Stupid to go for two (1 Viewer)

[Zow]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

Why do you say it's stupid?J

Mathematically it is a big risk given that, on average, teams only convert like around 40 percent of the time. I remember reading some article/report on this awhile back. However, given the way Denver was playing, you have to figure their chance was more around 45 percent or so. This makes the play risky, but probably not "stupid."

 

[moleculo]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

Why do you say it's stupid?J

Mathematically it is a big risk given that, on average, teams only convert like around 40 percent of the time. I remember reading some article/report on this awhile back. However, given the way Denver was playing, you have to figure their chance was more around 45 percent or so. This makes the play risky, but probably not "stupid."

how do you come up w/ 45%? Assume all it takes for 2 yards is a single completion. Cutler was 36/50 for the game, or 72%. So, if that trend is to continue, odds of converting are more like 72%.

 

[[scooter]]

Can't stop San Diego, and he has a chance to essentially go up 3 games...genius.

It wasn't genius. In fact, it was just as much of a coinflip as overtime usually is.San Diego had scored on 7 of 9 drives (78%), while Denver scored on 6 of 10 drives (60%). Based on those numbers you could expect San Diego to have a 57% chance of winning in overtime. On the other hand, 2 point conversions are only successful about 44% of the time. So, Shanahan traded a 43% chance of winning in OT for a 44% chance of winning outright.And actually, even that 44% number is skewed, because it doesn't take into account the :24 seconds which remained on the clock.

 

[kaa]

Another statistic that would be interesting to know is how many coaches ever go for two in this situation. I'm betting it's extremely low, and that should tell you something about the wisdom of the decision.

if all the coaches in the NFL jumped over a cliff, should Shanahan do as well?

How far down is it? I mean if you pile up every body it may be a short drop for Shanahan if he jumps last.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

Why do you say it's stupid?J

Mathematically it is a big risk given that, on average, teams only convert like around 40 percent of the time. I remember reading some article/report on this awhile back. ...

The only risk involved is the back lash if it doesn't work, a couple of Superbowl wins and more than a decade record of success mitigates this concern. NFL Head Coaches do not maximize their opportunities to win, they minimize the opportunities to be second guessed. Going for this is almost always the correct call, but most head coaches aren't secure enough to go for it.

 

[Tau837]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

Why do you say it's stupid?J

Mathematically it is a big risk given that, on average, teams only convert like around 40 percent of the time. I remember reading some article/report on this awhile back. However, given the way Denver was playing, you have to figure their chance was more around 45 percent or so. This makes the play risky, but probably not "stupid."

how do you come up w/ 45%? Assume all it takes for 2 yards is a single completion. Cutler was 36/50 for the game, or 72%. So, if that trend is to continue, odds of converting are more like 72%.

Sure, but how many of his attempts were from just a couple yards out, with the entire defense bunched up as they are on a 2 point conversion? I don't think just citing his completion percentage is correct here.

 

[moleculo]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

Why do you say it's stupid?J

Mathematically it is a big risk given that, on average, teams only convert like around 40 percent of the time. I remember reading some article/report on this awhile back. However, given the way Denver was playing, you have to figure their chance was more around 45 percent or so. This makes the play risky, but probably not "stupid."

how do you come up w/ 45%? Assume all it takes for 2 yards is a single completion. Cutler was 36/50 for the game, or 72%. So, if that trend is to continue, odds of converting are more like 72%.

Sure, but how many of his attempts were from just a couple yards out, with the entire defense bunched up as they are on a 2 point conversion? I don't think just citing his completion percentage is correct here.

of course not, but one has to take into consideration a red-hot QB who has been very accurate all day, capable receivers, and an opposing D that has been marched up and down the field and is disgruntled because of a blown call a few plays earlier. There were a lot of factors at play here - moreso than simply looking at historical averages and trends - and most of the factors were clearly in the Broncos direction.

 

[Tau837]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

Why do you say it's stupid?J

Mathematically it is a big risk given that, on average, teams only convert like around 40 percent of the time. I remember reading some article/report on this awhile back. However, given the way Denver was playing, you have to figure their chance was more around 45 percent or so. This makes the play risky, but probably not "stupid."

how do you come up w/ 45%? Assume all it takes for 2 yards is a single completion. Cutler was 36/50 for the game, or 72%. So, if that trend is to continue, odds of converting are more like 72%.

Sure, but how many of his attempts were from just a couple yards out, with the entire defense bunched up as they are on a 2 point conversion? I don't think just citing his completion percentage is correct here.

of course not, but one has to take into consideration a red-hot QB who has been very accurate all day, capable receivers, and an opposing D that has been marched up and down the field and is disgruntled because of a blown call a few plays earlier. There were a lot of factors at play here - moreso than simply looking at historical averages and trends - and most of the factors were clearly in the Broncos direction.

I don't disagree with any of that or with his decision to go for it. I simply pointed out that your statement referencing his 72% completion percentage was probably overestimating the chance the play would be successful.

 

[slayer666]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

It was a balls-out decision that worked, so I voted yes - he's a freaking genius. If the two-pointer had failed, I would be crucifying him - just like the real media.

 

[Disco Stu]

Shanahan believed he had a better than 50% chance of that particular play working at that particular moment. That makes it a reasonable decision.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Of course it wasn't stupid. Denver's defense was not playing well at all at that point in the game, so going for two and the likely win was not stupid at all. What if they had kicked the XP, and then SD would have gotten the ball first in OT and went down and scored to win the game?

 

[Philo]

Always go for it. I make this decision every time in Madden. 4th-and-2 is like a 60% conversion ratio. 2-pt conversions are above 50% success rate. OT is 50/50, basically the coinflip decides the winner. TMQ has written about this at lenghth with tons of math. Rather have my players on the field making the try, with a better than 50/50 advantage, than let a coinflip decide a hard-fought game.

 

[Charlie Harper]

Always go for it. I make this decision every time in Madden. 4th-and-2 is like a 60% conversion ratio. 2-pt conversions are above 50% success rate. OT is 50/50, basically the coinflip decides the winner. TMQ has written about this at lenghth with tons of math. Rather have my players on the field making the try, with a better than 50/50 advantage, than let a coinflip decide a hard-fought game.

 

[jwojdylo]

hes a genius if it works and an idiot if it doesnt......he must be glad it did

 

[Philo]

Other times this has worked: Week 4 of 2003, Texans were down 3 with 2 seconds left, facing 4th and Goal from the 1. Went for it, rather than kick the gimme FG, and won. Week 15 of 2002, Vikings scored with 5 seconds left and went for 2 rather than the PAT to force overtime, and won.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I'd estimate the Broncos' chances of winning in overtime to be about 48 percent. (Whichever team won the coin flip would be a huge favorite, but I think the Broncos were slightly more likely than the Chargers to be stopped on their first possession.)

I'd estimate the Broncos' chances of making the two-point conversion to be over 60 percent. The Chargers couldn't stop those short passes all day.

I think Shanahan made the right decision.

 

[Philo]

Always go for it. I make this decision every time in Madden. 4th-and-2 is like a 60% conversion ratio. 2-pt conversions are above 50% success rate. OT is 50/50, basically the coinflip decides the winner. TMQ has written about this at lenghth with tons of math. Rather have my players on the field making the try, with a better than 50/50 advantage, than let a coinflip decide a hard-fought game.

Looking. I have it as 50.9% in '05, looking for something over the last 10 years or so total. No info in the Data Dominator. If you include all 4th-and-2s, however, it's easily above 50, even against goal-line Ds.

 

[Islanders rule]

I think it was a brilliant calculated decission. Shanny just showed his confidence in team, Cutler, Marshall, Sheffler and Royal executed. This win essentially gives the Broncos a 3 game lead on the Chargers. It also gives the rookie Royal great confidence. The kid ate up DeAngello Hall last week as the # 1 while Marshell served his 1 game suspension.

This week Royal catches the TD & 2pt conversion to win the game.

This gamble could make the Broncos season.

 

[Charlie Harper]

Always go for it. I make this decision every time in Madden. 4th-and-2 is like a 60% conversion ratio. 2-pt conversions are above 50% success rate. OT is 50/50, basically the coinflip decides the winner. TMQ has written about this at lenghth with tons of math. Rather have my players on the field making the try, with a better than 50/50 advantage, than let a coinflip decide a hard-fought game.

Looking. I have it as 50.9% in '05, looking for something over the last 10 years or so total. No info in the Data Dominator. If you include all 4th-and-2s, however, it's easily above 50.

4th & 2 <> 2 pt conversion

 

[[scooter]]

Always go for it. I make this decision every time in Madden. 4th-and-2 is like a 60% conversion ratio. 2-pt conversions are above 50% success rate. OT is 50/50, basically the coinflip decides the winner. TMQ has written about this at lenghth with tons of math. Rather have my players on the field making the try, with a better than 50/50 advantage, than let a coinflip decide a hard-fought game.

Looking. I have it as 50.9% in '05, looking for something over the last 10 years or so total. No info in the Data Dominator. If you include all 4th-and-2s, however, it's easily above 50.

4th & 2 <> 2 pt conversion

You have many more options on the 50-yard-line than on the 2-yard line.

this link says the 2-point success rate was 43.5% from 1994-2003. The 2004 rate was just over 50%. Historically, the NCAA success rate is just over 40%.

 

[Philo]

Always go for it. I make this decision every time in Madden. 4th-and-2 is like a 60% conversion ratio. 2-pt conversions are above 50% success rate. OT is 50/50, basically the coinflip decides the winner. TMQ has written about this at lenghth with tons of math. Rather have my players on the field making the try, with a better than 50/50 advantage, than let a coinflip decide a hard-fought game.

Looking. I have it as 50.9% in '05, looking for something over the last 10 years or so total. No info in the Data Dominator. If you include all 4th-and-2s, however, it's easily above 50.

4th & 2 <> 2 pt conversion

You have many more options on the 50-yard-line than on the 2-yard line.

this link says the 2-point success rate was 43.5% from 1994-2003. The 2004 rate was just over 50%. Historically, the NCAA success rate is just over 40%.

I edited to include vs. goal-line Ds. It's very close to 50, and in '05 it was above. Point is, in this scenario, Shanny made the right call.

 

[Charlie Harper]

Always go for it. I make this decision every time in Madden. 4th-and-2 is like a 60% conversion ratio. 2-pt conversions are above 50% success rate. OT is 50/50, basically the coinflip decides the winner. TMQ has written about this at lenghth with tons of math. Rather have my players on the field making the try, with a better than 50/50 advantage, than let a coinflip decide a hard-fought game.

Looking. I have it as 50.9% in '05, looking for something over the last 10 years or so total. No info in the Data Dominator. If you include all 4th-and-2s, however, it's easily above 50.

4th & 2 <> 2 pt conversion

You have many more options on the 50-yard-line than on the 2-yard line.

this link says the 2-point success rate was 43.5% from 1994-2003. The 2004 rate was just over 50%. Historically, the NCAA success rate is just over 40%.

I edited to include vs. goal-line Ds. It's very close to 50, and in '05 it was above. Point is, in this scenario, Shanny made the right call.

I agree that there was nothing wrong with this choice. Statistics of previous attempts are completely irrelevant in this case and every case.

 

[elmanx]

One good reason to go for two is the fear that Hochuli would do some sort of 'make-up' call in OT to compensate the Chargers. Hence, you may estimate the Chargers chance of winning in OT significantly greater than 50% (even without accounting for the fact that SD offense was doing a better job during the game).

By going for two, you avoid this problem. Doubt that Shanahan was thinking this, but if this was his reasoning, then it makes sense. Also doubt that Hochuli would have made a 'make-up' call.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Take advantage when your opponent is stunned.

 

[bergs101]

I will probably get ripped for this but if you were watching the game I think it is a reasonable assesement that will not show up in the post-game interviews and certainly not the boxscore (and it has not been mentioned yet in this thread)....

Cutler was physically affected by a health-related issue (presumably his diabetes, but is admittedly, speculation based on what I saw)....and Shanahan decided to go for it to limit the time that Cutler would be need to perform.

Based on this, I say Shanahan made the correct call

 

[SaintArnold]

These statistical arguments are nonsense. Shanahan saw that they didn't cover Royal the first time, figured they wouldn't adjust the second time, called the same play again, game over.

 

[timschochet]

Sorry about the delay in my response, but I was busy watching the Steelers play. I'm a bit surprised at the results of my poll. I figured a lot more people would disagree with me, based on the fact that I think most people are for whatever works 99% of the time. But the FFA, those both for and against, seem to be a more thoughtful crowd than your average football fan, and I appreciate the feedback.

Joe Bryant asked why I thought the move was stupid. In retrospect, stupid was an incorrect and rather arrogant choice of words, because it implies that I know more about football than Mike Shanahan, which is certainly not even close to being true in any way. What I should have written was, in my opinion it was the wrong choice. In fairness to Shanahan, I write this from the security of my couch after the fact. But I still hold this opinion.

There seems to be some disagreement here about what the percentages are for making a 2 point conversion: some say it's over 50%, some say under. The point is, if you fail, you almost certainly lose the game. Even a 45% chance to lose in one play is too much of a risk. I know people will argue that he's playing to win and I'm playing not to lose, but my position is more complex than that. Let's say you kick the extra point. Then you go to OT where you get a 50% chance at the coin flip. Even if you lose the coin flip, the Chargers still have to drive the ball down the field. Even if they do drive the ball down the field, they still have to punch it in or kick a FG to win. So many things can go wrong for the Chargers and right for the Broncos, that I believe it makes much more sense to play it safe.

The key for me is, it's one play versus many plays. So long as the percentages are close (and nobody has argued otherwise) the risks are magnified from the one play and lessened by the many plays. Someone brought up Tom Osborne, and I always admired him for going for 2. But there was no OT in college football then. Had there been OT, even sudden death, he would not have gone for 2, at least IMO.

 

[((Morpheus))]

If I were an NFL coach I'd go for 2 every time.

edit: does anybody have a link to the old thread with the statistical analysis of 2 point conversions?

 

[Jon_Moore]

But, they REALLY couldn't stop San Diego down the stretch. With that, Shannahan controlled his own destiny in this game. If he lets it go to overtime, and SD gets the ball...I'm not sure they felt they were going stop them. He saw a chance to steal a win instead of delaying the loss.

I doubt he believed that his defense could not stop the Chargers. Besides, with 24 seconds and no time outs left, SD is not going to score. So then you have a 50/50 chance to get the ball back. All this = a greater probability of winning than one shot at a 2 point conversion.

I really disagree. Once SD hit their groove, neither team was really stopping the other. Sure, every coach wants his defense to go out and make a stand. But, when it hasn't happened all game, you have to be real. San Diego came close to sneaking into FG range with the 24 seconds. If they have 40-45 seconds, I really have no doubt they get there and win it in regulation. So, if they got the coin toss, they do the same and end it then. So, take fate into your own hands and trust your offensive play calling (which also couldn't be stopped all game)gets it done, or leave your fate up to Heads/Tails? To me, this is obvious, I guess you just disagree.

 

[PBateman]

Play with the house money. Denver had no business winning the game. Lucky momentum was on their side and it was right to pull the trigger in this scenario. I like the decision. It's not a decision I would regularly make, but I liked it within the context of the game. Lose the coin toss in overtime, Sproles returns it to midfield and you're a Nate KAeding field goal from losing the game.

As a spectator of the game, I would have loved to see overtime because I just didn't want the game to end. Cutler, Marshall, Royal, Sheffler, Rivers, Chambers, Jackson, Sproles... awesome game! Too bad the referees determined the outcome instead of the players.

 

[[scooter]]

I'd like to think that Shanny knew the call that put them into that position was bogus, and he was giving SD a chance to stop them -- but I don't think of Shanny as that noble.

If that was Shanahan's mentality, he would have played for overtime and then deferred the kickoff.

 

[massraider]

These statistical arguments are nonsense. Shanahan saw that they didn't cover Royal the first time, figured they wouldn't adjust the second time, called the same play again, game over.

I agree. Sometimes, the situation calls for a coach to go off the 'Book'.I think Shanahan knew his D wasn't stopping anyone, and he had a 1 in 2 chance of losing the flip, and the game. meantime, he is two yards away from stealing a win from the division favorite, that is stunned after an absurd call, and subsequent TD. Plus he's at home, and is playing with house money anyway, as the announcer said. Might usually be the wrong call, and I hate Shanahan, but I want a coach that makes moves like that. (Oh, wait, we DID have a coach like that....)I'll also add that only coaches with job security make these calls, 9 out of 10 coaches kick the extra point, even if they WANT to go for two.

 

[Zow]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

Why do you say it's stupid?J

Mathematically it is a big risk given that, on average, teams only convert like around 40 percent of the time. I remember reading some article/report on this awhile back. However, given the way Denver was playing, you have to figure their chance was more around 45 percent or so. This makes the play risky, but probably not "stupid."

how do you come up w/ 45%? Assume all it takes for 2 yards is a single completion. Cutler was 36/50 for the game, or 72%. So, if that trend is to continue, odds of converting are more like 72%.

The average success rate, as someone pointed out, is about 43%. Denver at the time though was playing very well and had momentum - so I thought the 2 percent jump was substantial (like suited over unsuited cards). I like Maurile's 48 percent chance of winning in overtime - less maybe the .5 percent chance the EP is missed, so by mathematical definition the play was risky.

 

[Bills_Fan11]

I'm with ya Tim. I think it's a closer call than you make it out, but really simple math gets us there if we make a few estimations.

Yes. The irony is that math generally proves that coaches are much too conservative because they're more interested in dodging media/fan criticism than they are playing the odds. Shanny went against the %'s in this case by being aggressive. I think it's dumb, but I respect it a whole lot more than Mangini's spineless decision to punt with 4 minutes left down by 9 points, which will never be criticized by anybody not named Greg Easterbrook.

 

[Bills_Fan11]

I'll also add that only coaches with job security make these calls, 9 out of 10 coaches kick the extra point, even if they WANT to go for two.

That's very true.

 

[Ghost Rider]

All of this percentage talk means jack squat, really. You have to look at the situation. The Broncos defense wasn't stopping anyone, the Broncos offense had momentum against a defense that just had a potential game-ending turnover taken away, had just given up a TD, and didn't have the luxury of a timeout to regroup. They were on their heels, and Shanahan knew this, so he went for the kill. He should be applauded for this ballsy call.

Coaches with balls are the ones who win over the long haul, as Shanahan has done. Conservative coaches who are afraid to take chances never succeed in the long run in the NFL.

 

[Glatty]

All of this percentage talk means jack squat, really. You have to look at the situation. The Broncos defense wasn't stopping anyone, the Broncos offense had momentum against a defense that just had a potential game-ending turnover taken away, had just given up a TD, and didn't have the luxury of a timeout to regroup. They were on their heels, and Shanahan knew this, so he went for the kill. He should be applauded for this ballsy call. Coaches with balls are the ones who win over the long haul, as Shanahan has done. Conservative coaches who are afraid to take chances never succeed in the long run in the NFL.

 

[shredhead]

I'll also add that only coaches with job security make these calls, 9 out of 10 coaches kick the extra point, even if they WANT to go for two.

Denver Broncos' owner Pat Bowlen is on record as saying that Mike Shanahan has a job as head coach of the Denver Broncos as long as he wants it. Maybe that job security came into play when it was time to make the decision to go for two. I was watching the game and even before the bad call I was saying to myself as Denver was driving down the field that if Denver scores they need to go for 2 and win the game right here and now. Honestly, I didn't think Shanahan would do it, but I'm glad he did.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Well the voting is about 50/50...which means if the play had failed it'd be 90/10 that it was a bad call...which is the correct answer.

 

[SSOG]

There seems to be some disagreement here about what the percentages are for making a 2 point conversion: some say it's over 50%, some say under. The point is, if you fail, you almost certainly lose the game. Even a 45% chance to lose in one play is too much of a risk. I know people will argue that he's playing to win and I'm playing not to lose, but my position is more complex than that. Let's say you kick the extra point. Then you go to OT where you get a 50% chance at the coin flip. Even if you lose the coin flip, the Chargers still have to drive the ball down the field. Even if they do drive the ball down the field, they still have to punch it in or kick a FG to win. So many things can go wrong for the Chargers and right for the Broncos, that I believe it makes much more sense to play it safe.

I can easily just reverse that logic and use it against playing it safe, though. I mean, if the Broncos punch in the 2pc, they win the game. If they go to overtime, then they have to win the coin flip, and even if they do win the coin flip, they still have to march down the field, and even then, they have to make the FG or punch it in for the score. So many things could go wrong for the Broncos and right for the Chargers that I believe it makes much more sense to play aggressive.A big point that hasn't been mentioned yet... sudden death overtime is a game of kickers. The reason why the coin flip is so important is because 30 yards gets you in position for a high-percentage walk-off score. If Shanahan still had Elam around, I think he'd be far more likely to head to overtime in this situation, but he's got a raw, untested, slightly scattershot kicker with no real game experience in even mundane situations, let alone kicking gamewinners against divisional foes. Even if SD and Denver were perfectly evenly matched (something that could be debated one way or the other all day long), SD's big advantage at the kicker position (especially in terms of experience) would DRAMATICALLY tip the scales in their favor in overtime, such that I think any 50/50 estimate of either team's chances of winning in overtime is just plain inaccurate.

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

I'd estimate the Broncos' chances of winning in overtime to be about 48 percent. (Whichever team won the coin flip would be a huge favorite, but I think the Broncos were slightly more likely than the Chargers to be stopped on their first possession.)I'd estimate the Broncos' chances of making the two-point conversion to be over 60 percent. The Chargers couldn't stop those short passes all day.I think Shanahan made the right decision.

Well put.I also think Shanny knew they got away with one, which made the decision a little easier to make.Regardless, ballsy. Love it.

 

[Short Corner]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

Why do you say it's stupid?J

Mathematically it is a big risk given that, on average, teams only convert like around 40 percent of the time. I remember reading some article/report on this awhile back. However, given the way Denver was playing, you have to figure their chance was more around 45 percent or so. This makes the play risky, but probably not "stupid."

how do you come up w/ 45%? Assume all it takes for 2 yards is a single completion. Cutler was 36/50 for the game, or 72%. So, if that trend is to continue, odds of converting are more like 72%.

Sure, but how many of his attempts were from just a couple yards out, with the entire defense bunched up as they are on a 2 point conversion? I don't think just citing his completion percentage is correct here.

of course not, but one has to take into consideration a red-hot QB who has been very accurate all day, capable receivers, and an opposing D that has been marched up and down the field and is disgruntled because of a blown call a few plays earlier. There were a lot of factors at play here - moreso than simply looking at historical averages and trends - and most of the factors were clearly in the Broncos direction.

I don't disagree with any of that or with his decision to go for it. I simply pointed out that your statement referencing his 72% completion percentage was probably overestimating the chance the play would be successful.

But you are ok with someone coming up with 45% out of thin air?

 

[timschochet]

The silent majority speaks! Despite the preponderance of posts here which favor going for two, the actual vote is 126-123 against. As JetsWillWin pointed out, imagine what the result of this poll would be had the Broncos failed.

 

[kerpow]

Its calls like this that makes football great. Vermeil did something like this (edit - ran on 4th down for game winning TD, when a FG would have tied) a couple of years ago for the same reasons - he didn't like his chances in overtime.

 

[Da Guru]

When you figure the odds of going for it in that situation you have to factor who wins the coin toss... the Chargers could not stop Denver and Denver could not stop the Chargers.

Shanny probably thought if he lost the coin toss that he would lose the game. At that point winning and losing was still controlled by Denver..not a coin toss.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

The silent majority speaks! Despite the preponderance of posts here which favor going for two, the actual vote is 126-123 against. As JetsWillWin pointed out, imagine what the result of this poll would be had the Broncos failed.

Yep 90% of you would be wrong...

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

When you figure the odds of going for it in that situation you have to factor who wins the coin toss... the Chargers could not stop Denver and Denver could not stop the Chargers.Shanny probably thought if he lost the coin toss that he would lose the game. At that point winning and losing was still controlled by Denver..not a coin toss.

You also need to stop looking at league averages. Has there been a time in the past twenty years that the odds of the Denver Broncos getting 2 yards on a play was the "league average" or worst?

 

[Joe Bryant]

Take advantage when your opponent is stunned.

This is the huge factor that I see being over looked. It's the "battle" angle that I think is getting lost in the stats.J

 

[Joe Bryant]

I say it's stupid to go for two in that situation. Sure, it's gutsy, but it's also stupid. Kick the extra point, go into overtime. What say you?

Why do you say it's stupid?J

Mathematically it is a big risk given that, on average, teams only convert like around 40 percent of the time. I remember reading some article/report on this awhile back. ...

The only risk involved is the back lash if it doesn't work, a couple of Superbowl wins and more than a decade record of success mitigates this concern. NFL Head Coaches do not maximize their opportunities to win, they minimize the opportunities to be second guessed. Going for this is almost always the correct call, but most head coaches aren't secure enough to go for it.

Agree on the second guessing thing.But why do you say going for it is almost always the correct call?

J

 

[Manster]

i loved the call, mostly cause i took DEN +1.5. going for 2 sealed the deal for me either way.

i also thought it was a great call from a coaching standpoint. it showed shanny's confidence in Cutler. it also puts the SD defense back on it's heals and puts pressure on them.

bottomline, Cutler is the man in Denver and shanny is gonna give him an opportunity to make the big plays.