For those still confused about the 2-pt call

[DuncanIso]

What would Landry do?

Kick.

 

[goshann]

What would Landry do?

Kick.

“No Danny, No”

 

[Vtwin]

What would Landry do?

Kick.

Ironically, Landry pioneered the use of computers and data driven analysis in the NFL.

He wouldn't have had the option to go for two though as it wasn't instituted as a rule until the early 90's.

 

[CWR]

Men do math

Honestly it’s fine to either go for it or to kick. Depending on factors such as your offense, their defense, the psychology of your team, etc.

There was nothing Inherently wrong with going for 2 there.

The problem is none of us trust Schottenheimer to make that call because he’s been a bad coach so far with a losing record.

If it was a Super Bowl winning coach, a lot of people wouldn’t second guess them going for it.

Fair. He has no credibility now.

 

[dreghorn2]

Reading this entire thread I'm reminded of the scene from the movie Moneyball where the A's scouts are sitting at a table discussing a player and deciding he won't hit 'because he has an ugly girlfriend'.

 

[pansophy]

Kicking the XP leaves options open.

Failing the 2 point conversion reduces options.

The thousands of plays the analytics used to come up with the math driven conclusion really have nothing to do with the circumstances of this particular situation.

If analytics were the end all be all then theoretically teams that played entirely based on the analytics would dominate.

It's literally the opposite. If you kick the XP and then fail on the 2 point conversion later you are out of options. If you fail on the 2 point conversion on the first TD you have a chance to make it up.

The other thing that may be causing some confusion is that this whole logic is based on the game going into overtime. The chances of losing in regulation are higher with this approach, but the chances of losing overall is less. Going for 2 at the first TD gives you a 52% chance of winning the game versus only a 45% chance of winning if you kick both times.

 

[pansophy]

Reading this entire thread I'm reminded of the scene from the movie Moneyball where the A's scouts are sitting at a table discussing a player and deciding he won't hit 'because he has an ugly girlfriend'.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

It's literally the opposite. If you kick the XP and then fail on the 2 point conversion later you are out of options. If you fail on the 2 point conversion on the first TD you have a chance to make it up.

The other thing that may be causing some confusion is that this whole logic is based on the game going into overtime. The chances of losing in regulation are higher with this approach, but the chances of losing overall is less. Going for 2 at the first TD gives you a 52% chance of winning the game versus only a 45% chance of winning if you kick both times.

Depends if you're The Dallas Cowboys or any other NFL team.




(seriously...I wonder what OUR team rate is)

 

[stuckindc]

The problem with analytics is that the game is played by human beings with emotions. And no matter how much mathematicians may wish otherwise, humans are not dice rolls or random numbers.

Anyone who has ever played sports should know that momentum is real.

Great point. You can mess up the momentum that you just captured by scoring a TD then missing the 2 point. I get the analytics but to your point .. momentum is hugely important