DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2016 NFL Season Looking Back: Browns 26 Titans 28 Going for two

Reading comprehension. FO.

I understood. Others might not. Thanks for the insult though!

Agreed. Nothing else to say, really.

If you kick the XP the first time, your entire mindset after that is different.

You don't have to rush as much, knowing you need ANOTHER SCORE.

There really isn't. Kicking 1 would have given us hope a little longer.

Apparently, Hue has as much faith in our defense as I do. He was going to go for 2 twice and not risk overtime.

I dunno, it kind of fits his MO. He's aggressive. There is good and bad in it. I like the overall attitude it instills. It definitely beats playing passive all the time. I'd have liked it better if it had worked, but the team is basically duck taped together. There was no guarantee they would have made it into the end zone again, might as well get some 2-Pt conversion practice in.


I think Louis should have sat down in the hole in the zone instead of running into triple coverage. I didn't really notice it live, but that's the way it looked on the postgame shows. Pryor and Louis both ended up in the same spot on the scramble drill.

Louis needs to keep getting better. Hopefully Coleman will be back soon.

j/c:

I don't see what the big deal is. He needed to convert a 2 pt. conversion w/either the first or second score. Prolonging the wait of the eventual 2 pt. attempt would not change anything.

We still would have lost does not matter

Good article. Find out what is needed to keep playing vs. going for the win. Not good choices left when down to this point in a game. I am okay with an aggressive decision.
We did waste more time than I wanted to. We are not good enough for playing for it in the 4th quarter very often. Their intensity should have been there more in the first half.
Defense painted us into a corner. Wish I could make sense of some of this offensive play calling. Run disappears, force it to Pryor when doubled or tripled, just not smart ball IMO. Now if some of our receivers caught more balls, we might be doing better. But we still have to hand the game to this D.

????? It's how it's done. Go for the most points available. Their pros this is how it's done during a comeback. Take the most points available now. No big deal.

_________________________________
10-6

Assuming the odds of making the 2pc are the same whether you try it first or second then it really doesn't matter too much when you try it. Those saying that you should kick it first to keep it a one possession (8 point game) are forgetting the fact that 8 points is not a one possession game IF you miss the 2pc on the second try either.

You can't compare the odds of winning AFTER missing the 2pc on the first TD (which obviously go way down) to trying the 2pc later, as those are apple to oranges.

You have to compare the odds of both of these choices success BEFORE you know the outcome of the first TPC. As the odds of conversion of the 2pc are the same whether you try it earlier than later then it doesn't hurt you to try it earlier. 8 +7 is the same as 7 + 8. (so is 6 + 7 +3 and 7 + 6 +3)

Possible outcomes assuming onside kick recovery and 2pc at 45%


XP + 2pc fail = 55%
XP + 2pc = 45%
2pc + XP = 45%
2pc fail + xp =55%

The odds are the same either way.




You actually may be able to increase your odds of coming back from a missed 2pc by trying it early.

2pc fail + xp =55% (couple minutes or more left)
XP + 2pc fail = 55% (no time lest)

I would prefer the first choice here. As being down 9 with a few minutes is better than being down 2 with no time left. At least you have the info of already knowing you are going to miss the extra point and can plan your offense accordingly. That could show itself in the speed in which you play or also in your decision making (ex kicking the FG first on 4th down since you already know you need both)




Final reason to to try the 2pc first

Lastly I would argue that since you have to have a 2pc with one of the touchdowns, your odds of converting the 2pc in its entirety go up if you try it first. The reason being if you try it first and false start, hold, pass interference, etc you can now kick the xp first and go for the 2pc second. Where if you try the 2pc last and you get a penalty you now have to try a very long 2pc which would drastically lower your odds.

jc

Everybody assumes that the Browns only needed to convert a single two point conversion, but who is to say that if the Browns converted the first two point conversion, they wouldn't have gone for two on the second try as well? (Hue probably wouldn't have, but depending on the time remaining, I don't see why not.)

Let's throw a hypothetical out there that the Browns converted the initial two point conversion, got the ball back, and scored another touchdown with no time remaining. So down 1, pending a PAT or 2 pt try.

If you say that our kicker has a 95% chance to make the extra point and a winless team on the road might be 40% to win in overtime against an average team, that gives you a 38% chance to win. Two point conversions are successful more often than that. Why not go for it?

Time remaining obviously changes things as you have to account for the possibility of the other team scoring again.

Plus, if you miss the first 2ptr, you know you still need two scores. It affects the way you manage the clock on the next drive if you recover. If you take the 1 the first drive, you don't know how urgently you need to move the ball up the field, because you don't know if you need one (if the 2ptr is successful) or two (if it's not) drives. Do you need to hurry that second drive up or can you use all the time on that drive? If you get down there and score with 6 seconds left then fail the 2ptr how is that better than what happened in the game? I'd argue that's worse.

Going for two in that situation was absolutely the right thing to do from a strategic standpoint.

The third quarter ineptness lost this game.....period!

Going for two at that time really did not effect the outcome.

The difference is, and this is why I would have gone for it.. you are down 15, you need 2 TDs, and 1 2-point conversion.. if you go for it on the first one and miss, with 2:00+ left, you still have time to play for the last FG possession... If you wait until after the second TD, odds are you have no time left.

Either way it's a long shot but at least if you know early, you can try to plan for it.

CFR - Your article can say whatever it wants ..

And let me clarify .. I would go for the 1 in that situation but i get going for two .. its a personal preference .. like i said earlier .. 60/40 ... and in no way, shape or form do I think HUE made some egregious error ...

But don't act like going for 1 is stupid ... this has VERY VALID ARGUMENTS for both sides ... HUE HAS MADE PLENTY OF MISTAKES and 4 or 5 MAJOR ONES .. this isn't one of them ..

Matter of fact .. I just watched the game and what bothered me ALOT MORE was the fact when we got to the 20 yard line with right around a minute left we didn't KICK THE FIELD GOAL .. the clock stopped cause or receiver got out of bounds .... KICK THE FG THEN .. u lose no time running them out there then ...

That bothered me WAY MORE than going for 2 ..

Bottom line on going for two ... if u go for 1 or 2 and make it ... its either 7 or 8 down witch makes it a ONE score game ... if u go for 2 and miss its a TWO score game ..

Thats HUGE as to how the D is going to play U .. HUGE ... so once u make that decision .. U can't compare what happend IF we would have made the other decision ..

Someone made the statement it didn't hurt them mentally cause they went right down and scored a TD ... MAYBE that was because the Titans could have CARED LESS if we scored as long as IT TOOK TIL THERE WAS WHAT ... 20 seconds left?? .. when did we score the last meaningless td ... now IF we made the two pointer there DEFENSE PLAYS ENTIELY DIFFERENT on that next series ...

Did u notice the HUGE CUSHIONS on that last drive .. I KNOW I DID .... bet they wouldn't have been there if it was a ONE SCORE GAME ...

SO DON'T ACT LIKE THIS IS A CLEAR CUT EASY DECISION .. thats crap ..

And onc e again .. i had NO PROBLEM with the decision .. just not my personal preference ..

Amazing how it's this difficult for some to comprehend what you're saying.


When you're down two scores, I don't care if you score as long as you chew the clock. Calling a defense down 1 score is completely different then calling a defense down two scores.

Getting an onside kick has a 20% success rate. Recovering a second onside and then scoring 3 with no time left has to be a statistical impossibility. That first onside would have given us the chance to win (by evening score) where we had to get TWO onsides to even have a slight chance at winning the game.

Probability is essentially non existent.

You seem to be having a comprehension problem the other way ....

When your down 15 you either need to make a 2 pointer after ONE of your touchdowns to make it a two score game instead of a 3 score game ..

So if u go for 1 after the first TD to make it an 8 point game (one score) ... u still need the 2 pointer after the 2nd TD ....

Now if u miss that one ... guess what .. U NEED ANOTHER SCORE ...

So your end of game IMPOSSIBILITY is right there also ...

Key is .. WHENEVER u go for 2 u need to make it or your in DEEP POOP ...

Like i said .. i can see it either way ... my personal preference is to take the XP after the first one and then go for two after the 2nd one ... i'm 60/40 ...

My biggest problem with this one is NOT KICKING THE 37 yard FG (he went out of bounds at the 20) ... with the clock stopped anyhow ...

Now that was STUPID

Not really. If you're in the red zone, you try to get the quick TD and make it a two-point deficit, which means if you get the 2nd onside kick, you only need to get into field goal range instead of trying to drive for the TD.
I see that scenario both ways, I admit, but I'd still do what Hue did.

i think it was smart to go for the 2pts at first because most teams wouldn't expect it. It probably gave us a slight edge mentally.

Just to be clear, you can spell egregious correctly (I admit I had to look it up cuz I wasn't sure lol), but you can't spell 'worst'??

Spell check baby .. *L* ...

All this talk about two onside kicks is meaningless. If you miss the 2PC on the 1st TD or the 2nd then you will need two onside kicks.

Once you miss the two point conversion your screwed either way. Whether you miss the two point conversion the first TD or the 2nd doesn't change your odds of winning. If you miss it the 2nd TD you really won't have much time to try to come back.

The point here is to win you need to CONVERT one of the 2PC. It doesn't matter if it is the 1st or 2nd as long as you convert one of them. Once you miss the 2PC no matter when you try it you are [censored].

You keep talking about kicking then getting to one score (8 points), but 8 points is only one score if you make the 2PC. If you make the 2PC on the first TD or the second TD you are giving yourself a shot. If you miss the 2PC on the first or second TD you are in need for a second onside kick and in trouble.

It isn't that the 2PC was attempted on the first TD that hurt them, it is that they MISSED the 2PC. If you miss the 2PC on the 1st TD or the 2nd TD then you will need two onside kicks.



Lastly I would suggest that going for the 2PC the first TD is better, as if you get a holding call, false start, hands to the face, etc penalty that moves you back you could now kick the extra point and save the 2PC attempt for the 2nd try. Where if you get a penalty on the 2nd TD you are facing a very long 2PC.

Maybe Hue was planning on going for two twice to win the game and wasn't playing for overtime.....

That's what I would have done. Why leave it up to a coin flip?

How many teams in that situation would have gone for two? Not too damn many. We always seem to be the ones going against the grain, trying to outsmart the other guy, not doing what teams would normally do in a given situation. Let's establish ourselves as a professional football team before getting cute.

What does this even mean?

See the sentence prior to the one you quoted.

So you should go against what you think is the right move because it's "cute"?

Football coaches should just listen to the analytics people about when to go for it on 4th down, when to go for 2, etc. It comes down to the reality that these are not really football problems, they are more game theory problems and most coaches have no idea how to approach them.

Oakland won in week 1 because instead of trying to tie the game they went for 2 and won it.

If you can get 2.5 yards per play you could technically use all 4 downs and never have to punt..