The 2 Point Conversion Debate

Page 3 of Let's hear it... I feel that you never chase points unless it's absolutely necessary.... 37 comments | 929 Views | Go to page 1 →

  1. #31
    AverageJoesGym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 05
    Location
    Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?
    Posts
    16,781

    Quote Originally Posted by gametime
    That's the simple theory to "chasing points". When there is 20 minutes of football to play you don't start taking 30% over 99%. At that stage you have no idea of the twists and turns ahead. You are playing bad odds, and I've seen it come back to bite a team more often than not....
    I agree, the only time it makes sense is in an end of game type situation or when you can't be sure that you'll get another possession. The odds just don't favor it otherwise.
    Advertisement

  2. #32
    Habib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 06
    Location
    Buy the ticket, take the ride
    Posts
    12,180

    Quote Originally Posted by gametime
    That's the simple theory to "chasing points". When there is 20 minutes of football to play you don't start taking 30% over 99%. At that stage you have no idea of the twists and turns ahead. You are playing bad odds, and I've seen it come back to bite a team more often than not....
    And I'm going to spin off of these numbers here. Following the odds at a 30% success rate you would complete the 2-point conversion once every 3-4 times. Even if you could do it once every three times, which is a slightly more favorable percentage, kicking the field goal would garner more points.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Aug 05
    Posts
    4,912

    The worst mistake coaches make is chasing points when (with significant time left) they score a TD and are down 2 points. Say 21-19. Sure going for 2 and making it will tie the game.

    But not making it can lead to being down two scores. If Team A scores again its 28-19 and you are down two scores. If you had kicked it would have been 21-20, and now 28-20 and you are still within one score.

  4. #34
    iPapi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 05
    Location
    In a place where I have kin, friends, enemies, and everything in between.
    Posts
    2,366

    My argument during the UK/UofL game was about going for 2 after the TD put you up 1 point. All of those moments were in the 2nd half, and with the way both teams were moving the ball we could safely assume that at least UofL could move into field goal range at any point in time (sorry, UK's kicker sucks).

    With that being said, I would have played to be ahead by a field goal as opposed to 1 point at least one time during the second half.

    That's just me, but I'm a gambling man anyway.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Oct 06
    Posts
    5,545

    If you're arguing going for 2 before you absolutely have to, you're making a bad assumption.

    You're assuming that you will make the conversion. Odds are strongly against that happening. So now, instead of being 1 point closer or 1 point further ahead, you're 1 point farther back.

  6. #36
    iPapi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 05
    Location
    In a place where I have kin, friends, enemies, and everything in between.
    Posts
    2,366

    Quote Originally Posted by mobaar
    If you're arguing going for 2 before you absolutely have to, you're making a bad assumption.

    You're assuming that you will make the conversion. Odds are strongly against that happening. So now, instead of being 1 point closer or 1 point further ahead, you're 1 point farther back.

    That's conservative, in my opinion.

    The only thing I am assuming is that a field goal beats an opponents 1 point lead or its 2 point lead.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Oct 06
    Posts
    5,545

    Quote Originally Posted by iPapi
    That's conservative, in my opinion.
    The statistics don't care about your opinion.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Nov 04
    Location
    5 Miles from nowhere
    Posts
    20,629

    Quote Originally Posted by iPapi
    My argument during the UK/UofL game was about going for 2 after the TD put you up 1 point. All of those moments were in the 2nd half, and with the way both teams were moving the ball we could safely assume that at least UofL could move into field goal range at any point in time (sorry, UK's kicker sucks).

    With that being said, I would have played to be ahead by a field goal as opposed to 1 point at least one time during the second half.

    That's just me, but I'm a gambling man anyway.
    That's the whole point...both teams were moving the ball and scoring consistently. Even if U of L does come back and take the lead, you'd have to feel as a UK coach that your team would certainly answer. There's no need to risk it at that point.

    The argument to go for two earlier in a game is much stronger when you have serious doubts about your ability to get the ball in the end zone again...if you're moving the ball and scoring with relative ease, it's really stupid to risk it, IMO.

Top