Steelers' 2 point Conversion Strategy

[JD_KaPow]

If that was true, everybody would do it. Truth be told, going for 2 is rare and usually unnecessary.

Uh, no. The NFL is ridiculously conservative. There are extremely strong arguments for (1) going for it on 4th down WAY more often and (2) going for 2 more often. Coaches won't do it because the criticism they get when it doesn't work massively outweighs the praise they get when it does work. They do it to save their jobs, even though it costs them wins.

 

[links18]

Uh, no. The NFL is ridiculously conservative. There are extremely strong arguments for (1) going for it on 4th down WAY more often and (2) going for 2 more often. Coaches won't do it because the criticism they get when it doesn't work massively outweighs the praise they get when it does work. They do it to save their jobs, even though it costs them wins.

Wasn't part of the point of moving the extra point kick back to encourage teams to go for two more often? Or no?

 

[lukin2006]

It worked out for us...to bad for them, not.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

How often does it pan out for them?

Last year they converted on something north of 70% of their attempts. For the play to be breakeven they need to convert on something like 47% of their attempts.

By the numbers it is the correct move.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Wasn't part of the point of moving the extra point kick back to encourage teams to go for two more often? Or no?

Well, the main reason was to stop XPs being automatic. Moving it back changed the XP from a 99+% proposition to a 94% play, roughly what it was 15 years ago, IIRC. One side effect is that the math becomes more favorable for going for 2, but I'm not sure how much of an objective that was.

They should have moved it back more, to around 90% success rate.

 

[drawandstrike]

Last year they converted on something north of 70% of their attempts. For the play to be breakeven they need to convert on something like 47% of their attempts.

By the numbers it is the correct move.

I'm sure they practice it a lot, so it's great that our defense denied them all 4 attempts today.

 

[Doomsday]

Didn't it end up washing out because we missed 2 two point conversions at the end as well?

 

[links18]

Well, the main reason was to stop XPs being automatic. Moving it back changed the XP from a 99+% proposition to a 94% play, roughly what it was 15 years ago, IIRC. One side effect is that the math becomes more favorable for going for 2, but I'm not sure how much of an objective that was.

They should have moved it back more, to around 90% success rate.

What is the reason for wanting the extra point less of a sure thing? To get more variability in the score and thus more uncertainty and drama?

 

[JD_KaPow]

Last year they converted on something north of 70% of their attempts. For the play to be breakeven they need to convert on something like 47% of their attempts.

By the numbers it is the correct move.

Well, they picked their spots. I'm sure they evaluate the teams they're facing and see if they think they have a particular advantage before deciding which way they'll go: they didn't do it against everyone last year. So they must have thought the odds were favorable against us. But we proved them wrong.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Well, they picked their spots. I'm sure they evaluate the teams they're facing and see if they think they have a particular advantage before deciding which way they'll go: they didn't do it against everyone last year. So they must have thought the odds were favorable against us. But we proved them wrong.

They tied the NFL record for most two point attempts in a single season last year.

This year they've been more aggressive.

 

[links18]

Last year they converted on something north of 70% of their attempts. For the play to be breakeven they need to convert on something like 47% of their attempts.

By the numbers it is the correct move.

Well, they rolled a fat 00.00 % today.

 

[links18]

Didn't it end up washing out because we missed 2 two point conversions at the end as well?

Well, there is another element of uncertainty, because you do not know how your opponent will react to your decisions. Isn't there a chart or something?

 

[JD_KaPow]

What is the reason for wanting the extra point less of a sure thing? To get more variability in the score and thus more uncertainty and drama?

A few things. First of all, the automatic XP is just bad. We waste our time watching a play where something interesting happens, what, once a year, maybe? Given that, there's a few things you can do.

1. Get rid of the XP entirely. I'd be fine with this.
2. Move the XP such that the odds are more like they were 20+ years ago (90%). This makes the play itself at least somewhat interesting, and has the added benefit of promoting going for 2. My philosophy is that all real football plays are better than all kicking plays, so this is simply a good thing.
3. My favorite: get rid of the XP, give 7 points for a TD, and allow the team the option of gambling a point on a try from the 2. They make it, they're up to 8. They miss it, they're down to 6.

I often saw people complaining about how they shouldn't "change the game." But the fact was that the game had changed, even without a rule change. Kickers are much much better now than they used to be.

 

[speedkilz88]

They tried for 2 pt conversions 4 times. That's 4 points they left off the board by doing that. Had they converted on just 2 of them, they'd have gotten the 4 points back. But they didn't.

Huge that our D didn't let them convert a single 2 pt attempt. Also holding them to 3 FG attempts was huge. They made 2 FG's and missed 1. If Pitt had scored on a single 1 of those 2 pt attempts and scored a TD instead of being held to a FG on just 1 of those 3 FG attempts, that's a 6 point difference.

We won by 5.

But the Cowboys went for one of those as well because of the point difference they caused. So there is another point to account.

 

[Tenkamenin]

I felt like they were kind of throwing it in the Cowboys face to begin with by going for two. I think they thought they were going to score at will during the course of the game and they only ended up chasing those points all night long.

Yeah you could only imagine how much they were chuckling when they were reviewing our defense in film study. They wanted to put us out but ended up put themselves out.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Well, they rolled a fat 00.00 % today.

Yup, and that will happen sometimes. It's the nature of playing the odds.

On the other hand, I wouldn't characterize it that way. They made a sound decision: we simply stopped them. We deserve praise, they don't deserve ridicule.

 

[links18]

Since they changed the rules to allow a failed conversion to be returned for points, is there ever a reason to not do your utmost not to get tackled after making an interception, i.e. lateral the ball, etc.?

 

[JD_KaPow]

Didn't it end up washing out because we missed 2 two point conversions at the end as well?

Yeah. Only the first 2 Steeler tries were discretionary. All the 4th quarter attempts were dictated by the score at the time. All teams would have gone for 2 in those situations.

 

[StarBoyz83]

They do that a lot they're kickers have sucked last year and this year. That's why they do it.

 

[speedkilz88]

Since they changed the rules to allow a failed conversion to be returned for points, is there ever a reason to not do your utmost not to get tackled after making an interception, i.e. lateral the ball, etc.?

You wouldn't want them to return the fumble back their way. But yeah, in the right situation you would probably be ok with that.