MM explains his thought process of going for 2

[CowboyRoy]

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.

Yet as you pointed out, almost no one does it.

 

[HungryLion]

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

The odds of having to score twice in two minutes are the same. Because the odds of missing the 2 pointer on the second TD are the same.

 

[Uncle_Hank]

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

You could do that, but your odds of winning will go down.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

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.

That he did.

 

[CowboyRoy]

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.

no, this was entertaining. Always nice to hear a bunch of homers back a horrible coaching call. Some were doing it last week when the moron decided to go for it instead of kick the FG to tie it at 20.

 

[CowboyRoy]

The odds of having to score twice in two minutes are the same. Because the odds of missing the 2 pointer on the second TD are the same.

So scoring once and getting and going for 2 in 4 minutes is the same as having to score twice in 4 minutes?

Sure buddy...…...keep smoking that stuff.

 

[CowboyRoy]

You could do that, but your odds of winning will go down.

LOL...………..sure buddy, that's why most kick the extra point right?

 

[Hawkeye0202]

This thread.....lol

 

[JD_KaPow]

LOL...………..sure buddy, that's why most kick the extra point right?

Good, confirmation that you're trolling. You know this isn't true.

 

[Keithfansince5]

This is a perfect analogy
https://twitter.com/nottobetrite/status/1308162381642686465?s=21

Haha. People say that because they miraculously recovered an onside kick. It might be the only one recovered this entire year in the NFL. It is so absurd that this is even a discussion. The choice failed. They missed the 2 point try. IS that worth anything to anyone? They now were faced with being down 9 points with 4 minutes left. All ATL had to do was get 1 first down and it is over. They played conservative ball and kicked it back to us and we had to score quickly to get within 2 points. We did which is amazing. But do we all want to live with that decision if it presents itself again? I don't. I prefer to take the 1 point kick. Be down by 8. Play smart defense, force the kick. Play to score and the tie. If we fail that 2 point try, I can live with that. They are hard to convert. We gave ourselves our best shot. If we convert it than we kick off to them and play defense. The amount of time remaining would be an unknown so we would have no idea how much time would be left. I presume ATL would have used timeouts on our drive to stop the clock hoping to have the last chance. This means they would not be able to stop the clock on their drive if they even had one.

Anyway, none of these are great scenarios and likely neither offer a high percentage of a good outcome. Maybe like asking would you rather get hit by a whiffle ball bat or a wood bat? Both hurt, but one is worse.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Good, confirmation that you're trolling. You know this isn't true.

Someone just put up the numbers pal, sorry. It was one of your cronies too. This conversation is over. It was a dumb call.

 

[Uncle_Hank]

So scoring once and getting and going for 2 in 4 minutes is the same as having to score twice in 4 minutes?

Sure buddy...…...keep smoking that stuff.

You don't know if you only have to score once or not. You're just as likely to have to score twice, only you have even less time if you miss at the end.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Haha. People say that because they miraculously recovered an onside kick. It might be the only one recovered this entire year in the NFL. It is so absurd that this is even a discussion. The choice failed. They missed the 2 point try. IS that worth anything to anyone? They now were faced with being down 9 points with 4 minutes left. All ATL had to do was get 1 first down and it is over. They played conservative ball and kicked it back to us and we had to score quickly to get within 2 points. We did which is amazing. But do we all want to live with that decision if it presents itself again? I don't. I prefer to take the 1 point kick. Be down by 8. Play smart defense, force the kick. Play to score and the tie. If we fail that 2 point try, I can live with that. They are hard to convert. We gave ourselves our best shot. If we convert it than we kick off to them and play defense. The amount of time remaining would be an unknown so we would have no idea how much time would be left. I presume ATL would have used timeouts on our drive to stop the clock hoping to have the last chance. This means they would not be able to stop the clock on their drive if they even had one.

Anyway, none of these are great scenarios and likely neither offer a high percentage of a good outcome. Maybe like asking would you rather get hit by a whiffle ball bat or a wood bat? Both hurt, but one is worse.

Easy, easy common sense. You 100% kick the 1 and its not even debatable.

Only on a homer board is it even being discussed.

 

[Keithfansince5]

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.

He made the wrong call and it is being justified because of the miracle that happened to win the game. Going forward this is not the smart call.

 

[HungryLion]

So scoring once and getting and going for 2 in 4 minutes is the same as having to score twice in 4 minutes?

Sure buddy...…...keep smoking that stuff.

It’s not smoking anything. It’s called math chief. I suggest you learn the basics.

probability doesn’t care about your feelings. It is what it is.

 

[CowboyRoy]

You don't know if you only have to score once or not. You're just as likely to have to score twice, only you have even less time if you miss at the end.

Why would you have less time? If you are assuming you are going to miss the first one, then assume you miss the 2nd one and score as quickly as possible.

If you are going to use dumb logic, then us it in both.

 

[Uncle_Hank]

Haha. People say that because they miraculously recovered an onside kick. It might be the only one recovered this entire year in the NFL. It is so absurd that this is even a discussion. The choice failed. They missed the 2 point try. IS that worth anything to anyone? They now were faced with being down 9 points with 4 minutes left. All ATL had to do was get 1 first down and it is over. They played conservative ball and kicked it back to us and we had to score quickly to get within 2 points. We did which is amazing. But do we all want to live with that decision if it presents itself again? I don't. I prefer to take the 1 point kick. Be down by 8. Play smart defense, force the kick. Play to score and the tie. If we fail that 2 point try, I can live with that. They are hard to convert. We gave ourselves our best shot. If we convert it than we kick off to them and play defense. The amount of time remaining would be an unknown so we would have no idea how much time would be left. I presume ATL would have used timeouts on our drive to stop the clock hoping to have the last chance. This means they would not be able to stop the clock on their drive if they even had one.

Anyway, none of these are great scenarios and likely neither offer a high percentage of a good outcome. Maybe like asking would you rather get hit by a whiffle ball bat or a wood bat? Both hurt, but one is worse.

Why are you okay with missing the two-point conversion with no time left instead of missing it with enough time to try to get the ball back? That makes no logical sense whatsoever. You are playing to lose, not to win.

 

[Keithfansince5]

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.

NOPE. One requires you to recover an onside kick the other doesn't. HUGE difference.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Someone just put up the numbers pal, sorry. It was one of your cronies too. This conversation is over. It was a dumb call.

I put the numbers up. And the numbers clearly say that coaches are starting to adopt it.

 

[Uncle_Hank]

Why would you have less time? If you are assuming you are going to miss the first one, then assume you miss the 2nd one and score as quickly as possible.

If you are going to use dumb logic, then us it in both.

The debate is not about whether it's better to be down by 8 or 9 with 4 minutes left. The debate is about whether it's better to be down by 9 with 4 minutes left or down by 2 with 4 seconds left.