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

 

[Cowfan75Lives]

You can study it all you want. It was a stupid call.

 

[Kwyn]

There has to be a feel for the game and momentum factor.

Going for 2 after the offense had been shaky all game was a terrible decision.

Analytics aside, if we were going to go for 2 it should've been after the next td. At that point we'd have had back to back drives of success and the offense rolling.

I like the analytics aspect of the game, but it doesnt factor in all the necessary context. If we were to plug it into some type of ai program which compiled the entire game id wager the decision would be to kick.

AI would recommend going for two after the first touchdown 100% of the time because of the math.

 

[pansophy]

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




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

The break even point is a 2-pt conversion rate of 37.5% so you have to be pretty bad for the math to be working against you.

 

[Kwyn]

Kicking the XP leaves options open.

Failing the 2 point conversion reduces options.

The exact opposite is true



“Scenario three” gives you two different paths to win.

The other two choices only give you a single path

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

The break even point is a 2-pt conversion rate of 37.5% so you have to be pretty bad for the math to be working against you.

The problem I have with this...calculation...is this...from a simple search:

The two-point conversion success rates vary significantly among NFL teams. In the 2026 season, the Atlanta Falcons lead with a perfect conversion rate of 100%, while the Chicago Bears have not converted any attempts this season. Here’s a brief overview of the two-point conversion statistics for some teams:

• Atlanta Falcons: 100% success rate
• New York Jets: Most conversions in 2025 with 6 successful attempts
• Chicago Bears: 0 conversions this season

It's a widely variable % rate. As mentioned several times, coach has to have some situational awareness and not just play the general odds.

 

[pansophy]

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

Except that the math is based on the performance of those human beings. So there could be situations where you believe you don't have a good matchup or aren't playing well and so your 2-pt conversion rate is going to be lower than 37%. Then you would just go for an XP.

So if you had enough data you could see how much the 2-pt conversion rate changes based on these psychological factors and momentum, and in game determine where you think you are on the spectrum. 37% chance of making a 2-pt conversion is a pretty low bar though.

 

[Cmac]

It was a brain dead stupid call, and it'll be one of the calls that gets Schotty fired at the end of the year.

I'm still confused about it. It was a panic move way before that kind of panic was necessary.

 

[CWR]

AI would recommend going for two after the first touchdown 100% of the time because of the math.

AI will get better.

 

[Bigrandrn]

There is zero reason to go for 2 on the FIRST TD when u need 2 TD. Going for 2 is the riskier option vs a PAT. knowing this, knowing u still need ANOTHER TD, u kick the PAT and make it a 7 point game…..then if you score the second TD, THEN u have a CHOICE….kick the PAT and go to OT if you have all the momentum by that point, or NOW u go for 2 for the win.

As we saw, if you choose the riskier choice with the first TD and fail, now u need 8 and are forced to go for 2 and make it (again, the more difficult task vs PAT)…u paint yourself into a corner of getting the 2pt just to tie, no second option.

It’s was a stupid decision….if you want to go for 2 and the win, u do it after the SECOND TD.

What if they score, u kick to the bucs, and their QB gets hurt or they do nothing..,,,u get the ball back and score and then can tie it having ALL the momentum? Do u NEED to go for 2 and the win at that point? Another reason to kick the PAT first and save the choice for the second TD….u have no idea how the game might swing before that second TD and it’s better to have the choice to kick to tie if u have the momentum, or go for 2 to win at that point, not the first TD.

 

[pansophy]

There is zero reason to go for 2 on the FIRST TD when u need 2 TD. Going for 2 is the riskier option vs a PAT. knowing this, knowing u still need ANOTHER TD, u kick the PAT and make it a 7 point game…..then if you score the second TD, THEN u have a CHOICE….kick the PAT and go to OT if you have all the momentum by that point, or NOW u go for 2 for the win.

As we saw, if you choose the riskier choice with the first TD and fail, now u need 8 and are forced to go for 2 and make it (again, the more difficult task vs PAT)…u paint yourself into a corner of getting the 2pt just to tie, no second option.

It’s was a stupid decision….if you want to go for 2 and the win, u do it after the SECOND TD.

What if they score, u kick to the bucs, and their QB gets hurt or they do nothing..,,,u get the ball back and score and then can tie it having ALL the momentum? Do u NEED to go for 2 and the win at that point? Another reason to kick the PAT first and save the choice for the second TD….u have no idea how the game might swing before that second TD and it’s better to have the choice to kick to tie if u have the momentum, or go for 2 to win at that point, not the first TD.

You are literally saying the opposite of what is true. Your plan is the risky plan.

If you make an XP and then miss a 2-pt conversion on the second TD you just lose. If go for 2 on the first TD and miss, you have a second opportunity to a 2-pt conversion to tie. So by going for 2 on the first TD you have a backup plan if you miss and if you wait your don't.

 

[Vtwin]

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.

Not really. If you kick the XP you have the option of kicking to go to OT or going for the win in regulation. If you fail on the two point conversion you have no option but to convert on the two point attempt to tie. Failing the first two point conversion leaves you one option. Kicking the first XP leaves you two options.

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.

It does come down to the decision to sell out for the regulation win vs going to OT. If you make that all or nothing decision, then it makes sense to go for 2 the first time. Miss that 2 pointer though and it's now down to a coin flip on at least getting to OT. I'd rather preserve that decision and make it a coinflip to win the game rather than go to OT.

Two coinflips vs one.