should the Panthers almost always go for 2pt conversion? (1 Viewer)

[biggamer3]

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7172753/a-requiem-patriots-defense

Why aren't the Panthers just going for a two-point conversion all of the time?

OK, so the Panthers shouldn't go for two when they're down one or in a tie game in the fourth quarter. In situations where one point is obviously valuable, they should be taking the single point. But in situations where the Panthers would automatically be going for one, it seems like they might be able to gain a competitive advantage by going for two.

The math is pretty simple. Olindo Mare will convert his extra points about 99.5 percent of the time. We'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say that choosing to kick the extra point will be worth one point. If the Panthers can convert on more than 50 percent of their short-yardage runs, it would be profitable for them to go for two more often than not.

And the Panthers are a rather remarkable rushing offense in short yardage. They've run the ball 41 times with three yards to go or less this year, and they've converted 29 of them. That's a success rate of 70.7 percent. Perhaps the Panthers won't be quite that successful on two-point conversions, but it's reasonable to infer that they would probably succeed more than 50 percent of the time.

 

[roadkill1292]

I like the outside-the-box thinking exhibited. Not only do I think that Carolina should go for it every time, but I also think that they should eliminate the PAT altogether anyway.

 

[IHEARTFF]

Pretty sure the math says every team should go for 2 almost all the time

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Pretty sure the math says every team should go for 2 almost all the time

This.

 

[solorca]

I know it will never happen, but it's an interesting thought. I honestly think that from the two, Cam Newton is as close to unstoppable as it's possible to be in the NFL.

 

[The_Wolfman]

It might make sense mathematically, but in the real world is it worth the extra wear and tear and increased risk of injury for their franchise QB just to possibly gain a small edge?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

It might make sense mathematically, but in the real world is it worth the extra wear and tear and increased risk of injury for their franchise QB just to possibly gain a small edge?

Hell no it isn't worth it, not if you are charging yer qb for the 2pter ea time.But if you can be more judicious with your play selection.... that's different.

 

[Joe Summer]

Pretty sure the math says every team should go for 2 almost all the time

I think the sample size may be too small. If teams went for 2 every single time, I think the success rate would eventually decrease.

 

[solorca]

Pretty sure the math says every team should go for 2 almost all the time

I think the sample size may be too small. If teams went for 2 every single time, I think the success rate would eventually decrease.

Good point. I'm sure teams do a good bit of work on goal line stuff now, but if every touchdown had a two point conversion involved, there would probably be a lot more time and effort spent on coaching that piece and creating defensive "wrinkles"

 

[karmarooster]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that the offense should rush to the 2 point line following a touchdown and force the defense to either call or a time-out or go with the personnel on the field from the previous play who are potentially gassed, especially if the TD is a longer play. Of course this advantage would be moot in cases where the officials stupidly review the TD when it wasn't really in doubt in the first place.

Nonetheless, most teams with an effective run-blocking O-line or a beast at QB should do this every time - not just the panthers, but the Broncos, Browns with Josh Cribbs - I'm sure there are others. Especially considering that these teams have losing records, it calls for taking greater chances to win.

Only problem is that risk-averse head coaches would be roasted by talk radio for the entire week.

 

[warpedone]

Two yards at the goal line is a whole lot different than two yard from just anywhere on the field.

 

[SacramentoBob]

I don't understand why bad teams waste their time punting. You're down 21 in the 3rd quarter, you can stop punting now.

 

[biggamer3]

I don't understand why bad teams waste their time punting. You're down 21 in the 3rd quarter, you can stop punting now.

Look at browns yesterday. Down 14 in late 3rd I believe, punted on fourth and two from other teams 37

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I don't understand why bad teams waste their time punting. You're down 21 in the 3rd quarter, you can stop punting now.

Look at browns yesterday. Down 14 in late 3rd I believe, punted on fourth and two from other teams 37

Statistically, the Browns have a better chance of recovering a muffed punt than picking up two yards on fourth down.

 

[joffer]

Pretty sure the math says every team should go for 2 almost all the time

This.

/thread

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Pretty sure the math says every team should go for 2 almost all the time

This.

/thread

Pretty sure the math doesn't actually say that, though.

 

[joffer]

Pretty sure the math says every team should go for 2 almost all the time

This.

/thread

Pretty sure the math doesn't actually say that, though.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Pretty sure the math says every team should go for 2 almost all the time

This.

/thread

Pretty sure the math doesn't actually say that, though.

I too am eager to see IHEARTFF's math.

 

[Da Coach]

I agree with the post about the increased risk of injury. In addition, there are only so many snaps to go around during any week of practice. What areas of preparation would the team have to cut back on in order to practice more goal line offense for their 2 point conversions? I also think it's doubtful that the Panthers (or other teams) want to show teams some of their goal line plays when they don't need to. I believe they would rather save those plays for when they're worth 6 points or for a situation when they really need to get 2 points.