Teachable Moment: That's why you go for two early

GhostOfPelluer · Sep 21, 2020

gjkoeppen said:
Or you think that because the Cowboys were beyond EXTREMELY lucky to get that on-side kick that your idea of needing more scores with less than 5 minutes to play is better than only needing 1 with a 50/50 shot on a 2 point conversion. I'll say it again if the other 31 NFL coaches, not wannabe fans, were asked if they would rather be down by 1TD and a 2 point conversion or needing 2 or more scores needed to win a game with less than 5 minutes to play how many would chose needing multiple score?
.
.

You're missing the point. They were going to have to be beyond lucky to recover the onside kick either way if they wanted to win

Future · Sep 21, 2020

GhostOfPelluer said:
You just proved my point. Down 8 you try to score with basically no time left and force OT. But then if you fail you need an onside kick with no time left so you lose. So now you think it's better to try the onside with 15-20 seconds left, then assuming you recover it, you have 1-2 plays to get into FG range (without timeouts possibly). Which is longer odds than the way it worked out.

No, you don't try to do that down 8. My point was if you don't force a 3 and out and get the ball with less time left.

gjkoeppen · Sep 21, 2020

GhostOfPelluer said:
So you'd rather have false hope that it's a one-possession game when it's actually a two-possession game and just be screwed when you miss the conversion at the end. Got it.

I'm done with this. You think because the Cowboys converted an on-side kick that normally has a little less than a 2% chance of happening and the Cowboys won that having to need multiple score beyond a TD and a kicked extra point is is better than just needing a TD and a 50/50m chance on a 2 point conversion. If the Cowboys fail on the 2 point they lose and there was a 98% chance they they were going to lose as things went yesterday. The Cowboys got way way way beyond lucky on that on-side kick. Don't bother to reply because I'll just ignore you.
.
.

Future · Sep 21, 2020

Trendnet said:
Either you value analytics or your don't.

This is stupid.

You can value them and not make every decision based on analytics.

Hoofbite · Sep 21, 2020

JD_KaPow said:
You need an onside kick EITHER WAY if you don't convert the 2-pointer. Doesn't matter when you try the 2-pointer.

I think a lot of the conventional wisdom on this topic includes some baseline assumptions that attempting the 2-point conversion later increases the probability of success. Not sure how anyone can believe that.

cffl2323 · Sep 21, 2020

Something I read in a similar discussion elsewhere, probably the easiest way to explain.... hopefully

"You’re either going to make or miss the 2 point conversion. If you’re going to miss it, why the hell would you want to learn that with 6 seconds left in the game instead of 6 minutes? It’s so irrational"

GhostOfPelluer · Sep 21, 2020

gjkoeppen said:
I'm done with this. You think because the Cowboys converted an on-side kick that normally has a little less than a 2% chance of happening and the Cowboys won that having to need multiple score beyond a TD and a kicked extra point is is better than just needing a TD and a 50/50m chance on a 2 point conversion. If the Cowboys fail on the 2 point they lose and there was a 98% chance they they were going to lose as things went yesterday. The Cowboys got way way way beyond lucky on that on-side kick. Don't bother to reply because I'll just ignore you.
.
.

You've obviously been ignoring my replies already, so fair well.

Hoofbite · Sep 21, 2020

Future said:
This is stupid.

You can value them and not make every decision based on analytics.

For example, the analytics that favor going for it on all 4th downs. Does anyone do that?

Texas2Step41 · Sep 21, 2020

JD_KaPow said:
For some reason, people think you should kick the xp when you score a TD to put you down 9 late in the game. Today was the perfect demonstration of why this is wrong.

Down 15, you either need two scores or three scores, depending on whether you convert a 2-pointer or not.

But you don't know how many scores you need until you attempt the 2-pointer. That's why you do it after the first TD.

If the Cowboys had kicked the XP after the first TD, they would have been down 8 and they wouldn't know how many more scores they needed. They likely would have been more methodical on the second TD drive, playing to tie (and not leave the Falcons enough time to win it). Then, if they failed the 2-point conversion, the game is over.

This way, they KNEW they needed two more scores, and they were much more aggressive on the second TD drive, leaving themselves enough time for the third score.

When down 15 late, ALWAYS go for 2 after the FIRST score. Information matters. And there's no benefit--none--to waiting.

Alarming how many likes this post got, my God

Trajan · Sep 21, 2020

Not sure why this is so difficult, maybe because it is going against what teams normally do in-game.

It was the correct call. First, neither option leaves you with a high chance of winning, neither is a great choice. I would want more time, and make the decision earlier, then putting everything into the final play.

Think all agree, you must convert either of the 2 point plays. The only question is when do you want to take the shot.
1. Do it early - then you know how to play moving forward. If you make it, you are set. If not then onside kick, with low chance of success.
2. Do it late - everything is on the final 2 point conversion. If you make it, tie and go OT. If not, then onside kick, with low chance of success.

I would rather know early, then on the last play and then rely on an onside kick.

GhostOfPelluer · Sep 21, 2020

Future said:
No, you don't try to do that down 8. My point was if you don't force a 3 and out and get the ball with less time left.

Then I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

G2 · Sep 21, 2020

It was refreshing to see a HC/OC get right after it and be aggressive. Garrett would have left enough time on the clock for Atlanta to score again.

Future · Sep 21, 2020

GhostOfPelluer said:
Then I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

I'm just saying that you have 0 margin for error when you need two possessions.

bsbellomy · Sep 21, 2020

Jake said:
Teachable moment: that's why you DON'T go for two early.

The only reason this thread exists is because the Cowboys got lucky on an onside kick.

If you assume a missed conversion in both scenarios, they were going to need the onside either way. But in your scenario we probably only have 10 seconds after getting the onside instead of 2 minutes.

GhostOfPelluer · Sep 21, 2020

Future said:
I'm just saying that you have 0 margin for error when you need two possessions.

It's a long shot and usually that game is a loss regardless. Just agree with the notion that you try it early, know if it's two possessions right away, rather than wait, and find out it's two possessions late.

Future · Sep 21, 2020

GhostOfPelluer said:
It's a long shot and usually that game is a loss regardless. Just agree with the notion that you try it early, know if it's two possessions right away, rather than wait, and find out it's two possessions late.

Yes that is true. It is dumb.

bsbellomy · Sep 21, 2020

KingintheNorth said:
Unless one of those options is adding more time onto the clock, then no, not at all.

Going for the 2 and missing it in that stage of the game eliminates the need or option for 2 later. Going for the much more likely XP keeps the game within 1 scoring drive.

By the way Atlanta also screwed up earlier going for 2. When you have a good sized lead, take the 1 point. You shouldn't even be thinking about a team needing 3 scores to tie you.

You should only go for 2:

When you have to

When you feel you have an overwhelming schematic advantage

Your kicker is hurt

I love analytics, love, love love them. But we are overthinking them. Use them for an edge not as a rule. Coaching football is still about feel. Feel where you are at any point in the game and reduce or eliminate opportunities for mistakes.

It's crazy to me that some of you don't get that today's decision was wrong.

Crazier that a highly paid NFL coach doesn't get that either.

You missed one. When trailing by 15 mid 4th quarter with no timeouts. When you miss a 2pt after the first TD, it affects the pace at which you play, knowing you need to scores. If you think you need 1 score you don't leave enough time on the clock to do anything after an onside recovery.

bsbellomy · Sep 21, 2020

gjkoeppen said:
I'm done with this. You think because the Cowboys converted an on-side kick that normally has a little less than a 2% chance of happening and the Cowboys won that having to need multiple score beyond a TD and a kicked extra point is is better than just needing a TD and a 50/50m chance on a 2 point conversion. If the Cowboys fail on the 2 point they lose and there was a 98% chance they they were going to lose as things went yesterday. The Cowboys got way way way beyond lucky on that on-side kick. Don't bother to reply because I'll just ignore you.
.
.

Just because the chance is remote doesn't mean it is a better decision to wait until the last possession.

MarcusRock · Sep 21, 2020

MarcusRock said:
I haven't read the entire thread but I think the point the opposition is making is that if you kick the PAT and make it an 8-point game, assuming your D makes the stop, you will only need 1 TD drive to potentially tie the game (with a 2 pointer) vs. 1 TD drive (PAT) plus a FG drive when not knowing what the clock situation will be because you turn it over to your D. In this game, that necessitated an onside kick which has a very low recovery rate (and even less so with the rules changes).

So how is only needing 1 TD drive (plus 2 pointer) not as good as needing 1 TD drive (PAT), PLUS needing to get the ball back again to mount a second drive for a FG where a low-probability onside kick is probably necessary to mount that second drive?

Anyone going to answer this?

bsbellomy · Sep 21, 2020

Hoofbite said:
For example, the analytics that favor going for it on all 4th downs. Does anyone do that?

I don't think the analytics say that. Maybe all 4th downs in plus territory.

Teachable Moment: That's why you go for two early

Well-Known Member

Intramural Legend

Well-Known Member

Intramural Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Taco Engineer

Intramural Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Intramural Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member