Should The Cowboys Go For Two Every time?

[theSHOW]

,,, follow it up with an on-side kick and I think we've got ourselves a strategy...

yes! and don't punt the ball...ever. Go for it on every 4th down.

 

[CCBoy]

Oh. Well, in that case I think I'll attribute the forward pass to Dave Campo.

Yes, I realize that he did not came up with it. But apparently, that's no big deal because he did in fact use it.

Again, Adam and Eve if that is proof to yourself...I made a statement of using a trick play that was similar to play action, to start the season.

One can play with origin as if that had some magical relationship or what not. Proof on Campo, I did not see...but did see the play I described ordered up by Bill Parcells.

And origin is of little importance on any single play...and that wasn't the point to begin with. But taking away some of the perceived predictiveness of the Cowboys...but hey, buy Campo a cowboy hat as well.

 

[theSHOW]

Shorter field means less yards given up so the defense looks better on paper.

not just that but if the team were to go for it on every down never punting or kicking the defense would get more restandf with some shorter fields be fresher. The percentages are not that much of an advantage when you factor in touchdowns scores vs FGs and punts and the onside kicks are acting as the same offensive opportunity again for the offense or a shorter field = shorter time on field for our D. Add in the excitement level for the team and the fans. Why not keep our best unit on the field longer.

 

[Doomsday101]

not just that but if the team were to go for it on every down never punting or kicking the defense would get more restandf with some shorter fields be fresher. The percentages are not that much of an advantage when you factor in touchdowns scores vs FGs and punts and the onside kicks are acting as the same offensive opportunity again for the offense or a shorter field = shorter time on field for our D. Add in the excitement level for the team and the fans. Why not keep our best unit on the field longer.

If Dallas went to no punts and always going for 2 the only thing they would accomplish is showing they truly have lost it and do not know what they are doing. In Madden it may work in real life it doesn't that is why no team or coach in his right mind would ever do such a thing.

 

[BringBackThatOleTimeBoys]

If Landry were here, he (and a lot of living active coaches) would say unless the two-point conversion works at least 50% of the time, you are worse off than just kicking the extra point.

 

[Blackspider214]

Reminds me of that high school coach in Arkansas who never punted, kicked a fg or kicked an XP. And onsided every time.

There's a lot of in depth studies done about is it worth it to punt and all.

 

[Verdict]

Really cool post. I'm not sure I understand the analogy completely....how is missing the 1pt the equivalent of busting out in tournament play? Assuming your return is likely to be more than that one point, and you're never risking more than that one point. I assume you're saying that the risk for the total number of XP attempts for the game would be higher than whatever the expected margin of victory would be for an NFL game, and so the risk of going for two each time could effectively break you and should be avoided.

I believe you that that can be calculated statistically and that it's relevant. I just have a hard time keeping it straight in my head when the expected points per attempt are (theoretically, at least) higher than they would be kicking the ball each time.

What he is saying is that if the one extra point you don't get costs you the game, it really doesn't matter what the close percentages say. Realistically, your chances of losing the game are higher on an extra point miss than you winning the game based on a two point conversion made because you are more apt to miss making the two point conversion against good teams, which is exactly when you need the points. I can see both sides of this issue ... I just don't see us going for two points except on a situational basis.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Wow, I hadn't considered they'd actually score.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I guess the million dollar question is if the statistics back this up, why does virtually nobody in the NFL or even in college for the most part do it?

I cannot think of a single professional team or major college program that goes for 2 points after every TD..................there has to be a reason why.

 

[Idgit]

The busting out of the tournament part would come into play if you going for two and failing costs you the game. Even if you are 60% likely to have success (which I don't necessarily agree with), that 40% failure rate is quite high, especially compared to something that is nearly 100% guaranteed. Statistically speaking, there will be runs where you go 10, 20, or 30+ attempts without successfully completing a two point conversion. This is called variance, and it only evens out over very large sample sizes, which is why I don't even trust the 60% number from the past 20 years, it is a very small sample. The Cowboys can't afford to push a small edge, if it even exists. According to the article, once teams start preparing for the two point conversion, the success rate could drop to 50%, which is breakeven. At that point, you are just gambling with variance.

Go here and set the number of flips to 51 and change it to Session, and run it about 10 times and see how out of whack the numbers can get.
http://www.btwaters.com/probab/flip/coinmainD.html

Ah. This makes perfect sense. I tend to agree with you that the 2 point conversion percentage is not near 60%, by the way.

I guess my question then becomes what happens when more than one team, then, hypothetically starts gambling against the variance. It stands to reason that some teams are then going to win some games that they otherwise would not by taking the higher risk. In a league where a single win is the difference between top-12 and out of the playoffs entirely, can teams within spitting distance of the playoffs afford to not take those risks when even one of their chief competitors might? In the poker tournament example, the players don't risks earlier in the tourney where the risk of bankrupting effectively handicaps their ability to be effective relative to the field, but at some point the field has to narrow enough that you're not simply trying to make the cut, but you're playing the odds against individuals to try to beat them, specifically. Or is that not right? I can see the argument for limiting the incapacitating risk in an open field, but at the point where it puts you at a disadvantage relative to one or two specific competitors, you go back to playing the numbers honestly, don't you?

 

[Derinyar]

Honestly, I think you'd need to be closer to 75% to really make it worth the risk. You really need a decent sized change to make it worth taking points off of the board.

 

[joseephuss]

Reminds me of that high school coach in Arkansas who never punted, kicked a fg or kicked an XP. And onsided every time.

There's a lot of in depth studies done about is it worth it to punt and all.

A lot of those studies focus on lower level football where kicking and punting teams aren't as good as the ones in the NFL. If I recall correctly, that Arkansas team is a private school. I'm not familiar with Arkansas high school football, but in Texas there is a dramatic difference in talent between the public school leagues and the private school leagues.

 

[joseephuss]

You can credit Adam and Eve if you wish, but Bill Parcells used that very play the first year he was Head Coach...with the Cowboys.

I don't recall Dallas using that play in Parcells first season at all. The tight ends that season totaled 4 TD receptions. Jeff Robinson had two, a 5 yarder and a 3 yarder. Dan Campbell had one, a 5 yarder. Jason Witten had one, a 36 yarder. None of those were trick plays. The two to Robinson were unexpected as he was the third string TE and mostly used as the deep snapper, but they weren't trick plays.

 

[NeonDeion21]

Honestly, I think you'd need to be closer to 75% to really make it worth the risk. You really need a decent sized change to make it worth taking points off of the board.

The way I see it, Dallas left an additional 53 points on the board last year by kicking XPs.

 

[CCBoy]

I don't recall Dallas using that play in Parcells first season at all. The tight ends that season totaled 4 TD receptions. Jeff Robinson had two, a 5 yarder and a 3 yarder. Dan Campbell had one, a 5 yarder. Jason Witten had one, a 36 yarder. None of those were trick plays. The two to Robinson were unexpected as he was the third string TE and mostly used as the deep snapper, but they weren't trick plays.

Actually the play was to Terry Glenn, but was a halfback pass, that went as I described...


http://cowboysblog.***BANNED-URL***/2009/11/cowboys-ready-for-washingtons-trick-play.html/
Every week your favorite columnist, Jacques Taylor, and I have a friendly bet about when the Cowboys will use the flea-flicker or halfback option pass. Bill Parcells loved the trick play. Richie Anderson beat the Commanders with a TD pass to Terry Glenn in 2004.

I just didn't know who it was to...and assumed it was to a tight end on the fake, a form of play-action as I described.

Naw, I didn't misremember the event...and then the blunder by Bill followed the game.

 

[CCBoy]

And Chocolate Lab...want a discussion on validity as well?

I won't go into a burn barrel routine that is illuminated through that old process...

 

[Blackspider214]

A lot of those studies focus on lower level football where kicking and punting teams aren't as good as the ones in the NFL. If I recall correctly, that Arkansas team is a private school. I'm not familiar with Arkansas high school football, but in Texas there is a dramatic difference in talent between the public school leagues and the private school leagues.

To me, if it's 4th and 1 or 2, I don't mind going for it anywhere on the field in today's football. Especially how handcuffed the defense is with the rule changes. You see in college and high school, teams going for it quite a bit. Just have to be smart about it.

4th and inches from midfield does not need to automatically mean punt.

 

[Angus12]

Actually the play was to Terry Glenn, but was a halfback pass, that went as I described...

Wait, what? The play you described was the TE falling down as the flow of the play went to the other side of the field. Then the TE would get back up and would be uncovered. Bruce Coslet's play.

Now you're claiming that the play was ran by Terry Glenn? And thrown by a running back? That play NEVER happened. Sure, Glenn has been targeted during halfback passes, but never after pulling off Coslet's falldown fake. Please show us even one time that Terry Glenn fell down at the snap on a trick play. Much less on one where the RB then throws the pass.

I'd like to take this time to apologize to the board for inadvertently bringing on the inevitable incoming gibberish.
BURN BARREL!!! Gahhh... ripple... ring tap... ~eats some paste~ BURN BARREL!!

 

[CCBoy]

Wait, what? The play you described was the TE falling down as the flow of the play went to the other side of the field. Then the TE would get back up and would be uncovered. Bruce Coslet's play.

Now you're claiming that the play was ran by Terry Glenn? And thrown by a running back? That play NEVER happened. Sure, Glenn has been targeted during halfback passes, but never after pulling off Coslet's falldown fake. Please show us even one time that Terry Glenn fell down at the snap on a trick play. Much less on one where the RB then throws the pass.

I'd like to take this time to apologize to the board for inadvertently bringing on the inevitable incoming gibberish.
BURN BARREL!!! Gahhh... ripple... ring tap... ~eats some paste~ BURN BARREL!!

That was Bruce Coslet's play, during the Campo years.

You can credit Adam and Eve if you wish, but Bill Parcells used that very play the first year he was Head Coach...with the Cowboys.

I then posted:

Actually the play was to Terry Glenn, but was a halfback pass, that went as I described...


http://cowboysblog.***BANNED-URL***/2009/11/cowboys-ready-for-washingtons-trick-play.html/

This was the exact event of that very play and referenced in account above:

Every week your favorite columnist, Jacques Taylor, and I have a friendly bet about when the Cowboys will use the flea-flicker or halfback option pass. Bill Parcells loved the trick play. Richie Anderson beat the Commanders with a TD pass to Terry Glenn in 2004.

(Anderson's trick pass floated into the hands of Terry Glenn in the back of the end zone early in the fourth quarter, giving the Cowboys (2-1) a 21-10 lead with 13 minutes remaining, enough cushion to survive a comeback by the Commanders (1-2).)

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=240927028

1. I just didn't know who it was to...and assumed it was to a tight end on the fake, a form of play-action as I described. But a tight end of today's team would work fine and validate my part of comments as well.

I even included fall out when Bill, again in 2004, described a generalized category of trick plays as being Jap. And formally apologized for making a comment off cuff, but not intentioned as a stereotype as such:

Here's, due to the original posting showing the repurcussions of the trick play and Parcell's comment, being deleted:

But further proof that the play as referenced twice above, was instead, a trick play....

He thought enough to preface it by saying “No disrespect to the Orientals,” and went on to say that one of his assistant coaches was coming up with “a few' of what we call ‘Jap’ plays, OK, surprise things.”

This was due to his being questioned on the trick play, but recorded here:

http://www.nikkeiview.com/blog/2004/07/japjapjapjapjapjapjap/

Oh, and Bill Parcells was known throughout the league as Tuna.

One can insult as long as moderators allow that, but the truth stands on merit...unlike attitudes displayed, and a tight end set of stats that would not stand ANY year's stats for a group of any tight ends it has had. No matter how one jokes about an accumulated production of around a total of 40 yards for an extended period, (coughing loudly) from the point in 2004 which has now been documented and placed into existence beyond disproof.

Oh, and on the poking fun part, that was insultive and not fact directed beyond a core set of tar and feather group cherry picking...allow me to paint a more accurate, now, picture:

Find this...

and then launch yourself into the middle of it. You figure out the associated phrase that could apply.




Oh, and this was my first posting about the possible use of a trick play:

I think that the very first play from the line of scrimmage this season...should be a trick play, that sucks the secondary into the box...and sends a tight end out as a blocker. The old Parcells play, where he rolls up to the defender, who avoids the blocker. The tight end then gets up quickly and has a sideline pattern for a huge gain/touchdown.



And by the way, don't forget this:

 

[joseephuss]

Bill Parcells first year with the Cowboys was 2003 not 2004. Your whole initial description of the trick play and events was wrong. You also never mentioned the Parcells press conference in your initial posts about trick plays. I would say you totally misremembered the events.