XP's vs 2-pt attempts

[Shorttynaz]

I remember starting a similar thread last year, and I thought of it the first time the Cards went for 2.

 

Easy to look back on it now, but I thought the first 2 point attempt was dumb (shoulda posted it then for the timestamp). Had you not have wasted a point, you wouldn't have been forced to fail at your 2nd 2-point attempt.

 

Difference? You'd be up by 3 - and a FG would only tie it..

Edited September 9, 2014 by Shorttynaz

[nelsosi]

I remember seeing research at one time that showed that (with certain exceptions due to game circumstances), statistically, it was better to go for 2 all the time. It was similar to the research that supported for going for it on 4th down in most situations.

[stevegrab]

I remember seeing research at one time that showed that (with certain exceptions due to game circumstances), statistically, it was better to go for 2 all the time. It was similar to the research that supported for going for it on 4th down in most situations.

 

I remember reading that, but it uses the premise that things average out, and doesn't consider that the times you go for it (2pt conv or 4th down) and need it could be the times when you fail and lose, the times it works doesn't matter (you would have won or lost regardless).

[nelsosi]

I hear ya. I'm not a big proponent of going for 2 personally. But I am a big believer that teams should be going for it on 4th down far more often than they do - I am waiting for the day that someone hires a coach with this philosophy and he turns the NFL on its head by using all 4 downs.