Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Actually, if you miss the two point conversion when down 8, you can't tie in one possession. You need to compare apples to apples. The chance of missing the two-point conversion is the same either way.
Sorry if it hit home. My points have already been stated by others, I bolded the parts above in my statement that reiterated what has been said and I wanted to emphasize. Did you skip that part? I was trying to see the other problem from the other side and that is the only thing I could figure out is what I said, because, 99% of the time, going for 1 is the right call. Matt Waldman's post makes some sense in lining up for 2 to see if you can get a mismatch, if not then call timeout and kick the extra point. So what was your point, really nothing intelligent came from your thread? Sorry I had to spell things out for you, let me know if you have any other issues.
Maybe nothing stops you. If it were me, the fact that I wanted to give me team a better chance to win the game would stop me from kicking a field goal. If you don't like a generic "4th and long," make it 4th and goal from the 6. Or 4th and 4 from the 15. Whatever. The point is, if you're trailing by two TDs plus one 2 point conversion, and you score a TD and then later find yourself is the red zone on 4th down, there is an obvious time and yardage situation in which, assuming you converted on the 2 point try, going for it is better for your team than kicking the field goal and hoping to get the ball back. There has to be. And if you find yourself in a situation like that, you're FAR better off knowing if you converted on the 2 pointer already. It informs the decision.
But that has little to do with the "go for 2" debate. If you went for 2 and made it, you are down by 7. Are you kicking a field goal or going for it in this situation? I sort of see your point but I'm not sure how this is a real "advantage" of going for 2 early.
If you miss it at the end, you've significantly increased the chances of losing the game. Just like if you miss it at 7 mins, you've significantly increased the chances of losing the game. So why do that to yourself earlier? You're more than likely going to lose if you miss the 2 either way.
oh... and again, I think this this is a marginal advantage even seeing where you are going. It doesn't counteract the downsides of missing by any means.
What's the downside of missing early as opposed to missing late? The only one I can think of is that the other team will sit on the ball slighly more when they're up 9 than they would have if they were up 8. And the psychological mumbo-jumbo, I guess. But that's always overblown- we're talking about professional football players in the fourth quarter of a winnable game. They're not gonna run into the locker room, put The Smiths on the loudspeakers, and smoke clove cigarettes if they're down 9 with seven minutes left.
That's not the best you can hope for. What you gain is the knowledge, when you have the ball fourth and one at the 25 with 2:30 left and 1 timeout, that you have to go for it, or have to kick the field goal.
You're being purposely ignorant. You scored the TD. You're down 9. You kick a PAT. You can now tie in one possession with a TD and 2pt conversion. You scored the TD. You're down 9. You make the 2 pt conversion. You can now now tie in one possession with a TD and a PAT. You scored the TD. You're down 9. You miss the 2 pt conversion. You now can't tie with one possession. So when the probability, explained earlier in the thread, is 96% that you'll make the PAT vs 45% that you'll make the 2 pt conversion, why would you take the higher risk scenario of making it a 2 possession game to tie?
If you're down 8, you are missing crucial information, which is, will I make the 2-point conversion or not? Kicking the FG is only right if you miss the 2-point conversion. Going for it is only right if you make the 2-point conversion. If you don't try the 2-point conversion until later, you don't know which is the right decision.
You go for two as late as possible. As a point of reference, I get visibly upset whenever I see a team go for two outside of the 4th quarter.If you go for two too soon, you're opening yourself up to the possibility of having "given up" a free point. More often than not, that point comes back to burn you.
Surely you've done an "accurate assessment of all possible outcomes", since you've mentioned it more than once. Care to show your work?I don't think that means what you think it means.The only one bad at assessing risk is yourself. You would rather risk ending your game with 7 minutes left than having a chance with 30 seconds left. Does that make sense?This thread is putting on a clinic for the well-known point I raised earlier. People are just naturally really bad at assessing risk.
Is this one of those "secret" formulas that only risk assessors know about?I'd say over a quarter at least. Considering that the EV of an extra point attempt is barely higher than the EV of a two point conversion attempt anyway, I think there would have to be enough time left for a ton of different scenarios to realistically come into play. Once there's an easily contemplated number of possessions left, I want to know where I stand. If the other team scores a TD on their subsequent possession, that doesn't change the calculation at all, and if they kick a field goal I don't see much of a difference- again, still need the two point conversion (plus a FG) at some point to tie, and two TDs still wins it no matter how I do on the conversions. So it would have to be enough time for there to be several possessions by both teams.
It's not a higher-risk scenario. No matter what order you do them in, if you're going to tie with two possessions, you have to make both the 96% try and the 45% try. Doing the 96% one first doesn't increase the chance that you'll do both successfully. It's the same either way.But tying in two possessions isn't the only beneficial outcome. There's also a slight chance that you could win in three possessions even if you miss the two-pointer. The question is whether the chance of that happening is better by going for two first or by going for one first. I haven't read the whole thread, but I suspect the better arguments are for going for two first. If you're going to need three possessions, it'd be helpful to know that as soon as possible. (Your opponent will also know it, but it probably won't affect his game plan as radically; thus the info will be less useful to him.)
You don't kick a FG when you scored a TD. If you're down 8, you score a TD. Thats 6 pts. Then you're down 2 and you immediately go for 2 there at the end of the game. If your down 9, then you're in a worse position where you need a TD and a FG to stay alive.
At 25 or 45 I'd kick. Probably at 13 also. I think the answer to your question is that time has to be short enough to narrow the scenarios significantly. At 7:00, I can pretty much assume that each team has 1-3 possessions left, which makes the scenarios narrow. At 15:00, it's more like 2-5 possessions, and the possibilities are diverse enough that you should still be maximizing for expected value instead of looking at specific score scenarios. The extra point has higher expected value (in terms of points on the board).
It is absolutely true that if you miss the 2-point conversion, you're in a worse position than if you don't miss it. What you're not getting is that you're in that position whether you miss it early or late. If you miss it late, you don't know you're in that position, and can't adjust your tactics accordingly.
What's the score when you score? 49-40? or 19-10? How is your Def.? How is your Off.? How many Time Outs do you have left?Of course the answers above make a differents. Nothing is a clear cut answer. No matter what a so called sheet says to do.TobiasFunke said:
1. Just kick the extra point and hope to score and get the two points the next time around.2. Go for two and if you don't make it go for an unside kick.3. Go for two and if you don't make it kick off and hope to get the ball back twice.Most coaches want to try and keep up the pressure. So most would kick the extra point and play on.It's true that the score matters- not much, but a little. I was assuming a standard game in the 40 point neighborhood.It's also true that most coaches would kick the extra point.However, they do it to cover their rear ends, not to "keep up the pressure."For an example in a similar situation, see Belichick's "controversial" 4th down gamble vs. the Colts last year. Obviously the right call as far as giving the team the best chance to win, but because it was risky and unconventional, he got crap about it for weeks from the media and probably some fans. He could do it because of who he is, but a less secure or well-regarded coach could never get away with it, even though it's the best thing for the team.What's the score when you score? 49-40? or 19-10? How is your Def.? How is your Off.? How many Time Outs do you have left?Of course the answers above make a differents. Nothing is a clear cut answer. No matter what a so called sheet says to do.TobiasFunke said:1. Just kick the extra point and hope to score and get the two points the next time around.2. Go for two and if you don't make it go for an unside kick.3. Go for two and if you don't make it kick off and hope to get the ball back twice.Most coaches want to try and keep up the pressure. So most would kick the extra point and play on.
He did the exact same thing against the Chargers last week. He got stuffed on that fourth down attempt, also, but since the Patriots won I don't think many are talking about it.
The scenario is not exactly the same, because if you kicked the extra point, you still have to make a 2-point conversion. If the 2-point conversion fails after your scenario, you're in worse shape than if it had failed initially--specifically because you know that you need to score on two different possessions. Yes, if it fails your options are limited--that's why it's important to know whether it failed or not.
Yeah, I hadn't seen anything about it at all.If you couldn't tell, this is a favorite topic of mine- why NFL coaches are so incredibly risk-averse, and also why fans and the media don't really grasp strategy and risk, and as a result essentially pressure their coaches into making decisions that hurt their favorite football team. This one is a favorite, but I like the two point conversion stuff too. Hope Chase keeps 'em coming.
Enough of this. You're the one commiting this. If you miss the 2 point conversion you can't tie with two possessions period, whether you did so early or late is immaterial to that point. If you assume you score twice (which you are either way), the odds of two point conversion success aren't likely to change from the first TD to the second. THEREFORE:The "benefit" of waiting is physcological. You keep your players mentally in the game longer. I think that's a valid point, but pros aren't getting down with 7 minutes left...too much time. I, and others, have outlined some advantages that can be gained.
Maybe this seems like kind of a vague standard, but I think if you're in a situation where anymore than a 3 and out by the opponent will most likely ice the game, then it's time to start going for 2. So if you're in a situation where you need to either force a 3 and out or recover an onside kick, then it's time to go for 2.There may be a few other cases in the 4th quarter, but I think that would be the basic standard.
you might increase your odds of getting the second TD, but that second TD is worthless without the 2 pt conversion
Whats there to adjust. You just lost your best chance to stay alive by missing that 2 pt conv. Whether its the last second or with 7 mins to go is semantics. The percentages show that the game is more than likely over. So why take that chance away from yourself? When you're down 15, you're trying to tie or go ahead in as few possessions as possible. Thats 2 TDs, 1 PAT and 1 2pt. So by going for the 2 first, you increase the percentage that you will need another possession rather than staying alive with the high percentage 1 pt.
mid 2nd qtr at least. its very possible its proper to go for 2 regardless of time left.
That doesn't matter you have to convert a 2pt conversion and kick in either case (assuming we are playing for OT). What everyone seems to be ignoring is that you still have to score a second TD. If you are down by 1 TD + whatever conversion attempt needed with 5 minutes left your entire playbook is open. If you are down a TD + FG with 5 minutes left your entire playbook is not open. You are playing against both the opponent *and* the clock.
Funny thing is I completely agree with you about nfl coaches being too risk averse. The "fraidy cat punts" and other similar issues that TMQ laments about on a regular basis are ridiculous plays. I agree with many of them. Coaches need more desire to try to win rather than to minimize the amount they lose by. I just don't think this discussion fits that criteria.
Because going for 2 has a success rate under 50%, while OT has a rate (pre-coin flip) of 50%. The only time you'd consider going for 2 would be on the second score, on the road, when you know you got very lucky to score the second TD (IE: They've dominated you, but you scored when the corner and safety tripped each other, or some other highly improbable and lucky scene). IN other words, I find it very hard to believe that anyone would consider such a poll even remotely serious given the animosity in this poll, and the condescending, somewhat fececious attitude displayed by a few of the "kick it" proponents. When the 14 poll was posted, I took it to be a condescending joke. I did that because that math is relatively easy to see. If I was incorrect, apologies.
but if you're not going to make the 2 pointer, using you whole playbook to drive down the field and scoring that second TD is an exercise in futility. You play to win the game -- not to keep it close -- not to wait until that last possible moment before you lose.
Seriously? So, if you are down 15-0 at then in the 2nd quarter and you score a TD, you are going for 2? Unless you plan to go for 2 after every TD, this is insane.
I'm not sure whether it'll affect your thinking, but what if I told you that the "go for 2" guys do understand that, but would go for 2 anyway?Think of it this way. There are two possibilities: that you will make your two-point conversion (whenever you try it), or that you will miss it.
You aren't "keeping it close" you are keeping all your available options open and limiting your predictability. By being able to use your entire playbook you are playing to win.
1. Maybe pretty high.2. Much better than the odds of scoring twice when you think you need only one score to tie.
I disagree of course, although I do think it's less clear because of the emotional or psychological factors, like renesauz says. I just think those kinds of things are pretty insignificant in the case of professional football players with plenty of time left on the clock, and clearly outweighed by the strategic factors.
You are actually doing just the opposite of keeping your options open.
You are more screwed if you miss with 7 minutes left. Your opponent knows that you have to pass and your opponent knows that you have to have at least 2 possessions.
What's the morale of a team with a minute to go down by 2 because they just missed the 2 point conversion and now has to recover an onside kick or force a 3 and out?What's the morale of a team with a minute to go down by 2 that missed the 2 point conversion earlier but just scored again to give themselves a chance to win if they recover the onside kick or use all 3 of their timeouts and force a 3 and out?Just like the argument being made by the "go for it late" guys, I think it's likely that the morale would be much higher for the second group than the first group. And that morale would be even more prone to big swings and more important in this scenario.
