On the subject of 2 point conversions

[Steel Peon]

When your offense is clicking on all cylinders, and your team has talent akimbo, then I can see no reason why you shouldn't go for those pretty little 2 point conversions. However, it looks like Tomlin is operating under the mistaken pretext that our offense is just as good, if not better, than it ever has been before, which the last few games have clearly shown it not to be. So, I believe this should count against Tomlin, in terms of judgement about the current state of his team, and should serve as a benchmark for anyone thinking about pursuing the almighty 2-pt conversion WHEN YOU DON'T NEED TO, as if it needed to be such.

If a 2 point try makes mathematical sense, then by all means, go for it. But if it doesn't, then you'd better have some really good reasons to even think about it.

[lipps83]

Agreed. This offense can barely get 1st downs at times. Tomlin and Haley seem to still think they can score from anywhere on the field. They are still living in the preseason idea that this offense would score 40 a game.

[DesertSteel]

It's like gambling. You keep trying to make up what you lost.

[teegre]

bump

(I must have overlooked this thread... until now.)

[Steel Peon]

Don't want to let the bump go to waste, so I'll attempt to throw out some 2 point try logic, and how some of it should depend on the point difference. Maybe a chart is in order?

Losing by:

1 point = Tie the game dumbass, kick the 1 pointer.
2 points = Duh, go for it.....tie the game.
3 points = I can see no mathematical reason to go for the 2 point attempt.
4 points = A FG after a 1 point kick will tie the game from here, and there's no reason to risk losing by attempting a low probability 2 pointer.
5 points = A TD from here will put you ahead regardless of either's success, so it's still a matter of future FGs (of which 2 more would be needed to move ahead), and a 2 pointer plus a following FG will tie the game, so why the hell not go for it?
6 points = Kick the 1 pointer, and go ahead after 2 more FGs, or a TD dumbass.
7 points = Kick the 1 pointer, and tie the game after 2 more FGs, or go ahead with a TD plus the 1 point kick dumbass.
8 points = Kick the 1 pointer dumbass.
9 points = You have little to lose by going for 2 here. Being 8 points away after a 1 pointer still sucks (along with requiring a TD plus an 8 pointer just to tie), and 7 away is a whole lot better.
10 points = The probabilities are starting to stretch a bit here, and a 2 pointer plus another TD, PLUS another 2 pointer ties it, but 3 FGs will tie after a 1 pointer, so it might depend on the state of your team and the environment they're playing in.
11 points = Kick the 1 pointer and be a FG plus a TD and 1 pointer away from tying. I can see no reason to plan on 3 future FGs to tie the game.
12 points = A successful 2 pointer puts you 10 points away from tying it, and a failed 2 pointer puts you 4 FGs away, so the 1 pointer doesn't really matter at all here.
13 points = 2 points gets you barely anywhere here, so just kick the 1 pointer.
14 points = 1 point puts you 2 TDs away from winning, and a chance at gaining a 12 point margin would hardly be worth the risk.
15 points = kick the 1 pointer dumbass.
16 points = Why am I still doing this?

Ok, now we can move onto winning by:

1 point = Go for 2 dumbass.
2 points = Kick the 1 pointer dumbass.
3 points = Being 5 or 4 points ahead doesn't matter a whole lot, so just take the 1 point and try not to lose.
4 points = So now were in familiar territory here, and being 6 ahead sounds really good, along with making mathematical sense, but then you run the risk of not being able to win with a FG should your opponent score a 7 point TD. It looks like making decisions on your team's future performance is easier when you're behind, because you have no where to go but up, and consequently nothing to lose. But when you're ahead it gets a little more complicated, and now (I think) you'd just be better off planning for the worst, which is TDs.
5 points = Sure a 2 pointer puts you up 7, but the smart money says kick the 1 pointer. I guess this would depend on how unstoppable your offense was at the time, and if you're pretty sure the opponent will score an immediate TD.
6 points = Kick the 1 pointer dumbass.
7 points = Going for 2 here is relatively pointless, and I can see no reason to plan on your opponent scoring 3 future FGs.
8 points = I wouldn't blame anybody for trying to make it a 10 point game, but I think 9 is just fine.
9 points = Kick the 1 pointer dumbass.
10 points = I'd like to win by 1 point if my opponent scored a TD plus a FG.
11 points = I think it would be smarter to go for 2 here, but if the game is currently a FG war in a defensive standoff, then you might want to get that 1 pointer.
12 points = The 1 pointer makes more sense to me here, but going for 2 could make a lot of sense given the right situation. It's getting kind of redundant now, so here is where I'll stop.

I understand that a lot of what a coach decides to do really depends on the game's momentum, state of the team, how much time is left, and the weather conditions, so feel free to disagree with any of my judgements, and clarify the hell out of them. The drivel spewing outta me is over for now.

[Shoes]

When your offense is clicking on all cylinders, and your team has talent akimbo, then I can see no reason why you shouldn't go for those pretty little 2 point conversions. However, it looks like Tomlin is operating under the mistaken pretext that our offense is just as good, if not better, than it ever has been before, which the last few games have clearly shown it not to be. So, I believe this should count against Tomlin, in terms of judgement about the current state of his team, and should serve as a benchmark for anyone thinking about pursuing the almighty 2-pt conversion WHEN YOU DON'T NEED TO, as if it needed to be such.

If a 2 point try makes mathematical sense, then by all means, go for it. But if it doesn't, then you'd better have some really good reasons to even think about it.

This makes absolute sense. Tomlin however seems to enjoy the media saying "Pittsburgh Steelers coach Mike Tomlin is as daring as any coach in the sport when it comes to 2-point conversions. In the past, that philosophy has made him an innovator"

[GoSlash27]

I think Tomlin just has a false sense of security because we practice the red zone drill so much. I personally agree with Peon; you go for 2 only when the potential benefit outweighs the risk, specifically a change in the number of scores. Too often IMO Tomlin goes for it for no concrete reason.
And they're not particularly unpredictable in the playcalling either. I can't think of the last time they ran a 2 point play on the ground.

[Psycho Ward 86]

agreed. just go by the chart. if your offense is clicking on all cylinders though, you arent even going to need those 2 point conversions in the 1st place

[Steel Peon]

if your offense is clicking on all cylinders though, you arent even going to need those 2 point conversions in the 1st place

Aw dayumn, I know some cold hard logic when I hear/see/read it, and this sheeeit is Iron Fucking Clad!

[teegre]

Knowing my affinity for going for two, after every TD, my b-in-law chided me, by asking: "They're going for two, right?"


(I'll come back to this, but not right now.)

[st33lersguy]

8 points = I wouldn't blame anybody for trying to make it a 10 point game, but I think 9 is just fine.

I disagree. I can't justify going for two up 8 after the TD, extra point makes it a 2 possession game

[Psycho Ward 86]

If going for 2 were such a significant strategic advantage, people would have been pounding the table to do it a long ass time ago. That never happened. It happened only after we tried to be world beaters at it. To this day, the top offenses still arent going for 2 at a high clip.

Get the extra point. Focus on scoring actual touchdowns to a point where you dont have to even worry about the "difference" a 2 point conversion will make. Simple.

[st33lersguy]

I am against the strategy of risking losing a point for the sake of chasing more points if you don't have to. There is no strategic disadvantage to kicking the extra point

[Steel Peon]

Knowing my affinity for going for two, after every TD, my b-in-law chided me, by asking: "They're going for two, right?"

Pleeeeez tell me......you don't have a red phone somewhere in your mansion?