Going for 2 with the game on the line.

The Packers loss last night got me thinking about this. Why not go for 2 instead of kicking the PAT to go to OT?

Think of it this way, you have one 2 yard play for the win.

Or you can kick the long Pat that has been missed several times this year. Then go to a coin toss to decide who gets the ball. If you win, you can win the game by driving the length of the field for a TD. Or kick a field goal to give the other team a chance to match with a field goal of their own, or beat you with a TD, or stop them for the win. If they match, you have to drive down for another field goal. Or maybe you fail to score at all, then you have to stop them from scoring to get another chance.

Or maybe you lose the coin toss and they get the chance to win first. If you can hold them to a FG and then can only muster a FG of your own, you have to stop them on their next possession or they win with a FG. No matter what, you're going to have to draw up at least 1 scoring drive, and most likely at least 1 defensive stop.


I'm taking my chances with the 2 yard play for the win. But coaches are afraid to do this because all the captain hindsight fans and media would tear them apart if it fails, even though it's the right thing to do.

I would never be a HC, because I am uber conservative. Mike McCarthy and John Fox are coaches I can relate to in that way. However, not even insane lunatics go for 2, there. College coaches playing in illegitimate bowl games (not Rose, Sugar, Orange, Cotton, or Fiesta) are about the only guys who do it postseason.

I can kinda see your point in that particular example, the Packers were one play away from losing anyway why not go for it while the Cards are still trying to work out what happened. We all know how important momentum is.

Now that PATs aren't automatic we might see this more often.

Personally, when we were 31 points down last night I'd rather have seen us go for 2 on every TD - yes, you run the risk of it being 31-18 instead of 31-21, but scoring 5 times in the half without reply and before the clock expires was always going to be a big ask - if you decide that's going to be your strategy when you're more than 3 scores down, then you probably hit the FG on 4th down in the first half too (which somewhat reduces the impact if your 2PAs fail).

I thought going for the TD in the first half was the right call at the time, hindsight tells us it wasn't, but if put in the same position again I'd expect us to do the same.

I did that on Madden at the weekend on a challenge I'd be trying to win for ages. Was 10-0 down almost immediately and ended up winning 11-10 with a last second 8 point TD

Euphoric

I could have seen that happening if they weren't so depleted at the WR position. They couldn't have liked there matchups if they went for it against a very good defense.

Should have been a no brainer for me...

Who is the Packers best player? Put the ball in his hands and try to win the game.

I think it depends on your team structure and match up...

Odds you convert the 2 pt: roughly 50/50

Odds you when the coin toss in OT: 50/50

Odds your defense continues to hold down the best offense in the NFL: I felt there was a 75% chance that the Cardinals would at least score a FG if they got the ball

Odds that you win if you get the ball first in OT: I'd guess at 25% on a gut feeling - you're on the road, and the Cardinals defense has been good all year. You only actually scored 13 points considering the last TD was a hail mary


With all that, WTF were they thinking? Your best odds to win IMO came on putting the ball in Rodgers hands with a 2 pt attempt.


Take into consideration that your defense really isn't all that good....you're on the road....just a no brainer to me. Go for 2. You had a chance to decide the game...instead you let it be decided by a coin toss and a random broken play.


Heck, you could argue that any team that puts the financial resources into their QB that Green Bay has, should absolutely go for 2 in that game.

Watched the GBvsARZ game last night on NFL Replay and thought the exact same thing.

I'll take my chances at the two yard line for all the marbles.

Two point conversion success rate is IIRC about 48%.

Then you have to factor in a 94% chance of hitting the extra point, and a 50% chance of winning in over time, which gets you to 47% chance of victory if you go about it this way.

So, at the end of the day we're talking a 1% swing between the decisions, which if forced to guess, I have to imagine is well within the margin of error, making them basically equal propositions.

WHY COACHES PLAY FOR OT RATHER THAN GOING FOR 2 WITH THE GAME ON THE LINE:

There's no clear advantage to doing it one way over the other, but if you fail in OT after not going for 2 people grumble, whereas if you fail going for 2 rather than taking it to OT people go insane.

In conclusion coaches tend to make a decision that's basically equal odds and pick the one that's less likely to cause them to be fired.

Makes sense, IMO.

el capitan":u9ocs6in said:

I can kinda see your point in that particular example, the Packers were one play away from losing anyway why not go for it while the Cards are still trying to work out what happened. We all know how important momentum is.

Click to expand...

This was my thought too... if the Packers had driven down over the course of 5 minutes and tied it, i'd say take the EP, OT and play it out.

But the way they tied it, that hail mary after the 4th and 20... you have to figure you're playing on borrowed time anyways.

Popeyejones":3cx2a86k said:

Two point conversion success rate is IIRC about 48%.

Then you have to factor in a 94% chance of hitting the extra point, and a 50% chance of winning in over time, which gets you to 47% chance of victory if you go about it this way.

So, at the end of the day we're talking a 1% swing between the decisions, which if forced to guess, I have to imagine is well within the margin of error, making them basically equal propositions.

WHY COACHES PLAY FOR OT RATHER THAN GOING FOR 2 WITH THE GAME ON THE LINE:

There's no clear advantage to doing it one way over the other, but if you fail in OT after not going for 2 people grumble, whereas if you fail going for 2 rather than taking it to OT people go insane.

In conclusion coaches tend to make a decision that's basically equal odds and pick the one that's less likely to cause them to be fired.

Makes sense, IMO.

Click to expand...

That does make sense......but I think the type of team you are makes a difference, as well as where the game is played. If its a home game, I take OT every time.

If it's a road game and I have an elite QB, arguably the best QB in the NFL, I'm putting the ball in his hands rather than potentially putting the game on my average defense.

They just got their asses kicked by Arizona a month prior to that game. If McCarthy was being honest with himself, he knew Arizona was ultimately the better team - why take it to OT when you can put the ball in Rodgers' hands, the one advantage you have over them...

Not going for 2 there was just plain stupid.

Those who dare, win.