 12-4 with 2 losses to the 8-8 Saints. G@D DAMMIT!!!