Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by JD_KaPow, Sep 20, 2020.
You want to be down and needing two scores or down and needing one score?
That’s the point.
We failed going for 2 when it was 39-30. That’s unfortunate. That’s killer.
BUT... at least we knew we’d still need to score 2 more times.
If we kicked the PAT to make it 39-31, we’re still hoping for a 2-point conversion later. And if we fail later? Then that means being down 8 points is actually 2 scores, we just wouldn’t know it yet.
There’s no benefit to putting off the decision. If you need 2 scores to win the game, wouldn’t you want to know that? Why would you prefer to be unsure if you need 1 score or 2 scores?
You just gave two examples. The first being from 8 years ago and offering no actual analytical methodology, just opinion. And even when providing numbers, the only teams to actually win in the data set provided kicked the extra point first.
the 2nd example is a chart from the 70s and it says to kick the extra point down 15 lol.
did you even look at them?
If you miss the 2 point conversion you need two scores either way. Whether you miss it on the first td or the 2nd td.
31 out of 32 head coaches kicks the extra point.
I noticed you didn't answer the question, though.
You are reading it wrong. After the td the Cowboys were down 9. People are advocating kicking the extra point to go down 8. The 2nd link recommends going for 2.
Because it's not relevant. The whole argument is based on a failed 2 point conversion.
And they would be wrong. Although I think their are other coaches that would go for two as well. Harbaugh comes to mind off the top of my head.
No. Conventional wisdom says it's right.
The Cowboys were given a gift today. That call loses you the game 99 out of 100 times.
And missing the 2 point at the end loses you the game 100 out of 100.
You play for a one possession score everytime. The Football gods smiled on the Cowboys today.
This thread only exist because the Cowboys won.
I’m with the OP. The math is pretty simple. You’re down by 15. You need two TDs, an extra point and a 2 point conversion. The question is when do you take the 2 pt attempt and what happens if you miss it?
Scenario 1: You take it on the first TD. You make it. Now you’re down 7 and a TD ties it.
Scenario 2: You take it on the second TD. You make it. Now you’re tied.
Scenario 3: You take it on the first TD. You miss it. Now you know you need two scores to win.
Scenario 4: You take it on the second TD. You miss it. Assuming you didn’t leave any time on the clock, you lose.
I cannot agree with the 2 pointer after the first TD; however, if we had kicked after the first TD and gone for 2 after the second TD, I am absolutely certain we would have still been doing the o sides kick if we ran that stupid playcall, maybe the worst of the game by Moore. He counted on nothing but the misdirection for a critical 2 pointer. If I’m going for two with the game on the line, I want an RPR option with the ball in the QB’s hand where he can let Zeke run it in, or take it and run/pass himself....at least have someone in the back of the end zone for a Zeke lob if guys are there to stop him. You have to get that ball into the end zone for a jump ball or something.
If its irrelevant, as you say, then it should be easy to answer.
And the debate at hand is not about a failed two point conversion, it's about when should you go for two (while being down by 15). After the first TD or the second TD. So the question I posed earlier in this thread is indeed relevant.
Do you want to be down needing two scores or be down needing one score?
A reply of one or two would easily answer the question.
"I think that's the wrong call there to take the extra point... The decision to go for two there is simple mathematics where you'd rather know if it's a two-score game at the earliest time instead of taking all the way down to the end... I can't tell you how many conversations I've been involved in in this particular situation, but to go for two there, just to make it clear with a little over 4 minutes if we were going to be in a one-score game or a two-score game was the thinking."
*sticks tongue out at Helman*
That makes no sense. You created the need for two scores by going for two early. If Atlanta gets a first down or two we're getting the ball back with less than two minutes left. Down by one score you still have a chance. Down by two you are screwed, but at least you know you are screwed so to some that's a good thing.
The Cowboys were screwed today if not for an improbable onside kick. This thread wouldn't even exist without it.
If your strategy depends on recovering an onside kick then it's a bad strategy. They are successful less than 5% of the time under the new rules. The Cowboys got lucky. I'll take it, but they were lucky.
Let’s take this out of this specific game and think about it in more general terms. A football team is down 9 points after scoring a TD late in the 4th. Right after they score, they have to decide whether to kick the xp or go for two. There are four ways this could play out:
1) they go for two and make it on their first TD
2) they go for two and fail on their first TD
3 they Go for two and make it on their second TD
4) they go for two and fail on their second TD
1 & 3 both win so we can ignore those and focus on 2 & 4. Going for two on the first TD versus the second won’t change you chances of success. The only difference will be WHEN you find out what happened. the earlier you find out you need that extra score, the better for your team. How, you ask?
well, let’s go back to today’s game. When the falcons started their drive with about 5:00 left, we knew that we needed two more scores. So we used all of our timeouts on their first series, managed to stop them and got the ball back with a decent amount of time left. It is exceedingly unlikely that we would have used our timeouts so quickly if we were down one score. It is only because we had the knowledge that we needed two scores that we played that desperately. Knowledge we would never have if we waited until the second TD to go for two.
You’re missing it.
Kicking the PAT to make the score 39-31 does NOT make it a 1-score game.
Converting the 2 to make it 39-32 DOES make it a 1-score game.
Being down by 8 means you’re either down by 1 score OR by 2 scores... you just don’t know which one yet.
YOU STILL NEED TO GO FOR 2 AND CONVERT LATER ON! So why not do it early? That way, IF YOU FAIL, at least you know that you’ll need another quick score AND an onside kick recovery.
There’s zero advantage to NOT knowing whether you’re down by 1 score or 2 scores late in a game. In fact, it’s a disadvantage.
Down by 8, you force the falcons to make a play....there's added pressure.
Cowboys fans this off season pounded their chests and screamed about analytics.
Cowboys follow analytics and go for two when down by 15
Cowboys fans - No, not like that.
I understand the thinking , but no one has answered the question. I'm asking a simple question.