| Sign Up | Google+

Playing not to lose makes you lose?

So I don't know how many of watched the game last night, but it was definitely some classic football, even if it did include the Cowgirls. Entertaining the whole night - couldn't decide whether to hope a loss and a short week would make Philly easier to beat, or hope a win and over-confidence. (just kidding, I pretty much always like to see Dallas lose, if only 'cause I live down here and it's always great to hear everyone crying about it on the radio)

Anyway, here's my question for you all - After two Philly field goals and two Dallas touchdowns, Asante Samuel (glad he's not in a Patriots uniform anymore) intercepts Romo, and the resulting drive leads to a McNabb - Westbrook TD. The score is now Eagles 12, Cowboys 14. I said, and continue to say, that Philly should have gone for two. Even if you miss it, you're only two back, less than a field goal. Make it, and you've tied the game. In the end, Philly was down 4, had to start at their 22, and it was a touchdown or nothing. 

So, is there a downside to going for two there that I'm missing?

To the bold go the spoils...

                                                                                                                                                                                                               

Recent FanPosts

View All Fan Posts

The Next FanPosts

There are 18 Comments. Load Now. Loading

Shortcuts to mastering the comment thread. Use wisely.

C - Next Comment
X - Mark as Read

R - Reply
Z - Mark Read & Next

Shift + C - Previous
Shift + A - Mark All Read

Comment Settings

Live comment alert: Hide it!

Comments for this post are closed.

tracking_pixel_5341_tracker tracking_pixel_5351_tracker