Hey, there sure were a lot of two point attempts in the game with the jets. Does anybody have an opinion on whether or not Rex Ryan has "gettin away from the cops speed" heading for the nearest donut shop??

Venom65437 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You go for one. Stupid to take points off the
> board that early. I don't care what the score is.
> If you don't HAVE to go for 2 you don't do it!

I agree that going for one would have been the correct choice, but what about that scenario amounts to taking points off the board? There's nothing to take off the board--you're attempting to put either one or two points ON the board.

If you go for 2 and miss, you took a point off the board. Yes if you make it you get an extra point. But when you don't HAVE to have them, take the 1!

The PURDUE-MICHIGAN game today lets me renew this discussion.

Michigan missed an extra point and ended up losing by it 38-36.

So Venom, an extra point is not automatic either.

Didn't the Jets blow an extra point attempt against us last week?

JC is right.

Even conceding your point that the kick point is almost automatic.

This is the big point of the "YOU ALWAYS KICK UNLESS YOU NEED THE 2 points" people.

But did you guys ever look at it like this.

Michigan was moving the ball at will against Purdue all day.

When it came down to trying to make that 2 point conversion to tie the game, they came up pitifully short?

WHY??????? Well, it could have been the play. It could have been bad luck. It could have been somebody didn't block or it could have been that a Purdue defender was out of position and because of that was right in the place someone had to be to make the tackle.

But you know what my explanation is?????? My explanation is that a 2-point conversion IS HARDER TO MAKE WHEN YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT.

The best reason to go for 2 in the first quarter after you have sacked the quarterback for a safety (2-0) and then score a touchdown (8-0) is because the 2 point conversion is easier to make when you DON'T HAVE TO MAKE IT then when you do. When the other team HAS TO STOP YOU TO WIN THE GAME OR KEEP A LEAD, they are more likely to.

Also, THE You "don't go for 2 points unless you have to" People are NECESSARILY SAYING THAT THE CHART HAS NO USE AT ALL.

Why would you need a chart if your philosophy is that a team shouldn't go for 2 unless it has to?

That's why I said, PhinsFan2, that you are the other extreme from the "always use the chart" people.


On another subject, is anybody going to give me some love for my Boilers beating Michigan in Ann Arbor for the first time since the Fall of 1966 when Bob Henry was a freshman at Cary Quad and Jack Clancy was playing for Michigan? That year the best team in the Big Ten was Michigan State with Bubba Smith. They played Notre Dame with Terry Hanratty and Jim Seymour to a 10-10 tie. Purdue went to the Rose Bowl based on the Big 10 no repeat rule. We beat USC 15-13.

> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The PURDUE-MICHIGAN game today lets me renew
> this
> > discussion.
Phinsfan2 Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------->
> Not really. Using college to argue an NFL point
> isn't going to work. Its apples to oranges.
> But since you did, I hope you are watching the
> LSU/Alabama game.****************************Bama was up 10-9 in the late 3rd qrtr.************************************ LSU scored a TD to go up 15-10. They
> went for two to try to get on a good football
> number and make it 17-10. They failed, leaving
> it 15-10.
> Bama scored a TD to go up 16-15. They went for
> two because there is no difference being up 1 pt
> or 2, but being up 3 is big. They got it. Two
> FG's later they were up 9pts, 24-15 with 3min
> left and the game was out of reach.
>
> Had LSU kicked the PAT (as the TV analyst
> suggested) to make it 16-10, LSU would have kicked
> a PAT instead of the 2ptr after their TD to go up
> 17-16. 2 FG's later would have made it 23-16 when
> they got the ball back with 3 min left and the
> game would still have been in reach.
>
> Just another example of why you don't go for two
> until you have to go for two. Too many things can
> happen where is bites you on the butt if you fail
> to convert.

RESPONSE: But, as I have also asterisked above, this was LATE IN THE 3RD QUARTER, i.e., the beginning of the fourth quarter.

This is hardly a situation where going for 2 in the first quarter cost the team the game. This was not a high scoring game.

Secondly, 17 is a good football number BUT 15 IS NOT!

With our hypothetical situation wherein I said Sparano would have been correct if this had been the first quarter and you disagreed, both 11 and 13 were good football numbers. In our situation we either stayed at 11 or went to 13 by attempting 2 points. Had we kicked the extra point, we would have gone up by 12. To tie 11 forces a 2 point conversion. To tie 13 requires 2 field goals.

Phinsfan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> College kickers are more likely to miss PAT's than
> NFL kickers and the college 2pt conversion rate is
> generaly better than 50%. There are 300+ Division
> I programs in college. There are 32 NFL teams made
> up of the best players in the world. Why not just
> use High School stats to make your point? Their
> kickers are even worse.

RESPONSE: Oh, come on. I think you are stretching your point now. You are seriously contending that there is such a gap between major college football and the Pros that it makes a difference to 2 point strategy. You are getting carried away.

I WROTE:
> > Why would you need a chart if your philosophy
> is
> > that a team shouldn't go for 2 unless it has
> to?
> >
> > That's why I said, PhinsFan2, that you are the
> > other extreme from the "always use the chart"
> > people.


Phinsfan2 responded:
------------------------------------------------------->
> You have the chart so that you don't have to think
> about it on the spot. It allows you to do all
> your analysis without being influenced by the heat
> of the moment or the pressure of a given
> situation.
>
> In other words having the chart keeps you from
> gambling or doing something based on your gut.
> It forces you to act based on prior statistical
> analysis of odds and probabilities.
>
> The key is to have your chart thought out
> correctly.

RESPONSE: But the chart says that when you're up by 11 you go for 2. So how do you square that with what you just said?


See below.
www.normhitzges.com

Of course an extra point is not automatic, nothing is, but it is so rarely missed it's almost not even worth thinking about.

BTW Dolfanmark provided the chart when I asked the board if anyone had a copy of the chart.

But it is not my chart or Dolfanmark's chart but the chart that is used I believe.

I also remember the chart that you posted a link to.

Okay, 3:27 seconds left in the third quarter and you are the Patriots trailing Miami 17-16. You score a touchdown (Now 22-17).

Okay, PhinsFan2, do you HAVE to go for the 2 point conversion then? Certainly, you could kick the extra point. Be up 23-17, 2 field goals.

It's really hard to follow how you apply your "when you have to" philosophy.

Had the Patriots missed the 2 point conversion, they would have only been ahead by 5 points which a touchdown would have been able to overcome.

You can make an argument that the Patriots should not have gone for 2 in that situation but should have kicked the field goal.

It's easier to determine when "you don't have to" which is in the first quarter or the first half. You "don't have to" then because you cannot predict how the game will play out. You only know that a 7 point lead is better than a 6 point lead, etc.

However, I would submit that the best time to go for the 2 is "when you don't have to" because it gives you the better chance of succeeding.

I think that what the Patriots did was a lot tougher to accomplish then than it would have been in the first quarter.

Of course, the fact that they succeeded is proof of nothing either way but I think a 2 point conversion is a lot easier to make in the first half than in the 2nd half "when it really matters."

err: sorry mistake "should have kicked the extra point" not field goal.