36 replies to this topic

[makoman]

I said enough about this yesterday, but I think going for 2 was clearly reasonable in this case. I can understand disagreeing, I just can't understand those who say that it made no sense or was clearly stupid etc. There was some of that on this board, but a lot more elsewhere. 

 

The real problem is that they are bad at going for two this year, they are now 2 for 7 this year. Maybe it's just variance (they were 2 for 2 last year, and 2 for 5 in 2019) or maybe something is wrong with their play design. It would be nice to have Dobbins who had both last year. But anyway, it's now potentially cost them two games, and could have cost them the Chiefs game. Fortunately the 2 successes came against the Colts since they were necessary.

[You Play to Win the Game]

The offense in the state it was in down the stretch in the Colts game, I can see it all day. That and they were down so big, they literally had to. But when the offense is flowing and they're clicking, sure. This version of the offense? It's like shooting a half court shot, IMO. Just not at all a likely conversion with this team currently. That should be a factor in these discussions, for most who are a proponent of going for it these past two weeks, I'm not seeing that factored, other than makoman. 

[Mackus]

Yesterday has nothing to do with an expected conversion percentage since you still need to convert once regardless of when you do it. We're talking sequencing and not really decision-making of 1 vs 2.  Unless you're gonna make a case that the attempt with a minute or two left inherently has better odds than one with 7or 10 minutes left, which I doubt I'd agree with except for fairly narrow, hard-to-predict edge cases (like an injury to a key defender in the time between attempts in an extreme example).

 

Whether you go for 1 or 2 in circumstances other than when score clearly dictates a certain choice always depends heavily on the quality of your offense and the quality of the defense you're playing against (and your defense and opponent's offense and how much time is left), and that should absolutely include very micro-level analysis and not just big picture macro analysis.  I would never just assume the leaguewide conversion rate is the expected success level for my next 2 point conversion try.  Nor would I use leaguewide rates for winning percentage.  Those are smart baselines, but I'd always want to adjust those, at least in my head, for day-of-game and in-game factors.

[85Knight]

Am I missing something? Why is it not a big difference between being down 8 and not 9 with 9 minutes left? For me that's all this comes down to.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Yesterday has nothing to do with an expected conversion percentage since you still need to convert once regardless of when you do it. We're talking sequencing and not really decision-making of 1 vs 2. Unless you're gonna make a case that the attempt with a minute or two left inherently has better odds than one with 7or 10 minutes left, which I doubt I'd agree with except for fairly narrow, hard-to-predict edge cases (like an injury to a key defender in the time between attempts in an extreme example).

Whether you go for 1 or 2 in circumstances other than when score clearly dictates a certain choice always depends heavily on the quality of your offense and the quality of the defense you're playing against (and your defense and opponent's offense and how much time is left), and that should absolutely include very micro-level analysis and not just big picture macro analysis. I would never just assume the leaguewide conversion rate is the expected success level for my next 2 point conversion try. Nor would I use leaguewide rates for winning percentage. Those are smart baselines, but I'd always want to adjust those, at least in my head, for day-of-game and in-game factors.

Fair enough, and agreed about yesterday, you talked me down on that one with your first post this morning about it.

[Mackus]

Am I missing something? Why is it not a big difference between being down 8 and not 9 with 9 minutes left? For me that's all this comes down to.

 

You have to go for 2 at some point down 15. 

 

If you go for it on the first score and get it, great, now you only need 7.  If you go for it earlier and don't get it, you're down 9 but you have several minutes left in the game.

 

If you kick the first one, now you're down 8. Still a one-score game.  You then get a stop and go score again.  If you get that conversion then, great, you're tied.  If you don't get it, now you are down 2 with a very short time left in the game.

 

Not getting the conversion will really hurt your chances of winning.  But if you fail earlier, you have more time left to recover from that failure.  If you wait and then fail later, you have a much harder time of overcoming that failure.

 

The order doesn't matter if you succeed.  But if you fail, I'd much rather have failed on the first touchdown than on the second touchdown.

[85Knight]

You have to go for 2 at some point down 15.

If you go for it on the first score and get it, great, now you only need 7. If you go for it earlier and don't get it, you're down 9 but you have several minutes left in the game.

If you kick the first one, now you're down 8. Still a one-score game. You then get a stop and go score again. If you get that conversion then, great, you're tied. If you don't get it, now you are down 2 with a very short time left in the game.

Not getting the conversion will really hurt your chances of winning. But if you fail earlier, you have more time left to recover from that failure. If you wait and then fail later, you have a much harder time of overcoming that failure.

The order doesn't matter if you succeed. But if you fail, I'd much rather have failed on the first touchdown than on the second touchdown.

I get that but it's a risk vs. reward situation for me. I like my chances of getting a td and a 2 point conversion more than getting a td and field goal with 9 minutes left especially with the backup qb playing. And as we saw it took a rare onside kick recovery to even have a shot at making the first scenario possible. It's all about the clock for me. A little more time and I'd agree 100% with you.

[Mackus]

I get that but it's a risk vs. reward situation for me. I like my chances of getting a td and a 2 point conversion more than getting a td and field goal with 9 minutes left especially with the backup qb playing

 

Of course it's easier to get 8 than 9.  That's not a fair comparison.  You would always rather be down 8 than 9.  You'd also rather be down 7 than 8.  In either case, when you're down 15, you're going to have to go for 2 at some point.  If you go for it on the first score, I think you have a much better (though still very small) chance of overcoming a failed conversion attempt than if you kick first then go for two on your second score and fail.

 

If you succeed on your attempt, the sequencing is irrelevant.  If you fail, it's better to have gone sooner than later.

[85Knight]

Of course it's easier to get 8 than 9. That's not a fair comparison. You would always rather be down 8 than 9. You'd also rather be down 7 than 8. In either case, when you're down 15, you're going to have to go for 2 at some point. If you go for it on the first score, I think you have a much better (though still very small) chance of overcoming a failed conversion attempt than if you kick first then go for two on your second score and fail.

If you succeed on your attempt, the sequencing is irrelevant. If you fail, it's better to have gone sooner than later.

I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one. This is like looking at one of those pictures and seeing two different images.

[jamesdean]

I didn't care for the 2 point attempt to end the Pittsburgh game but I didn't have a problem with Harbaugh going for 2 the first time in Cleveland.  I just assumed that's what he was going to do and agreed with it.  The game had been such a train wreck up until that point that it was hard for me to think they were actually going to come within a couple of points at the end so what difference did it make?  In retrospect, you can conceivably look at it differently but at the time, I was for it. 

[Mackus]

I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one. This is like looking at one of those pictures and seeing two different images.

 

I think it's totally fine to want to have waited to the second one.  I'm not arguing one is clearly right and the other clearly wrong.  I'm just arguing that neither decision is worse than the other and explaining why I'd have preferred going for it early..

[85Knight]

I think it's totally fine to want to have waited to the second one. I'm not arguing one is clearly right and the other clearly wrong. I'm just arguing that neither decision is worse than the other and explaining why I'd have preferred going for it early..

The spacetime continuum (LOL) thought that because we missed the 2 the first time proves that we would have missed it the second is above my pay grade. I don't know how we could prove or disprove that theory.

[Mackus]

The spacetime continuum (LOL) thought that because we missed the 2 the first time proves that we would have missed it the second is above my pay grade. I don't how we could prove or disprove that theory.

 

I haven't suggested what you say here.  There is a chance you succeed and a chance you fail regardless of when you go for it.

[makoman]

The spacetime continuum (LOL) thought that because we missed the 2 the first time proves that we would have missed it the second is above my pay grade. I don't how we could prove or disprove that theory.

I don't think anyone thinks that. 

 

The situation where you make it, whether first or second, isn't really at issue here. That is the ideal result. So we are only comparing the situation where you miss early vs the situation where you miss late.

 

If you miss early you have more information. That's it. You now know you need another possession. But now you can plan the rest of the game with that in mind, it likely affects your plans on both offense and defense.

 

If you miss late, you didn't get that information until late. You now know you need another possession, but maybe now it's too late to do anything about it. If you miss with 12 seconds left like last week the game is over. Maybe you would have played the past few minutes a little differently if you knew you were going to miss. For example, maybe you wasted time intentionally scoring late to get the last possession and not allow the other team an extra possession. You wouldn't have done that if you knew you missed.

 

I would rather have a chance to change the outcome by changing my plans if I know I need another possession. More information is better. If you fail with a minute left there's not a lot you can do. If you fail with 9 minutes left you can hurry up, you can play defense differently, etc.

 

Neither situation is good, neither is a likely win. But more information is better. 

[cprenegade]

I'm on the side of keeping it a one score game as long as possible.  I see the other side, and I can't argue with the logic of knowing in advance that you would need two scores.  Though my feeling is you know it, and now so does the other team.  They can game plan for trying to use down more clock when they might not if they know they are only one score up.  

 

You also never know what might happen in the time between the time you score the first TD and the time you have to try the 2-pt conversion.  Maybe they lose a player that opens up a play more for you on that 2-pt conversion.  It's a long shot for sure, but getting scoring on three consecutive possessions isn't exactly a high percentage bet either and that's what was needed at the time.  It just feels like when you miss that 2-pt conversion you've decreased your odds of winning the game right there as opposed to keeping them alive.  I know the analytics say no, they are the same.  

 

I don't know, I think it just comes down to a preference thing.  I prefer to keep a little pressure on the other team knowing I might tie it up with one score rather than giving them a small measure of breathing room knowing that I have to have two successful possessions to win.  But I certainly see how others would prefer to know they didn't make the 2 point conversion and now have to have a TD and FG on successive possessions.  

[Mike in STL]

I'm on the side of keeping it a one score game as long as possible.  I see the other side, and I can't argue with the logic of knowing in advance that you would need two scores.  Though my feeling is you know it, and now so does the other team.  They can game plan for trying to use down more clock when they might not if they know they are only one score up.  

 

You also never know what might happen in the time between the time you score the first TD and the time you have to try the 2-pt conversion.  Maybe they lose a player that opens up a play more for you on that 2-pt conversion.  It's a long shot for sure, but getting scoring on three consecutive possessions isn't exactly a high percentage bet either and that's what was needed at the time.  It just feels like when you miss that 2-pt conversion you've decreased your odds of winning the game right there as opposed to keeping them alive.  I know the analytics say no, they are the same.  

 

I don't know, I think it just comes down to a preference thing.  I prefer to keep a little pressure on the other team knowing I might tie it up with one score rather than giving them a small measure of breathing room knowing that I have to have two successful possessions to win.  But I certainly see how others would prefer to know they didn't make the 2 point conversion and now have to have a TD and FG on successive possessions.  

Well put. I get the logic. But I'd prefer it to be a one possession game as well, for all those reasons. 

[CMU82]

The Pittsburgh game.....I'd go for 2 99% of the time in a similar situation with this year's team.

 

Cleveland.....go for 2 when the Ravens did 100% of the time.  You know what you have to do, make or miss.

 

(Forgotten in all this, is that they did get the ball back right away, and went a pitiful three and out).

 

When there's more time left, and you cut the deficit to 9, then I kick the extra point.  I've seen Tomlin (almost to excess) and Harbaugh and others have those missing points bite them too often.