@miktoxic said:

i think the tour can handle himself.

my post was more to get a feel of where you're comin from.

welcome to the forum. just realize that i like to bust chops but even though sometimes it might seem personal, it isn't. i love my browns' brethren.

-peace.

LET'5 GO BROWNS!!!

No worries brother, having read many of both of your posts, I have a healthy respect for both The Tour and The Toxic. Also, it's nice to be welcomed by one of the elder statesman of the forum.

@hish747 said:

Hi miktoxic,

My response was sarcasm in response to Tour2ma's sarcastic quote referring to me.

Although I'm sure Tour2ma feels fortunate to have you here to defend him, we're just having a friendly disagreement. We'll be fine.

i think the tour can handle himself.

my post was more to get a feel of where you're comin from.

welcome to the forum. just realize that i like to bust chops but even though sometimes it might seem personal, it isn't. i love my browns' brethren.

-peace.

LET'5 GO BROWNS!!!

@hish747 said:

Just as you assume that they would get two possessions to score two field goals, you could just as easily assume that your team would be kicking two field goals as well. Especially since you have one of the best kickers in the league. Your scenario requires the other team to have two possessions, drives and successful field goals. I'm trying to avoid the situation where just one possession or score beats you. For an illustration of this, see the first game against Philadelphia.

And you assume the 2 point conversion to be successful - which is another flaw in your theory. Shurmur sucks as a coach but he didn't screw up on that call..

@miktoxic said:

wow, i see that you're sort of a newbie but to throw that post into this conversation was just plain stoopid and condescending.

might want to test the waters next time before you dive in not knowing there's a huge boulder a foot below the murky waters on which you lurk.

Hi miktoxic,

My response was sarcasm in response to Tour2ma's sarcastic quote referring to me.

Although I'm sure Tour2ma feels fortunate to have you here to defend him, we're just having a friendly disagreement. We'll be fine.

@thenew23 said:

Really??? Wow!! With 14 minutes left, what happens if you don't get the 2 and the other team kicks 2 field goals and beats you? Could you please give us a thorough explanation about that one?

This is a non-issue. Shurmur made the right call... period

Just as you assume that they would get two possessions to score two field goals, you could just as easily assume that your team would be kicking two field goals as well. Especially since you have one of the best kickers in the league. Your scenario requires the other team to have two possessions, drives and successful field goals. I'm trying to avoid the situation where just one possession or score beats you. For an illustration of this, see the first game against Philadelphia.

@hish747 said:

No need to be embarrassed Tour2ma, I'm happy to take you under my wing and explain it to you. The point of the 2 point conversion is not to be six points behind. This is advantageous because if the other team scores a touchdown, they only tie the game rather than win (see, Touchdown+PAT*=7 points which would beat you if you are down by 6 points). I want you to feel free in the future to call on me to explain anything to you, not just football either. Best. 747.

* PAT=point after touchdown (1 point as opposed to 2 points with the "2 point conversion")

Really??? Wow!! With 14 minutes left, what happens if you don't get the 2 and the other team kicks 2 field goals and beats you? Could you please give us a thorough explanation about that one?

This is a non-issue. Shurmur made the right call... period

@hish747 said:

No need to be embarrassed Tour2ma, I'm happy to take you under my wing and explain it to you. The point of the 2 point conversion is not to be six points behind. This is advantageous because if the other team scores a touchdown, they only tie the game rather than win (see, Touchdown+PAT*=7 points which would beat you if you are down by 6 points). I want you to feel free in the future to call on me to explain anything to you, not just football either. Best. 747.

* PAT=point after touchdown (1 point as opposed to 2 points with the "2 point conversion")

wow, i see that you're sort of a newbie but to throw that post into this conversation was just plain stoopid and condescending.

might want to test the waters next time before you dive in not knowing there's a huge boulder a foot below the murky waters on which you lurk.

@tour2ma said:

Yup... some forum members just don't understand the 2 point conversion...

No need to be embarrassed Tour2ma, I'm happy to take you under my wing and explain it to you. The point of the 2 point conversion is not to be six points behind. This is advantageous because if the other team scores a touchdown, they only tie the game rather than win (see, Touchdown+PAT*=7 points which would beat you if you are down by 6 points). I want you to feel free in the future to call on me to explain anything to you, not just football either. Best. 747.

* PAT=point after touchdown (1 point as opposed to 2 points with the "2 point conversion")

@tour2ma said:

Yup... some forum members just don't understand the 2 point conversion...

This isn't madden. You don't go for 2 every time you are up by 1 or 5. Damn.