'What ifs' are to be encouraged, but their weakness is often the lack of context, or safety relevance (risk probability) and thus training value. There are also issues of simulation (training or PC), instructor knowledge, and use of the results.
If the OP question is a technicality, then that aspect can be discussed in isolation, however if it's within an hypothetical scenario then it is vital to consider the preceding events and the overall context of the situation.
The OP assumes that the failures have been clearly identified, without ambiguity, and with low stress; yet in many less severe real aircraft situations, crews suffered startle and surprise with degraded mental ability. With hindsight human activity can appear to be irrational, yet it probably made sense to the crew at the time. Thus it is very important to consider their viewpoint, not just our view in remote isolation from an ambiguous evolving event and very limited timescale.
The OP implied that the crew had sufficient mental model of the local area; this could be a gross assumption. More often the situation model has to be constructed - recognising and linking previous aspects, and only then might options and desired outcome be considered.
As per #4, fly the aircraft. Navigate to a suitable clear space; if this is a runway great, if not manage the approach as best possible to avoid obstacles. Stopping will be the least of your concerns.
Aim for normality where possible, don't think that you can make up procedures on the 'fly'. Aiming for a short low speed landing probably involves greater risk than an overrun.
Thinking for rationalising the situation and planning the outcome, and justifying the course of action will require whatever spare mental is available. The task is to avoid the crash, mitigate the outcome of a non ideal landing. At best we might be able to follow the advice in the checklist, at worst in attempting to rewrite the drills or consider low priority issues we may fail to achieve the primary safety aim.
PS. Crews may not have any more time that that taken to write and check this post; stopping, no more than the time to read the PS.