Why teams keep making this 2-point conversion mistake

[DarthMonk]

By: Chris Chase | October 11, 2015 7:30 pm
It’s a decision made by NFL and NCAA teams every week and, though it obviously has its reasonable defenses, it’s always been confounding to me: When you go up by one point in a football game, you shouldn’t go for a two-point conversion. Such a decision may have cost the Washington Redskins a victory on Sunday.

This post isn’t about the Redskins in particular — there were far too many variables after the team’s failed two-point attempt to say Sunday’s result would have been different had Jay Gruden opted to kick an extra point with eight minutes remaining But it’s a good jumping-off point for a discussion on a baffling football strategy.

WHY YOU’D GO FOR TWO WHEN UP ONE POINT

It’s pretty clear: When you go for two and make it, you take a three-point lead. That has obvious benefits I don’t need to spell out here. For this reason, when there are under, say, four minutes left, going for two is absolutely the right call. There will likely be just one possession left, so you want to be sure the other team can only tie, not win, with a field goal. Going for two when it’s very late in the game is so simple it isn’t even strategy, it’s just what you do. It’s going for it earlier that’s the issue.

WHY YOU’D KICK THE EXTRA POINT ALL OTHER TIMES

Let’s take the Redskins, since Sunday’s decision was the impetus for this post. With eight minutes left in the game, Matt Jones ran for a short touchdown to put Washington up 13-12 over the undefeated Atlanta Falcons. Gruden didn’t hesitate, calling for the two-point conversion which failed when Kirk Cousins and Pierre Garçon couldn’t hook up on a pass play. Gruden was going for a 15-12 lead. Had Washington kicked the extra point, the score would have been 14-12. Now, it was 13-12.

In Gruden’s case, he had to ask himself the following: Would 15 points (what the ‘Skins would have had with a successful conversion) be enough to win this game? In the moment, it would have been silly to say “yes.” Though the game was low scoring, Atlanta had left some points on the board, the Redskins defense was tired and there was every reason to expect that it was going to take more than 15 points to win or go to overtime. Given that answer, you take the point and go from there.

It’s quite simple: Always take the points (or point, in this case). Always. (Except in the late-late-game situations mentioned above.) The scenarios are endless, but, again, what happened in Redskins-Falcons is a great example.

SCENARIO NO. 1 (WHAT HAPPENED SUNDAY)

After going up 13-12, the scoring was as follows: Redskins kicked a field goal (16-12), the Falcons scored a touchdown (16-18) with under 45 seconds left and kicked an extra point (16-19), obviously. That necessitated a Redskins field goal to tie, which they improbably got (19-19), only to lose in overtime.

Let’s go back to the two-point conversion with eight minutes left. There were three more scores in the game. Three! Fifteen points didn’t come close to winning. By giving up that single point they’d have had with the extra point, Washington made it easier for Atlanta to take a late three-point lead. Imagine the score had been 14-12. Then, that field goal would have put Washington up 17-12. When Atlanta scored that TD, it would have been forced to go for two after their touchdown, opening the possibility that it’d miss the conversion and leaving the ‘Skins with a chance to win on they field goal they ended up hitting.

SCENARIO NO. 2

With the two-point conversion a little less than a 50/50 proposition, a coach has to ask, “is it worth a coin flip to give up an almost-certain point?” Let’s look at another scenario, which is probably more common: Same situation, after a touchdown Team A leads 13-12 with eight minutes left, goes for two and misses it. Then, on the next possession, Team B goes down the field on a lengthy drive and scores a touchdown of its own. Up 18-13, Team B only needs two points to go up by a full touchdown.

That wouldn’t have been possible if Team A had kicked the extra point with eight minutes left. Then Team A is up 14-12 and down 18-14 with a Team B touchdown and missed XP, 19-14 with made XP or 20-14 with made two-point. Either way, Team A can win with a touchdown and extra point of their own. By flipping your own coin, you give the other team the opportunity not to flip their own.

These aren’t far-fetched scenarios. They occur every week. If the Redskins had made the conversion then, sure, it was worth it. But, again that happens 50% of the time. With the other 50%, you’ve given up a point and essentially bet that your offense won’t score any more. It’s a bad bet. It’s a bad strategy. Unless there’s almost no time left in a game, kick the extra point when you’re up one.

Every situation is different. A bad kicker might necessitate going for two earlier than you’d like. (The new extra-point rules change this slightly, admittedly.) Having a better offense or a killer play you know will work might sway a coach too. But, despite the tables, charts and percentages, you’ll never convince me a guaranteed two-point lead is better than a coin-flip three-point lead.

[Burgundy&GoldForever]

I'm tired of the NFL and its gimmick plays already. Two point conversions? 33 yard extra point attempts? Play the damn game. Stop making it a clown circus.

[DarthMonk]

I'm tired of the NFL and its gimmick plays already. Two point conversions? 33 yard extra point attempts? Play the damn game. Stop making it a clown circus.

Through the years, one of the only consistent aspects of scoring has been a TD + conversion has been worth more than a FG.

TDs started as worth 2 points with 4 more for a conversion for a total of 6 while a FG was worth 5.

The TD gradually became worth more while the FG and conversion became worth less.

The college 2 point conversion has been around for almost 6 decades. The NFL adopted it in 1994.

I think the 33 yard PAT is a little gimmicky but not the 2 pointer.

[Deadskins]

I'm tired of the NFL and its gimmick plays already. Two point conversions? 33 yard extra point attempts? Play the damn game. Stop making it a clown circus.

Through the years, one of the only consistent aspects of scoring has been a TD + conversion has been worth more than a FG.

TDs started as worth 2 points with 4 more for a conversion for a total of 6 while a FG was worth 5.

The TD gradually became worth more while the FG and conversion became worth less.

The college 2 point conversion has been around for almost 6 decades. The NFL adopted it in 1994.

I think the 33 yard PAT is a little gimmicky but not the 2 pointer.

Gimmick plays? A flea-flicker is a gimmick play. A double reverse is a gimmick play. The two point conversion is NOT a gimmick play. Moving the PAT back has increased the likelihood of going for two (and maybe even made it the mathematically better option), but I still don't see that as a gimmick, so much as trying to add strategy and remove what was a play members of the defense took off unless the game was on the line. The only issue I have with the new rule is that it eliminated the fake kick as an option, and made it nearly impossible to recover from a botched snap or other mishap and still score the two point conversion.

As for the article, I couldn't agree more. 8+ minutes is too early to go for two. As I tried to explain to absinthe in the Gameday thread, it is precisely because you don't know what is going to transpire in the remaining game time, that trying to set the point differential is an exercise in futility. Before the rule change, I would have said, you only go for two when you absolutely have to, or when it is obvious as explained above. With the change, I can see how it could be reasoned that you should go for two all the time and that, in the long run, that might score your team more overall points. But the issue I have with this is that if you are in a defensive struggle TDs are at a premium, and maybe you only get one chance to make the decision once in a game, and a miss could cost you dearly.

[Deadskins]

There is one scenario where going for two makes more sense, even though there is time left on the clock. If you are down by 14 in the 4th and score, then you should go for two. This way, if you make it, you can win the game on the second score by kicking the PAT, and if you miss, you still get another chance to try for two to force overtime. This maximizes your odds of winning the game.

[DEHog]

I really wish the NFL would eliminate the extra point kick. What I’d like to see is place the ball on the 3 yard line...if you run it in you get 2 pts, if you pass it you get 1…that would really make it exciting keeping the fans interest (which is what they want) and make it a play that counts!!

[Burgundy&GoldForever]

I really wish the NFL would eliminate the extra point kick. What I’d like to see is place the ball on the 3 yard line...if you run it in you get 2 pts, if you pass it you get 1…that would really make it exciting keeping the fans interest (which is what they want) and make it a play that counts!!

I'll go you one further. I'd like to see your suggestion. I'd also like to see punting eliminated. 4 downs. Get a 1st or score or it's a turnover at the spot. That'd eliminate these gutless wonder head coaches.

[DEHog]

I really wish the NFL would eliminate the extra point kick. What I’d like to see is place the ball on the 3 yard line...if you run it in you get 2 pts, if you pass it you get 1…that would really make it exciting keeping the fans interest (which is what they want) and make it a play that counts!!

I'll go you one further. I'd like to see your suggestion. I'd also like to see punting eliminated. 4 downs. Get a 1st or score or it's a turnover at the spot. That'd eliminate these gutless wonder head coaches.

I like that as well!! Didn't Atlanta make every fouth down Sunday??

[Irn-Bru]

When I'm watching the Skins, I always hope that we totally eschew 2-point conversion attempts until about 4:00 left in the game. I've seen so many games where a 2-point conversion attempted early in the 4th quarter just wasn't crucial to determining the final score.

That said, if I was a coach I'd come up with a chart ahead of time and follow whatever it told me, even if it said going for 2 before halftime was the right thing to do. NFL coaches don't rely on statistical tools enough and are too timid in general.

[Irn-Bru]

I really wish the NFL would eliminate the extra point kick. What I’d like to see is place the ball on the 3 yard line...if you run it in you get 2 pts, if you pass it you get 1…that would really make it exciting keeping the fans interest (which is what they want) and make it a play that counts!!

Ugh. Random, ad hoc rules in an attempt to try to make the game more exciting. We've had enough of that.

Reminds me of the proposals I see suggesting that, e.g., whoever scores the TD must kick the conversion, or things like that. I don't understand why anyone thinks the NFL needs more complexity and arbitrariness. IMHO we need a lot less. Simplify things and give the game a flow that approaches what you find in soccer and rugby matches. Enough of games hinging on some technicality that was poorly designed a decade ago.