Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Obviously I didn't mean specifically 30 seconds. Allow me to rephrase: It's much better to know you need two scores with 7 minutes left than with less than 7 minutes left.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
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.
You're down by 15 with 7:00 minutes left in the game (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Chase Stuart
- Start date
The Iguana
Footballguy
But you do. You lose a ton psychologically. If you go for 1, your defense is playing with the mind set of "1 stop and we are still in this". Missing the 2 and your defense is playing with the mindset of "we need a miracle to pull this out".Read the whole sentence. You don't lose anything you wouldn't also lose by failing the conversion later in the game.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
This thread is putting on a clinic for the well-known point I raised earlier. People are just naturally really bad at assessing risk. 
bigmarc27
Footballguy
Of course it's better, but will you not concede it's better to be down 8 with 7 minutes to go than 9 point with 7 minutes to go?Of course it is, and statistically speaking you're going to get the latter more often than the former.
Insein
Footballguy
If you can tie the game with 30 seconds left after being down 15 then you did good to get there. At that point, this is your last shot anyway. There is no second chance. You miss and your done. Pretty much the same thing if you miss with less than 7mins left to go down by 9. Thats what your not getting. You gain no valuable information from missing. You miss, your done. Thats the point.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
I'm not trying to single you out, Jayrod, but this is, IMO, where most people go wrong with the logic."Staying in the game" is not the same thing as maximizing your chances of winning. Your goal should be the latter, not the former. For example, let's say you're down by 21 in the first quarter. I give you the option of flipping a coin: heads, the game is magically re-set to zero-zero; tails, you lose. If you choose not to flip the coin, you stay in the game. But that doesn't mean it's the right decision. People say stuff like "worry about that later" or "stay in as long as possible" or "put off the hard choices because you don't know what will happen." Those are cop outs. The only goal should be maximizing your chances of winning, not maximizing how long you tell yourself "there's still a chance."
As an armchair coach, I'm putting off the highest-risk proposition until the very last moment.
I'd rather be down 8 going into my "final drive" than down 9. Based on the overall probability of success of 2-point conversions (in general -- not any specific scenarios regarding my team or the current situation), I'd rather make that attempt AFTER having scored the 13 "easy" points.
I'd rather be down 8 going into my "final drive" than down 9. Based on the overall probability of success of 2-point conversions (in general -- not any specific scenarios regarding my team or the current situation), I'd rather make that attempt AFTER having scored the 13 "easy" points.
Last edited by a moderator:
Insein
Footballguy
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.
The Iguana
Footballguy
I think keeping the game at 1 score maximizes your chance to win. Doesn't matter if that is 7 points or 8. 1 score is key. It keeps you out of desperation mode as long as possible. The easiest way to keep it at 1 score is to kick for 1. Making the 2 point conversion gives you a very limited advantage in that facet while failing the 2 gives you a huge deficit.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
This thread is putting on a clinic for the well-known point I raised earlier. People are just naturally really bad at assessing risk.
This is surprising. I figured some people would take the conventional wisdom play, because they would confuse coaches protecting themselves and looking out for their own best interests with the decision that gives you the best chance to win. But I can't believe how many people are getting it wrong.Maybe this will help- don't think of being down 8 as being "down one score," because it's not. It's a 50% chance that you're down one score. Consider a coin toss right after you get into the end zone. If it's heads, you get six points for the TD (and still need two scores), if it's tails, you get eight (and are within a TD and XP of tying the game). The coin's been flipped. It's lying on the ground. Do you want to see if it's heads or tails right now? Or do you want to wait to look at it until after you score again? And yeah, if you look at the coin, so does the coach of the team in the lead. So what? If it's heads he's gonna keep the ball on the ground to kill the clock and avoid turnovers, if it's tails he's gonna keep the ball on the ground to kill the clock and avoid turnovers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
To the various 7 vs 8 vs 9 posts in the past few minutes: Yes, it's obvious that being down by fewer points is better than being down by more points. That's true at any point in the game. It's also only part of the equation, which is why it's a gross oversimplification of the problem.
Jayrod
Footballguy
OK. I'll go from best case to worst. As best I could find, the success rate of 2-pt conversions in the NFL is between 40-50%. I'll go with 45% for this breakdown. NFL PAT's have a 96% conversion rate.Scenario 1: Go for two and make it. 45% chance of occurring:See the bolded. You're doing it without even realizing it. You're too focused on what can go wrong by going for 2, and what can go right by kicking the PAT. If you did an accurate assessment of all possible outcomes, instead of just the ones that support your preconceived notion, you'd see that going for 2 immediately is the right choice.
Yay! You are down a touchdown & PAT. Your team has 7 minutes left to get one stop and score one TD with the PAT to tie. You also have the possibility of getting 3 posessions and winning.
Scenario 2: Kick PAT and make it. 96% chance of occurring:
Yay! You are down a touchdown & 2-pt conversion. Your team has 7 minutes left to get one stop, score a TD & tie with a 2-pt conversion. You also have the possibility of getting 3 possesions and winning. There also could be enough time left to get a third posession in case the conversion fails.
Scenario 3: Conversion fails. (Only the probability of this occurring changes) 55% chance with 2-pt, 4% chance with PAT.
Uh-oh! You are still down 2 scores with 7:00 to play. The other team can now try to milk the clock, leaving you little time to get 2 stops and 2 scores. You can go for the onside kick, of course, but that has only about a 24% success rate. You are behind the eight ball at this point and all moves become increasingly desperate and expected. You know what you have to do, but so does your opponent.
The bolded line for me above is a big plus, IMO. I'd take a 96% chance to have the opportunity for that third posession, than a 55% chance that I've sealed my fate.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
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.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
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.
I've never seen a football game end with seven minutes left.
bigmarc27
Footballguy
You didn't watch Denver and Oakland this past weekend.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.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
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.
I assess risk for a living. It's well-documented that humans are naturally bad at doing it. There are a lot of great examples of that in this thread.TobiasFunke
Footballguy
One thing I will say- Chase phrased the question poorly. The correct answer if you want to win a football game is completely different from the correct answer if you're a coach and you want to keep your family in food, clothing and shelter and not have to deal with annoying questions from the media and fans with no concept of risk and strategy.
Jayrod
Footballguy
Uh. At that point, you'd only need 1 score as you'd already have the 1st.
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.I assess risk for a living. It's well-documented that humans are naturally bad at doing it. There are a lot of great examples of that in this thread.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
Ironically (or maybe not - I always misuse that term), kicking the PAT is the "safe" decision for the coach to make, precisely because the majority of people erroneously think kicking the PAT is the right decision.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Of course. But that's not particularly helpful in this case. That's like saying after an interception it would have been much smarter for the team to just kneel it on that play.
Ignoratio is assuming that your odds of converting do not change from the 1st TD to the 2nd - so if you miss on the first - you would have missed on the 2nd.If you miss on the 2nd, then you still need another score. Thus, going for it the first time, tells you that you definitely need two scores if you miss, and it alters the way you play the game.Its flawed logic, but it explains his position.
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
you make it a one score game and kick the extra point.....
I have seen this scenerio play out......
1. you go for two and miss, you are down 9......
2. the other team gets a FG putting them back up by 12.....
3. had you kicked the extra point, you would only be down 11 (TD and FG), but now you need two TD's again...
why would you ever put yourself in a position with 7:00 minutes left to HAVE to get the ball back twice, when you may only need it once.........
a ton can happen in 7 minutes......fumbles etc.....you could end up costing yourself a potential victory by getting greedy early....
you don't want to HAVE to get the ball back twice and HAVe to make them both TD's.......
I have seen this scenerio play out......
1. you go for two and miss, you are down 9......
2. the other team gets a FG putting them back up by 12.....
3. had you kicked the extra point, you would only be down 11 (TD and FG), but now you need two TD's again...
why would you ever put yourself in a position with 7:00 minutes left to HAVE to get the ball back twice, when you may only need it once.........
a ton can happen in 7 minutes......fumbles etc.....you could end up costing yourself a potential victory by getting greedy early....
you don't want to HAVE to get the ball back twice and HAVe to make them both TD's.......
you need to rethink how you look at strategy. its trivially obv that in this situation (down 8 with the clock winding down) you should leave time on the clock. if you miss the 2pt try you can still get an onside kick. denying your team that chance is a huge mistake.
renesauz
IBL Representative
The Iguana
Footballguy
This is just about risk assessment. It's also about the psychology of the situation. If you go for 2 and miss, you give your opponent a huge advantage and kick your defense in the balls. If you go for 2 and make it, you do little for your team or to your opponent. If you go for 1, you put the pressure on their offense to keep the ball and give your defense greater hope in their situation.
That's where the 7 vs 8 vs 9 talk comes from. You lose a lot more mentally by being down 9 than you gain by cutting the lead to 7 IMO. If you miss after the 2nd score you are in the same boat but why sink to that level sooner than you have to?
That's where the 7 vs 8 vs 9 talk comes from. You lose a lot more mentally by being down 9 than you gain by cutting the lead to 7 IMO. If you miss after the 2nd score you are in the same boat but why sink to that level sooner than you have to?
The Iguana
Footballguy
I'd rather see them go for 2. You lose little from their success and gain exponentially from their failure.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Could you explain the flaw? I assume you think the odds of converting to 2 pt conversion change from the 1st TD to the 2nd? If so, how?
Statler & Waldorf
Footballguy
Shoot the hostage.
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Based on how hard many seem to think it is to convert a 2-point conversion, how do you argue that you've done "little" for your team by no longer needing a 2-point conversion to tie the game? And it doesn't matter whether you view a 2-point conversion as 10% likely to success or 45% likely. At some point, you need it. If you're so worried that you're going to miss a 2-point conversion, it's disingenuous to suggest that an 8-point lead is just a one score game.
Spaces Lines and Laces
Footballguy
You kick it.
You were just down 15 points. The first thing that tells us is that you DID NOT stop them at ease every time they had the ball. The second is that they were able to stop you some of the time.
Now, if you go for 2 and miss, you have 7 minutes to stop them--which you were down 15, not a granted thing that you'll do it. Then you have to score, which again, they've been able to stop you.
Then, if you DO get that part done, if there's enough time you kick it and hope you can stop them and hope you can get back into FG range, or hope you're lucky enough to steal away an onside kick. ALL in 7 minutes. I'm not good at math, but you may end up hoping to average less than 2 minutes a possession.
The other factor is the "this is it" moment. Ideally, every player uses every ounce of breath and muscle on every single play. However, at 7 minutes, there is some reassurance of "if we don't get it, there's still time." But, if you put that big ol' offensive line, and tell them it's do or die, you're gonna get them just a little more fired up. The defense probably gets up for the moment a little extra too...but it's not do or die for them.
The problem is that people just assume you're going to score again. You've obviously not been a scoring machine to be down 15 at one point. It may/likely takes the 7 minutes to find 1 more score. You give yourself ONE chance to tie it at the end. You miss, at least you gave yourself a chance. You go for 2 on the 1st TD, you may never even get as close as 2.
You were just down 15 points. The first thing that tells us is that you DID NOT stop them at ease every time they had the ball. The second is that they were able to stop you some of the time.
Now, if you go for 2 and miss, you have 7 minutes to stop them--which you were down 15, not a granted thing that you'll do it. Then you have to score, which again, they've been able to stop you.
Then, if you DO get that part done, if there's enough time you kick it and hope you can stop them and hope you can get back into FG range, or hope you're lucky enough to steal away an onside kick. ALL in 7 minutes. I'm not good at math, but you may end up hoping to average less than 2 minutes a possession.
The other factor is the "this is it" moment. Ideally, every player uses every ounce of breath and muscle on every single play. However, at 7 minutes, there is some reassurance of "if we don't get it, there's still time." But, if you put that big ol' offensive line, and tell them it's do or die, you're gonna get them just a little more fired up. The defense probably gets up for the moment a little extra too...but it's not do or die for them.
The problem is that people just assume you're going to score again. You've obviously not been a scoring machine to be down 15 at one point. It may/likely takes the 7 minutes to find 1 more score. You give yourself ONE chance to tie it at the end. You miss, at least you gave yourself a chance. You go for 2 on the 1st TD, you may never even get as close as 2.
The Iguana
Footballguy
The flaw, IMO, is thinking that you gain or lose the same thing from failing or succeeding early that you do from failing or succeeding late.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jayrod
Footballguy
That's why I said "directly correlated". The idea that "putting the game on the line" with 7 minutes left means you are just pushing the 2pt conversion to the end of the game is flawed. When will the next TD be? I think with keeping the game within one posession, coaching changes. You have a better chance of getting the ball back with more time left for a third opportunity. That chance for a third opportunity is the wildcard and why I kick the PAT with 7 minutes left. With 5 or less, I would switch to a 2-pt conversion stance on the first TD.
H.K.
Footballguy
Yours is the only answer. 7 Minutes is the key. Way too early to go for two.Kicking the extra point makes it an 8 point game, so if your opponent makes a FG in the time remaining you are down 11, needing a TD+2/FG to force OT.Missing the 2 pointer and giving up a FG makes it a 12 point differential and it limits your options severely.Appreciate the shtick from the go for two crowd because it is very humorous
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
What if your quarterback is Romo? Do you go for 2 after the first touchdown so you don't put him in the high pressure situation of having to convert a 2-point conversion with 10 seconds left?
The Iguana
Footballguy
It may be disingenuous but it's a reality that players are human and will see an 8 point deficit differently than a 9 point one. Think about it from a fans perspective... if this is a home game and you go for 2 and miss, how many are going to head for the gates thinking it is over? If you kick the 1, how many are leaving? The team may won't "quit" as quickly as fans, but there will be a huge lose to them whether they admit it or not.
Jayrod
Footballguy
It's also disingenuous to suggest that the score doesn't directly effect the way everyone will play the game out.
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
I want them to go for two....if I stop them....game over...........I'd rather see them go for 2. You lose little from their success and gain exponentially from their failure.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
How are they different? It's worth two points either way.
The Iguana
Footballguy
Oh, and I'm not arguing that the 2pt conversion is hard to get. Statistically I think it is about 45 or 50% success in the NFL but that isn't my point at all. I'm arguing about making the players believe they have the best chance to win. 7 pts verses 8 doesn't change that significantly but 8 pts verses 9 changes it dramatically.
renesauz
IBL Representative
And this is where you're losing some of us. You miss the tieing 2 pointer later...you might well be done (barring an on-side recovery). You miss now...yeah, you need 2 possessions...but you're also more likely to GET two possessions..
Read that again...you are also more likely to get two more possessions. Teams up 2 scores late go ultra-conservative. They're running...you'r stacking the box. Three and outs are EASIER to achieve at that point then at any other. Teams up one score can't draw into an ultra-conservative shell. They have to convert first downs. They still pass with 7 minutes. On defense, you still need to defend the whole field...they are MUCH MUCH harder to stop. And guess what....all they need is a decent return and a first down or two and the scenario becomes more dire anyway, because a FG makes it that same 2 possession game.
At 10 minutes plus or 4 minutes minus, go for one. 10 minutes because there's too much time left. At four minutes because you're probably only getting one more possession either way so momentum and morale matter.
At 6 or 7 minutes, you go for two.
There are gray areas in between, which would be determined by things like
1. How's their running game/ how good are you at stopping it?
2. Wind/weather conditions (affecting FG possibilities for both sides)
3. Overall tone of the game (shootout vs. defensive slugfest)
Do you dispute that the opposition also gets the same information? They can adjust their offense, defense, and special teams game plans accordingly based on this "information", just like your team can.Also, with 7 minutes to go, it's entirely possible that you get 2 more possessions. Yes, you'd still go for 2 if you got the TD, but you wouldn't nessessarily HAVE to make it to win the game.
Jayrod
Footballguy
Covered already. That same information goes to the opposing coach.
Lash
Footballguy
If i was an owner, THESE are the types of questions I am asking prospective new coaches during the "Coaching Philosophy" part of the interviews
especially an easy one like this (automatic try for two after first score no questions asked) so i'd get immediate feedback to see if this coach knows what he is talking about
if he answered "no i'd wait" then i know we have a guy who doesn't understand logical situations and percentages
especially an easy one like this (automatic try for two after first score no questions asked) so i'd get immediate feedback to see if this coach knows what he is talking about
if he answered "no i'd wait" then i know we have a guy who doesn't understand logical situations and percentages
CalBear
Footballguy
The first flawed assumption is that if you're down 8, you're down by one score. You're not. You're down one TD and a two-point conversion. That's two scores.
Let's look at the scenarios. In the scenarios where you don't score two TDs, it doesn't matter whether you kicked or went for two, so the only relevant scenarios are the one where you score two TDs.
Scenario 1: You will score two TDs, and make the 2-point conversion. Same either way.
Scenario 2: You will score two TDs, and miss the 2-point conversion.
So the only scenario where the decision winds up mattering is when you score two TDs, and miss the 2-point conversion. Is it better to miss it with 7 minutes left, or closer to the end of the game?
One way to look at that is to answer this question: Would you rather be kicking off down by 9 with 7:00 left, or kicking off down by 2 with less than 2:00 left? To me, the first situation is obviously better. In the second situation your only hope is an onsides kick (assuming you used at least one timeout); in the first you can still get two possessions with good defense.
Another way is to look at the additional value of the information about the 2-point conversion. Let's say you get the ball back and drive downfield. With 2:30 left in the game, one timeout left, you have the ball fourth and 1 at the 25 yard line. Do you kick the FG or go for it?
If you're down by 9, you kick the FG. You can still stop them and get the ball back.
If you're down by 7, you go for it; the FG doesn't do you any good.
If you're down by 8, what do you do? You're forced to go for it, because you don't know if you're going to make the 2-point conversion or not. If you score a TD miss the 2-point conversion, going for it reduced your chances of winning, because you used more time and still need another score. Now you're kicking an onsides kick.
The additional information doesn't help your opponent, because if they are in the same situation (fourth down within field goal range), they will kick the FG whether they're up by 7, 8, or 9 points.
Let's look at the scenarios. In the scenarios where you don't score two TDs, it doesn't matter whether you kicked or went for two, so the only relevant scenarios are the one where you score two TDs.
Scenario 1: You will score two TDs, and make the 2-point conversion. Same either way.
Scenario 2: You will score two TDs, and miss the 2-point conversion.
So the only scenario where the decision winds up mattering is when you score two TDs, and miss the 2-point conversion. Is it better to miss it with 7 minutes left, or closer to the end of the game?
One way to look at that is to answer this question: Would you rather be kicking off down by 9 with 7:00 left, or kicking off down by 2 with less than 2:00 left? To me, the first situation is obviously better. In the second situation your only hope is an onsides kick (assuming you used at least one timeout); in the first you can still get two possessions with good defense.
Another way is to look at the additional value of the information about the 2-point conversion. Let's say you get the ball back and drive downfield. With 2:30 left in the game, one timeout left, you have the ball fourth and 1 at the 25 yard line. Do you kick the FG or go for it?
If you're down by 9, you kick the FG. You can still stop them and get the ball back.
If you're down by 7, you go for it; the FG doesn't do you any good.
If you're down by 8, what do you do? You're forced to go for it, because you don't know if you're going to make the 2-point conversion or not. If you score a TD miss the 2-point conversion, going for it reduced your chances of winning, because you used more time and still need another score. Now you're kicking an onsides kick.
The additional information doesn't help your opponent, because if they are in the same situation (fourth down within field goal range), they will kick the FG whether they're up by 7, 8, or 9 points.
renesauz
IBL Representative
Actually...no. Your offensive philosophy is much different down 8 or down 9. At 8, you're less aggressive....might even punt if you still have 3 timeouts on your own 40 and 3 minutes plus on clock. Down 9...you'll never punt again.I'm not even saying you're wrong...you very well might get another chance. But the chances of getting that third chance are actually greater down 9 then down 8. (Review my last post....the other team is also easier to stop when they're up 9 then up 8!!!)
Similar threads
- Poll
