MM explains his thought process of going for 2

[G2]

It obviously worked. JG would have tried to tie and still lost.

 

[HungryLion]

Being down 8 with 4 minutes to go is better than being down 9 with 4 minutes to go when all you can score in one drive is 8. LOL

Simple simple math. LOL

When making the call, he isn’t choosing to be down 9.

he is choosing to be down 9 OR 7.

 

[Runwildboys]

I think normally you take the extra point on the 1st td and go for 2 on the next just to keep your team mentally in the game. Failing on the 2 point can take it out of a team because they now know the odds are long to be able to win. However the team never left down even after the missed 2 point conversion

Or, if the players are strong willed, they pour everything they have into the time remaining...which is what happened. Oops, somehow I didn't see your last sentence. Did you edit that in there, or did I fail to read the whole thing?

 

[CowboyRoy]

Between 2011 and 2015, this situation--down 15, score a TD to make it 9, single-digit minutes remaining in the game--happened 13 times. Teams always kicked the XP. In fact, only once from 1994 to 2015 did a team go for 2 in this situation.
From 2016 to today, the situation has arisen 21 times. Teams kicked the XP 16 times and went for 2 the other 5 times.
Coaches are learning.

What you mean is that every once in a while some idiot will do the wrong thing.

 

[Uncle_Hank]

Well yes, thank you for the straw man argument. In your scenario, I would agree. However, that is not the scenario as it didn't include being down by 2 with 4 seconds left without the ball. Nice try though.

What do you think this conversation is even about? Are you being serious right now, or just trolling?

 

[Sarge]

Bad call, period.

 

[CowboyRoy]

When making the call, he isn’t choosing to be down 9.

he is choosing to be down 9 OR 7.

Why would you want to be down 9 when you can be down 8?

 

[CyberB0b]

That was me, thanks.

I hate when people say an 8-point deficit is a "one-score game." It's not. There's about a 50% chance it's a one-score game and a 50% chance it's a two-score game: you just don't know which.
Relatedly, a 7-point deficit is about 98% one-score game and 2% two-score game. We all treat that as 100/0, but there's a game or two a year where we remember that it isn't.

Most humans are risk averse. They'll take more conservative actions, even if it costs them more in the long run.

 

[JD_KaPow]

You know what I mean stupid.




What you mean is that every once in a while some idiot will do the wrong thing.

Nice try. The trend is clear, and not at all what you claimed ("nobody ever does it").

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Most humans are risk averse. They'll take more conservative actions, even if it costs them more in the long run.

Pretty much.

 

[Uncle_Hank]

Why would you want to be down 9 when you can be down 8?

Why would you want to be down by 8 when you can be down by 7? You're not saying anything.

 

[Jay]

Why would you want to be down 9 when you can be down 8?

What you mean is that every once in a while some idiot will do the wrong thing.

Let’s see time remaining in the game on these instances.

When it’s late, it makes sense. It’s almost common sense, for some of us.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Most humans are risk averse. They'll take more conservative actions, even if it costs them more in the long run.

Most Cowboys fans are homers and will back any dumb coaching decision must because they think it makes them a great fan.

 

[HungryLion]

Why would you want to be down 9 when you can be down 8?

Because you have to try to the two point sooner or later.


You don’t want to be down 9.

You also don’t want to miss the 2 pointer at the end. But it’s just as much a possibility as missing it on the first TD.

The odds are the same.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Why would you want to be down by 8 when you can be down by 7? You're not saying anything.

I would rather be down 7 but knowing that being down 9 I lose, Ill take my chances being guaranteed down 8.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Because you have to try to the two point sooner or later.


You don’t want to be down 9.

You also don’t want to miss the 2 pointer at the end. But it’s just as much a possibility as missing it on the first TD.

The odds are the same.

Sure, but its easier then scoring twice in 4 minutes.

 

[CowboysDrew]

Interesting article on this from 2012, humorously enough criticizing MM and saying he was wrong to go for 2 on the second possession and not the first against the 49ers.

https://www.footballperspective.com...are-foolish-to-not-go-for-2-after-touchdowns/

 

[JD_KaPow]

Why would you want to be down 9 when you can be down 8?

You're just trolling at this point; I'm done. Although I do thank you for asking the question about coaches doing this. It was interesting learning that they are in fact figuring it out.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Why would you want to be down by 8 when you can be down by 7? You're not saying anything.

This is correct. Yes, you may end up being down 9 when the play is over, but you still have about 4:30 left, give or take, to take corrective action which we did. If you take the XP, you have to drain clock and then pray you make the 2 point conversion to tie.

 

[Runwildboys]

LOL. Had they made the 2 and allowed ATL to score GAME over. So many variables to show this logic is wrong. They had to give themselves the best chance. That is all anyone can ask. Setting up a situation where all you need to tie the game is 1 TD and a 2 point conversion is far and away easier than needing to score 2 times. That is the what if scenario you have to consider when making that decision. If we score great, we only need a TD to tie and a PAT. BUT if we fail, now we are really in trouble because we need 2 scores which means recovering an onside kick. That alone should make anyone come to the conclusion that any decision that could lead to a onside kick recovery is right out. Thus, kick the PAT and play defense and get the ball back with a higher chance of success. Still a tough chance because it is hard to get a 2 point conversion. But it is cake compared to recovering an onside kick.

Now suppose the scenario was that they go for 1 on the first TD, now they need to score 8. Why do the odds of getting the 2 point conversion increase on the second one? They don't, and now you've run the clock down and it's game over.
Now suppose they actually do tie it up and send it to OT. With all the complaining about our defense yesterday, who had any faith that we win in OT?

He made the right call.