Jump to content


2 point conversion


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 dascottbills28

dascottbills28

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 164 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:44 PM

Nice to have an aggressive head coach who will go for two points to tie up the game!!

#2 cmjoyce113

cmjoyce113

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 635 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:45 PM

Coughlin just chose not to. I have a feeling that will hurt them

#3 swnybillsfan

swnybillsfan

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,451 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:46 PM

good call, great execution.

#4 Dorkington

Dorkington

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,706 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:46 PM

Won us the game, ultimately. :)

#5 Max997

Max997

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,485 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:47 PM

Usually the rule of thumb is you only go for 2 when you need to but I thought with way the game was going that it was the right call

#6 JR in Pittsburgh

JR in Pittsburgh

    No Mercy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,214 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:52 PM

Awesome catch by woods

#7 CardinalScotts

CardinalScotts

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,135 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:53 PM

and a gut feel not going off a chart

#8 NobesBLO13

NobesBLO13

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 970 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:54 PM

View PostJR in Pittsburgh, on 15 September 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

Awesome catch by woods
It was harder than it looked.

#9 Green Lightning

Green Lightning

    Mr. Peanut

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,683 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 05:57 PM

That took guts by a rook HC, OC, QB and receiver. No way that happens last year.

#10 jaybee

jaybee

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 769 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 06:01 PM

and...if it didnt work you all would be chastising Ralph, EJ. Woods, Marrone, Hacket, Doug, O-line, the long snapper, the punter, the place-kicker etc.  Cut EJ.  Cut Woods.  Cut the O-line.  Cut the refs.  Cut the cheer-leaders.  Just cut everybody....tomorrow at 6:00am.  Lose all games and get Johnny sh*t-ball.....and on and on.

This board is loaded with simpletons.

God bless the 2 or 3 folks that have a clue here.

I for one am happy we won a game against a struggling opponent.  Hey you gotta start somewhere.

#11 Koufax

Koufax

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,119 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 06:01 PM

I don't like the call, but I love the catch and I love the result.  I think it was too soon, and your point expectation going for two is less than kicking so you only do it if you think something in the matchup makes it greater than 50% likely or if you need the two (late in the game).

#12 johnwalter

johnwalter

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 368 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 07:25 PM

just because it worked doesnt mean it was a good idea

#13 NickelCity

NickelCity

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,448 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 07:26 PM

Loved it. Wanted it to happen but never actually believed Marrone would try it. Woods made a great play.

#14 BuffaloBillsForever

BuffaloBillsForever

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,002 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 07:27 PM

According the analytics "chart" it is the correct call whether you make it or not.

#15 Kelly the Dog

Kelly the Dog

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,969 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 07:30 PM

Things are not in a vacuum. The choice at that time in the game differs depending on how your offense and defense is playing, as well as who you are playing. To me, it was the right call at the time because of how we were playing, and even if we missed, I wouldn't have thought, in retrospect, it was a bad call. It worked, obliviously. But I don't think that was a no brainier either way.

#16 Mark Vader

Mark Vader

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,639 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 07:31 PM

View PostJR in Pittsburgh, on 15 September 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

Awesome catch by woods
The best catch of the day, and it was a beauty.

Thank you Woods.

#17 Tcali

Tcali

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,356 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:01 PM

good result --generally not smart to go for 2 until very late

#18 SageAgainstTheMachine

SageAgainstTheMachine

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,032 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:05 PM

Teams convert 2 pointers at a significantly higher than 50% rate.  They should happen more often based on the expected yield, but coaches are afraid of looking dumb when they fail.

(Which isn't to say there's never merit to the 1 sure point)

#19 swede316

swede316

    MMMMMMMMMMM BEER

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,231 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:06 PM

Was a good call..I woulda made the call...14-12...The right call.

#20 BuffOrange

BuffOrange

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,109 posts

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:07 PM

It seems like the Phil Simms' of the world have brainwashed a lot of people with this "chase the point" nonsense.  The advantage of being down 1 as opposed to 2 pretty much always boils down to the possibility that a 2pt conversion will help you later in the game.
EG 1: you give up a TD and now you're only down 8 instead of 9.
EG 2: you score a TD and have the opportunity to extend the lead to 7, which you could not do if you were down 2.

Does it really need to be explained what's wrong with this theory?  Obviously it is assumed by every hack announcer (and a lot of coaches apparently) that every failed 2pt attempt with 20min's left is likely to be successful had they delayed that attempt until late in the 4th Qtr.  Naturally there is zero math or logic to back this up.  
Going for 2 is clearly correct imo.