Let's talk going for 2 | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Let's talk going for 2

I think calling it "chasing points" makes it sound reckless. Like if you were down 8-0 in the first quarter and then went for two after scoring a TD of your own, that would be chasing points. It was a few seconds from the 4th quarter and possessions were at a premium.

I'm all about conservative and strategic football, but this was just an incomprehensibly poor decision by Dino to me. All the LSU fans sitting around me were asking "why aren't ya'll going for two? I don't understand."

Look at it this way. They obviously thought the chances of;

Kicking the XP
Scoring a TD
Kicking another XP
Kicking a FG for the win

Was better than

Making a 2 pointer
Scoring a TD
Making another 2 pointer for the tie
And then still needing another score to win or win in OT.

To WIN both scenarios require another TD then another score after that. But two kicked XPs are easier than two 2 point conversions.

I get the thinking. It's not incomprehensible if you're playing to win.
 
Look at it this way. They obviously thought the chances of;

Kicking the XP
Scoring a TD
Kicking another XP
Kicking a FG for the win

Was better than

Making a 2 pointer
Scoring a TD
Making another 2 pointer for the tie
And then still needing another score to win or win in OT.

To WIN both scenarios require another TD then another score after that. But two kicked XPs are easier than two 2 point conversions.

I get the thinking. It's not incomprehensible if you're playing to win.

Yep. And going for the win vs a tie is exactly who Dino is.
 
IMO you should rarely go for two outside of 10 mins left in the game.

However you need to take how the game has played out until that point. Since we were struggling to put points on the board, I would have went for two there. I had little confidence in getting two more scores.

Either way there was no clear choice.

IMO the bigger question is why not go for two after the last TD? If you get it, then you protect against an LSU TD putting the game away. That allows you to be more aggressive on D or even attempt an onside kick.

Sure if you don't get it then you can only tie with a FG. But IMO it is worth the risk.
 
What are the odds of converting one? 40%?

So the odds of getting none of them are 20% and the odds of getting both of them are 30%

half the time it doesn't matter.

there are enough combinations of outcomes that makes this all a big mess even with the limited number of possible possessions. it's just not some obvious slam dunk choice.
Is that math right? Or did you round
 
Look at it this way. They obviously thought the chances of;

Kicking the XP
Scoring a TD
Kicking another XP
Kicking a FG for the win

Was better than

Making a 2 pointer
Scoring a TD
Making another 2 pointer for the tie
And then still needing another score to win or win in OT.

To WIN both scenarios require another TD then another score after that. But two kicked XPs are easier than two 2 point conversions.

I get the thinking. It's not incomprehensible if you're playing to win.
That's a great description of where I think things landed.
 
What are the odds of converting one? 40%?

So the odds of getting none of them are 20% and the odds of getting both of them are 30%

half the time it doesn't matter.

there are enough combinations of outcomes that makes this all a big mess even with the limited number of possible possessions. it's just not some obvious slam dunk choice.
I too have always heard that 2-pointers are approximately 40% propositions.
So, odds to make both (and tie the game) are 16%
Any other scenario, leaves SU needing a third score to extend the game.

I'd have gone for 2 twice myself.
But like many here have said, it was not a deal breaker for me.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.
 
There was a great article maybe on 538 that basically said if you have a decision to go for 2 in the 2nd half it's mathematically correct to do so.

But they just used numbers and stuff not feelings.
 
There was a great article maybe on 538 that basically said if you have a decision to go for 2 in the 2nd half it's mathematically correct to do so.

But they just used numbers and stuff not feelings.

If it's the article Im thinking of, it didn't say that. It said it also depended on the margin and with less than 10 mins to play.
 
what do the numbers say when its a team with an Avg Oline so the running part is pretty much out the window? I wanted to go for 2 because i wasn't sure we could hold them long enough to get 2 more scores. turns out we were one 3rd down conversion away from doing just that. we could also have made the first , missed the 2nd and still been down 2 with 5 to go.

really the killer is the execution on the kickoff. they probably don't get it past the 30 and who knows if they make 1 more first down to get the TD.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,127
Messages
4,681,576
Members
5,900
Latest member
DizzyNY

Online statistics

Members online
90
Guests online
1,845
Total visitors
1,935


Top Bottom