MM explains his thought process of going for 2

TWOK11

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,062
Reaction score
11,276
What happens if you fail to make the last 2 point conversion ? You kick the onside with less time, if any time is left, then you had earlier. It is better to kick an onside, recover and move into scoring range with 4 min then :10 seconds.

I’m not sure why this is difficult to understand.

It’s the psychological illusion of 8 points being a true one score game. Their minds perceive 8 points as being functionally equivalent to 7 points because you can overcome both deficits on a single drive. Statistically, the difference between 7 and 8 points is massive because of the difference in success rate of an XP vs a two point conversion. And when you attempt that two point conversion has no bearing on how likely you are to make it.

The reality is you want to know as soon as possible whether you need two or three possessions to overcome a 15 point deficit. Finding that out AFTER the second touchdown is ALWAYS to your disadvantage and to your opponents advantage, in EVERY case. This is statistical reality.
 

Kevinicus

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,410
Reaction score
12,146
Wow, I've seen a lot of stupid on these boards over the years, but I'm not sure I've ever seen it this extreme.

It's like some people think the choice is between missing the 2 point attempt early and making it later.

Here are the possible outcomes to consider;

Go for 2 early -
Successful - Get a 2nd Td, tie it, win in OT.
Fail - Score quick, get an onside kick, get into fg position and Win
Lose

Go for 2 late -
Successful - tie it, win to OT
Lose

One option gives you an extra chance (small as it is) to win (technically, this option may exist with both, but would almost always be significantly less probable with the latter due to less time).

The odds of the 2-point try success and failure are equal for both.
 
Last edited:

TWOK11

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,062
Reaction score
11,276
Wow, I've seen a lot of stupid on these boards over the years, but I'm not sure I've ever seen it this extreme.

It's like some people think the choice is between missing the 2 point attempt early and making it later.

Here are the possible outcomes to consider;

Go for 2 early -
Successful - Get a 2nd Td, tie it, win in OT.
Fail - Score quick, get an onside kick, get into fg position and Win
Lose

Go for 2 late -
Successful - tie it, win to OT
Lose

One option gives you an extra chance (small as it is) to win (technically, this option may exist with both, but would almost always be significantly less probable with the latter due to less time).

The odds of the 2-point try success and failure are equal for both.

Humans rely on our intuition and what “seems” right, and this often betrays us. Statistics are often non-intuitive. It’s tough for some people to get their minds around the fact that going for two down 9 with 1 minute left increases your odds of winning compared to kicking an XP, and yet that’s clearly a fact when you do the math.
 

JD_KaPow

jimnabby
Messages
11,035
Reaction score
10,803
MM said it's better to know earlier if you need 1 or 2 possessions. Say they convert, hold them, and get the ball back. The implication of what he's saying is that they would have milked the clock if they only needed 1 possession. I don't like the idea of milking the clock when you're losing a game.
In a perfect world, when you’re down by 3 or 7 (assuming in the 7 case that you’ve decided you prefer OT to trying to win it with a 2-pointer), you want to score as the clock goes to 0, to keep the other team from a possible FG drive at the end of regulation. When you’re down by 3, you can often work this exactly. Down 7, you can’t be so cute: you’ve got to make sure you get in the end zone. But if you start with 3 minutes and some time outs, you can certainly slow it down some (or really, just not rush), because time isn’t much of a factor. You can huddle maybe, let the clock run some more between plays, you can stay in bounds, etc.
 

AceofSpades

Active Member
Messages
265
Reaction score
28
Choose one option from each scenario:

SCENARIO 1 - (Successful)
a. Cowboys go for 2 early and Succeed
b. Cowboys go for 2 late and Succeed.

SCENARIO 2 - (Unsuccessful)
a. Cowboys go for 2 early and Fail.
b. Cowboys go for 2 late and Fail.

In Scenario 1 the game goes to OT.

In Scenario 2 option A gives you a very, very small chance, option B gives you zero Chance.
 
Last edited:

mkindred

Well-Known Member
Messages
236
Reaction score
299
sure but how then did ESPN have our percentage of winning at .1% after we missed.

Because we missed. You know what the probability would have been if we waited for the 2 pt conversion for the second TD and missed? 0%. Game would be over. If that doesn't help explain it to people, nothing will.
 

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,142
Reaction score
36,328
8 points is only a one possession game if you assume multiple future statistical variables fall a certain way, the totality of which render a far less than 50% probability of it actually being a one score game.

In other words, 8 points being strictly a one possession game is a psychological illusion. It’s best to think of it as a 1.5 possession game, which is not fundamentally altered by when you go for two. By going for two after the first score however, you are controlling for an important variable earlier in the scenario and allowing yourself to plan accordingly going forward. Your are statistically more likely to win by controlling for the most variables as early as possible.

Another way to think of it: Would you rather be down 9 with four minutes left, or down two with 4 seconds left?
I really can’t make much out of this post.

Are you saying it’s not better to make it a 1 score possession game ? It’s better to be down by 9 than 8?
 

TWOK11

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,062
Reaction score
11,276
I really can’t make much out of this post.

Are you saying it’s not better to make it a 1 score possession game ? It’s better to be down by 9 than 8?

It’s better to go for two as early as possible so that you know how many scores you’ll need as soon as you can.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G2

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,142
Reaction score
36,328
Because in theory it isn’t a one possession game. It’s never a one possession game.

If you’re arguing that it’s better to go for two on the second TD, then everything else HAS to stay constant. What that means is if I missed the conversion on the first TD, then you also have to miss it after the second TD. Get it?!?

So in both cases, you need three scores to win. But in your case you don’t find that out until after the second TD whereas I find out after the first one. In others words, I have more time to plan for the three scores than you do.
I get it but don’t believe it’s a proven strategy. Only down 8 is a 1 score game. It provides the opportunity to tie the game that being down 9 doesn’t .

AND if you miss it you can still kick the onside kick like if you were down 9. In other words if you’re down 8 you still have to manage the time in case you need it if you miss the conversion
 

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,142
Reaction score
36,328
It’s better to go for two as early as possible so that you know how many scores you’ll need as soon as you can.


Thats the most ridiculous assertion I’ve ever heard. You’d rather be down 2 possessions than 1.

Id like to see some Statistical examples or percentages where teams have chosen this path . Otherwise it appears fans just defending their coach with a dumb decision .
 

HungryLion

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,533
Reaction score
60,407
I really can’t make much out of this post.

Are you saying it’s not better to make it a 1 score possession game ? It’s better to be down by 9 than 8?


When you make that decision. You’re not CHOOSING to be down by 9.

You’re choosing to go for 2. Which will mean you’ll be down 9 or 7.


McCarthy didn’t know the cowboys wouldn’t get the 2 when he makes the choice.
 

HungryLion

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,533
Reaction score
60,407
Thats the most ridiculous assertion I’ve ever heard. You’d rather be down 2 possessions than 1.

Id like to see some Statistical examples or percentages where teams have chosen this path . Otherwise it appears fans just defending their coach with a dumb decision .



nobody is saying you would rather be down two scores than 1.

that’s not the argument at all.

the argument is. You have to go for 2 at some point. So it’s better to go for it earlier so you KNOW if you make it or not, earlier.


Your ultimate preference is to make the 2 point conversion so you’re only down 7. But the coach can’t just choose to be down 7. He can only choose to TRY
 

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,142
Reaction score
36,328
What happens if you fail to make the last 2 point conversion ? You kick the onside with less time, if any time is left, then you had earlier. It is better to kick an onside, recover and move into scoring range with 4 min then :10 seconds.

I’m not sure why this is difficult to understand.
You have to manage the time down 8 just like you would if you were down 9.
 

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,142
Reaction score
36,328
When you make that decision. You’re not CHOOSING to be down by 9.

You’re choosing to go for 2. Which will mean you’ll be down 9 or 7.


McCarthy didn’t know the cowboys wouldn’t get the 2 when he makes the choice.
Of course you’re choosing for the possibility to be down 9 than 8. He knew that was a possibility .

The only way it makes sense is if you’re playing to win not tie. Meaning if if you convert then you’re going for 2 again to win instead of going to OT.

And based on the first game when he went for it in 4th and 3 instead of tying the game this would make more sense.
 

G2

Taco Engineer
Messages
24,426
Reaction score
26,192
Wow, I've seen a lot of stupid on these boards over the years, but I'm not sure I've ever seen it this extreme.

It's like some people think the choice is between missing the 2 point attempt early and making it later.

Here are the possible outcomes to consider;

Go for 2 early -
Successful - Get a 2nd Td, tie it, win in OT.
Fail - Score quick, get an onside kick, get into fg position and Win
Lose

Go for 2 late -
Successful - tie it, win to OT
Lose

One option gives you an extra chance (small as it is) to win (technically, this option may exist with both, but would almost always be significantly less probable with the latter due to less time).

The odds of the 2-point try success and failure are equal for both.
^ This is it in a nutshell and quite simple to absorb. The difference in probability is small, but there's still a difference.
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
Yes it does. For one thing, you know you have to allow more time for an onside kick and ensuing drive. Had they only gone for the extra point, then they would've been playing for the tie at the end, and would've been chewing up the clock. Had they done that and missed the 2 point conversion, game over. Add to that, the fact that even if they make the 2, now it goes into OT, which is still a gamble, considering our defense.
No, if you are down 8 you can play it exactly the same as if you are down 9, seeing as how a 2-pt. conversion is basically a coin flip. Unless your assuming you convert the 2, you have to leave time to get the onsides and score, which is no different than how you'd have to play it down 9.
 
Top