2 Point Try

[Seafan]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... point-call

Stupid call and stupid response from Pete.

 

[DavidSeven]

I liked it. Put the game away with a throw.

The fact that Brady was the opposing QB here mattered. Hauschka has struggled mightily on kicks from 0-33 yards. Our defense has played a ton of snaps the last 3 weeks. Lot of context that's being ignored here.

 

[AROS]

I hated HATED the call.

Now that we've won and I can look back with the luxury of knowing how it turns out, I get that it was a very ballsy call by Pete...One that we would have celebrated with bravado had they pulled it off.

Still, it's a fairly low percentage chance to make it.

Even though we won, I still think they should have gone for the extra point there.

 

[naholmes]

Terrible call and it almost cost them.

 

[potatohead]

So what do people feel about the Steelers going for two like... All the time? They scored first today to go up 6-0, and went for two.

I like the call Pete made today, I likely would have done the same thing.

 

[rjdriver]

Not really debatable. A statistically dumb call. Pete tends to get cute against Bellicheck and the Stache. Like he's trying to prove something.

If the Pats would have found a way to make one yard in 4 tries (which was likely), they would have had to at at least convert to tie.

 

[soje]

That call alone was horrible. Combine it with not going for the 2 point conversion when we scored the first TD (we missed the extra point, by the way) and it makes it horrendous.

So which is it? You can't have it both ways, they already missed an XP earlier, who says they make this one?

The point is I'm not against a 2 point try, depending on the situation. When a TD puts you up 5 points, then yes, go ahead and go for 2 to make it a 7 point lead. When scoring a PAT forces the other team to score what's basically 2 TD to tie a game, then no, do not go for the 2 point try.

 

[KARAVARUS]

I can't believe anyone agrees with that call. I guess if you're a risk-taker, you might love it, but if you want to statistically give yourself the best odds of winning the game, you play to go up eight. Yes, I know nine is more than eight, and almost impossible to lose. You have to look at execution probability. By kicking extra point, even if you miss, you're still up 7. But it's a league-wide stat that 95% of extra points are made. By going up eight, as someone said, you place that poor execution probability back on your opponent. It's an extreme uphill battle to not only score a TD on us, but then to also score another one right after that (two point conversion) to tie. Especially if you see it go 0-6 in an earlier matchup today.

So if you say you like the call, great, that's just a difference of philosophy--but don't, for one second, say it was THE right call. You have nothing to back that up. Statistics don't support it, only your opinion does. Sorry.

 

[potatohead]

If the Pats would have found a way to make one yard in 4 tries (which was likely), they would have had to at at least convert to tie.

If.

And if Seattle makes the conversion, its game over.

 

[mikeak]

We were in the redzone 6 times and scored two TDs!!!

We were on the half line and couldn't score.

What made us think we could score on a 2pt conversion??

8 points is a two score game. First score and then score again. We lean on our defense EVERY SINGLE WEEK and now we don't???

If we were the saints that scores a lot more creatively and sucks at defense then YES GO FOR IT. We are not the Saints and this was against our DNA, against our system and against trusting the core of our team.

It was a horrific decision. It also theoretically allows your opponent to for two to win... you just created a possibility to lose on one possession

 

[mikeak]

I liked it. Put the game away with a throw.

The fact that Brady was the opposing QB here mattered. Hauschka has struggled mightily on kicks from 0-33 yards. Our defense has played a ton of snaps the last 3 weeks. Lot of context that's being ignored here.

Such as our redzone execution in this same game?....

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

We were in the redzone 6 times and scored two TDs!!!

We were on the half line and couldn't score.

What made us think we could score on a 2pt conversion??

8 points is a two score game. First score and then score again. We lean on our defense EVERY SINGLE WEEK and now we don't???

If we were the saints that scores a lot more creatively and sucks at defense then YES GO FOR IT. We are not the Saints and this was against our DNA, against our system and against trusting the core of our team.

It was a horrific decision. It also theoretically allows your opponent to for two to win... you just created a possibility to lose on one possession

We were only 50% scoring extra points in this game. What made us think we could score on a 1pt conversion? This game is easy to play from both sides. Luckily we don't really have to second guess and discuss this terribly much because we won the game.

 

[soje]

That call alone was horrible. Combine it with not going for the 2 point conversion when we scored the first TD (we missed the extra point, by the way) and it makes it horrendous.

The amount of people arguing we should have kicked the extra point because it was a gimme is pretty amusing, considering the emboldened part. Neither were/are gimmies. Hauschka's missed a bunch of them this season.

You have to go with the statistically and mathematically correct play. That's why you double down with 11 on blackjack.

On that first opportunity, the TD had given us a 5 point lead, so it's logical to go for 2 and make it a 7 point lead. In the second opportunity, the TD had given us a 7 point lead. One point makes it a 8 point lead, which forces the other team to score a TD plus a 2 point conversion, so it's logical to go for the PAT.

Playing illogically or against the statistics may work here and there and those who win that way are called geniuses. However, what's not stated is how many times these geniuses have failed before this one win.

 

[potatohead]

I liked it. Put the game away with a throw.

The fact that Brady was the opposing QB here mattered. Hauschka has struggled mightily on kicks from 0-33 yards. Our defense has played a ton of snaps the last 3 weeks. Lot of context that's being ignored here.

Such as our redzone execution in this same game?....

Red zone is a far cry from the two yard line.

I get that statistically you kick the XP, but I can also see it the other way. If the Pats scored on that last play, do you think they go for two and decide to skip OT? I highly doubt it.

 

[cymatica]

Can't always base a game on statistics. Sometimes you have to go with your gut. There was an opportunity to go up by 2 scores, so take it. Worse case scenario you go up by 7, thats playing with house money in a sense.

Had a good chance if the throw wasn't horrible.

 

[THE TABS]

There's a fine line between being aggressive and being stupid, and that call was pure stupidity, ranking right up there with Butler INT in SB. Not even Mike Tomlin would have gone for two there.

The first priority for a head coach is to put your team in the best position to win, and PC FUBARed that one. Thankfully, it didn't come back to bite us.

 

[KARAVARUS]

The first priority for a head coach is to put your team in the best position to win, and PC FUBARed that one. Thankfully, it didn't come back to bite us.

EXACTLY THIS! Your responsibility is to put your players in the best situation to win. The players and owners alike, trust the coach to make the best decisions to let the team execute and win. Every offensive statistic in that game said that was the wrong call to make. There's no such thing as house money when you're playing teams like the Patriots. Everyone is ignoring my previous post. If you like the gutsy call, great. It's a difference of philosophy. You cannot say it was THE call to make because you have nothing but your opinion/philosophy to support that claim.

 

[KiwiHawk]

It was a fine call.

If we go up by 8 then the Patriots absolutely go for 2 if they score.

If we go up by 7 then there's no way in hell the Patriots go for 2 if they score. They play for OT.

But if we make it, then we go up by 9 and it's game over for the Patriots.

Absolutely the right call to make, with no down-side if you understand how the Patriots would respond.

 

[cymatica]

I guess you could make the argument that bevell calling a play in the redzone is a risk not worth taking

 

[soje]

It was a fine call.

If we go up by 8 then the Patriots absolutely go for 2 if they score.

If we go up by 7 then there's no way in hell the Patriots go for 2 if they score. They play for OT.

But if we make it, then we go up by 9 and it's game over for the Patriots.

Absolutely the right call to make, with no down-side if you understand how the Patriots would respond.

I did some basic calculations using the following numbers:

Odds of Patriots scoring a TD in a given drive = 30% (this season's numbers)
Odds of a successful PAT = 95% (this season's average)
Odds of a succesful 2 point conversion = 50% (historical average)
Odds of a win in OT = 50% (just a guess here, but quite logical)

After the final TD, Seahawks have the following odds of winning:

If they go for the PAT = 92.1%
If they go for the 2 point conversion = 72.5%

As someone said previously, you may agree with the call, but that's only your opinion.