PATs changed but not significantly IMO

[CyberB0b]

You need to convert between 47 and 48 percent of the time. Doubtful it's the correct decision.

Now bad weather games make it ore interesting. Heavy wind? Rain? Snow? Go for two.

Normal conditions? Kick it.

I think the league average success rate is around 50% from what I have seen, but it is a really small sample size.

 

[HoustonSucks]

Not a fan. It's more fun to think it's a given they're going to get the PAT and then something wonky happens. This way you know there's a chance something wonky happens. I'm just old school...

 

[Arkyvarminter]

Do you really want the kicker to be more of a factor in a game than he already is? I don't...

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I think the league average success rate is around 50% from what I have seen, but it is a really small sample size.

47.5

Considering last year kickers made roughly 95.3 percent of their kicks from this range.... You're indifferent as to which you choose.

Given Garrett's conservative nature. We'll be kicking.


http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/2...point-conversion-more-tempting.html?referrer=

 

[blsabb88]

It'll be interesting when a team goes for a PAT to win, only for it to be blocked and returned for 2 and lose by 1.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

He didn't perform as well but he got blocked twice mitigating that more than a little. That is on his blocking. That LB from SEA got canned for the one whiff.

Okay yeah I think that's what it is. He had some misses but yeah I might be factoring in those blocks as well for why I lost confidence in the kicking game.

 

[Blackspider214]

I'm in favor of this. The extra point has become a useless 99% play that people don't care about anymore. It's <was> about the only portion of a NFL game that basically wasn't worth watching.

Now they've made it more interesting.

Such dumb logic. Not every single second of every single game in sports needs to be "omgggzzzz exciting!!!111"

The extra point has been at the 2 for a very long time. No reason to change it because of this line of thinking.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

47.5

Considering last year kickers made roughly 95.3 percent of their kicks from this range.... You're indifferent as to which you choose.

Given Garrett's conservative nature. We'll be kicking.


http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/2...point-conversion-more-tempting.html?referrer=

I don't know if I'd consider Garrett "conservative". He made some big time calls last year that took some guts. I think coming out of the gate we'll see teams try the 33 yarders but most teams will transistion to the 2 point conversions especially if they are down big before halftime.

 

[daveferr33]

If you need a more exciting extra point to keep you engaged, then football is just not for you.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I don't know if I'd consider Garrett "conservative". He made some big time calls last year that took some guts. I think coming out of the gate we'll see teams try the 33 yarders but most teams will transistion to the 2 point conversions especially if they are down big before halftime.

Garrett is undoubtedly a conservative coach.

It's good to know he'll get aggressive on occasion... But he doesn't do it nearly often enough.

Also based on the numbers teams, again, should be in different between a 2 or a 1. Which I'd a step in the right direction as previously kicking was the superior football decision except in obvious later game situations.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Garrett is undoubtedly a conservative coach.

It's good to know he'll get aggressive on occasion... But he doesn't do it nearly often enough.

Also based on the numbers teams, again, should be in different between a 2 or a 1. Which I'd a step in the right direction as previously kicking was the superior football decision except in obvious later game situations.

Well what's a conservative coach? What is a overly aggressive coach? I think he coaches smart and coaches to the numbers even if those numbers are being aggressive. Even in the Green Bay game with the "catch" in it. If i'm not mistaken that was 4th and 2? They threw a deep ball to Dez rather than run it.

While I agree he's more conservative than he is Sean Payton.......he coached rather aggressive last year.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Well what's a conservative coach? What is a overly aggressive coach? I think he coaches smart and coaches to the numbers even if those numbers are being aggressive. Even in the Green Bay game with the "catch" in it. If i'm not mistaken that was 4th and 2? They threw a deep ball to Dez rather than run it.

While I agree he's more conservative than he is Sean Payton.......he coached rather aggressive last year.

The 4th and 2 long pass to Dez wasn't necessarily the play call. If you go back to the thread where Romo dissects the play he talks about the defense dictating why he threw that ball.

I'd say our lack of using more PA on first down and our general aversion to going for it in no man's land (usually opted for the bad punt or long field goal) marks JG as conservative.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Such dumb logic. Not every single second of every single game in sports needs to be "omgggzzzz exciting!!!111"

The extra point has been at the 2 for a very long time. No reason to change it because of this line of thinking.

Continuing to do something because you've" always done it that way" is monumentally shortsighted.

 

[Rogah]

What I don't like is the commercial after a kickoff. It is much worse than the extra point to me. Extra point/FG, 3-4 minute commercial break. Kickoff for a touchback, another 3-4 minute commercial break. It's 10 minutes after an exciting scoring play followed by a 10 minute buzz kill. Just cut out the commercial after kickoffs and I'm happy.

The reason why there are usually commercials after kickoffs is because kickoffs follow scores and scores are often (certainly not always but often) the result of a prolonged possession, say 7+ plays). When this happens, the networks get behind on their commercial break allocation. The number of commercial breaks is a constant for regulation games so they have to make sure they do their best to get a fixed number in per quarter.

 

[Rogah]

It'll be interesting when a team goes for a PAT to win, only for it to be blocked and returned for 2 and lose by 1.

It actually sets up a situation where if a team scores to take a 1 or 2 point lead on the final play of the game (or with something like 3 seconds or less left) they are better off to just take a knee on the XP than actually try it. You see that in college once in a long while.

 

[percyhoward]

We really need to go for 2 every time until our success rate gets down below 50%. If that ever happens.

On our last 19 runs from the 2-yard line or closer, we've scored 16 touchdowns.

 

[USMarineVet]

The expected points for the new PAT would be .916
The expected points for the 2pt PAT would be .948

The expected points for the old PAT was .996

So it would actually be smarter to go for two(without factoring in fumbles or INTs returned for 2 pts)

Agree with respect to the math.

But I think it will also have a lot to do with the team's make up.

For instance, in our case, we have an excellent Offensive Line and an excellent Kicker. We should be able to excel in both areas depending on the situation. But if you take a team with a good OLine and power back, but a not so great kicker, you may be more inclined to go for the two now. Or visa versa. Plug in the ABCs for each team's strengths and weaknesses.

Weather will be a tad more of a factor as well now.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Shouldn't take long for the first time when a team scores what they think is a tying TD in the final seconds... fans sink back into their chairs in relief preparing for OT, and the kicker goes wide left. Gonna be some nice reactions on that one.

 

[AzorAhai]

The reason why there are usually commercials after kickoffs is because kickoffs follow scores and scores are often (certainly not always but often) the result of a prolonged possession, say 7+ plays). When this happens, the networks get behind on their commercial break allocation. The number of commercial breaks is a constant for regulation games so they have to make sure they do their best to get a fixed number in per quarter.

I understand all of that, but it makes for a less viewer friendly program. I would much rather have a longer half time show with more commercials than the set up now. It won't happen because of the $, but that doesn't matter to me anyways.

 

[Nightman]

I understand all of that, but it makes for a less viewer friendly program. I would much rather have a longer half time show with more commercials than the set up now. It won't happen because of the $, but that doesn't matter to me anyways.

Somehow soccer manages to play 45 minutes straight without commercials. With technology today one would think they could run more TV ads during the actual game, using banners and inlays.