.... End of game strategy Q

[ElTexan]

7 minutes left in game.
A TD gets you to within 7 points.

Everyone kicks the PAT to make it a 6 pt game.

Why not go for the 2 point conversion?
If you miss it, you're still only down by 7.
If you make it, you're down by 5, thus keeping it to a one possession game [8 points] if your opponent scores a Field Goal on their next possession.

???

 

[BucksFanInGA]

Answer: Chris Simms

 

[tech_iceman]

kick the PAT... score a touchdown... win the game

 

[Cobrabit]

kick the PAT... score a touchdown... win the game

Exactly. As a coach you want to make the stop on defense (not just hope to give up a FG) then have a chance to win the game. If you go into a situation like that playing for a tie when the other team hasn't even scored again yet then you shouldn't be a coach. Got to have confidence in your team (defense) to get the job done.

 

[ElTexan]

Exactly. As a coach you want to make the stop on defense (not just hope to give up a FG) then have a chance to win the game. If you go into a situation like that playing for a tie when the other team hasn't even scored again yet then you shouldn't be a coach. Got to have confidence in your team (defense) to get the job done.

By that logic: if down by three, you'd go for it on 4th and 5 from the opponent's 12 yard line instead of kicking the FG to tie at the end of the game? Because you want to "go for the win" and "show confidence."

Nope. Try again. There's more to it than simply that.

 

[ralphiewvu]

They will most likely run the clock out instead of kick the field goal with only 7 minutes left. Unless of course a big kickoff return happens.

 

[rolltide14_0]

By that logic: if down by three, you'd go for it on 4th and 5 from the opponent's 12 yard line instead of kicking the FG to tie at the end of the game? Because you want to "go for the win" and "show confidence."

Nope. Try again. There's more to it than simply that.

Nope, he's right. You kick the goddamn field goal, let your defense get the stop, score a TD and win the game.

In either scenario you're going need to score a TD right? Why risk missing a 2-point conversion and only being able to tie the game in the end, when if you make the pat, you can win in regulation with a TD?

I guess it depends on your defense, whether you're confident in them or not. If the other team has been driving on you all night, then maybe the 2 is a good idea.

 

[Codaxx]

Nope, he's right. You kick the goddamn field goal, let your defense get the stop, score a TD and win the game.

In either scenario you're going need to score a TD right? Why risk missing a 2-point conversion and only being able to tie the game in the end, when if you make the pat, you can win in regulation with a TD?

I guess it depends on your defense, whether you're confident in them or not. If the other team has been driving on you all night, then maybe the 2 is a good idea.

-
I go for the extra pt in this game, but a lot depends on the flow of the game. If you are tryng to make it a 55-50 game than fine go for 2. 15-10 game, you hit the extra pt and make it 15-9.

 

[Doctor Krieger]

Answer...do the opposite of what wisconsin coaches do.

 

[bocomo007]

Spike it and kick the chip shot FG as time expires...

—Les Miles

 

[ElTexan]

In either scenario you're going need to score a TD right? \a.

in one scenario, you need a TD and a 2pt conversion to tie [if the other team gets a FG]
... and in the other scenario it's a 9-point game, and you need two scores.

hence the question.

can you follow along now?

 

[ElTexan]

-
I go for the extra pt in this game, but a lot depends on the flow of the game. If you are tryng to make it a 55-50 game than fine go for 2. 15-10 game, you hit the extra pt and make it 15-9.

This was my initial thought.

 

[rolltide14_0]

in one scenario, you need a TD and a 2pt conversion to tie [if the other team gets a FG]
... and in the other scenario it's a 9-point game, and you need two scores.

hence the question.

can you follow along now?

I'm trusting my defense to keep them from scoring a field goal. Don't try to insult me dickbag, you look stupid.

 

[Cobrabit]

The problem with your scenario is that you're automatically assuming that no matter what you do with your possession the other team will definitely score a field goal afterwards. This is where I'm saying you can't coach like this and try to play the odds game about going for two. You have to have confidence in your defense to get the stop after you score the first time. Then come back for achance to win the game with a PAT rather than just tying it.

If you go for the two point conversion initially and then get the stop, yes you don't need the next PAT to win, just the 6. However you're playing the odds of making two PATs versus a 2 point conversion. Typically the odds favor the PATs, unless of course you're one of our (VT's) kickers this year.

 

[Cobrabit]

Regarding the scenario you replied to my original post with: yes, you take the field goal to tie the game. The original question is about what gives your team the best chance on your next possession and how that affects your decision now. You tie the game now so you can win the game the next possession with any score. Automatically assuming the other team will score next will have your players lose confidence in you as their coach because you don't believe in them to make the stop.

There is a reason Vegas flows with money. Casinos know that while they might not win them all, the odds always favor the house or in this case the best percentages of winning the game. Coaches get paid millions to make these decisions and they're a whole lot smarter than the typical viewer who may have played football in high school.

 

[ElTexan]

The problem with your scenario is that you're automatically assuming that no matter what you do with your possession the other team will definitely score a field goal afterwards. .

No, I'm not assuming that. I'm asking the question as to why it is never considered, and whether it be a good idea to consider it.

Can you people not read?

 

[ElTexan]

If I was playing Oregon and we just scored a TD to make it 56-49, with 7 minutes left, I think it's a VERY good idea to go for the 2pt conversion... yet it wouldn't even be considered by your genius, millionaire coaches.

 

[Cobrabit]

So you don't think in the decades the game has been played that it hasn't been considered and shown to be lower odds, hence the reason no one does it. You asked the question why no one considers it and several have answered. If you don't want to accept that and continue coming up with 'what if' scenarios then have at it.

 

[ElTexan]

So you don't think in the decades the game has been played that it hasn't been considered and shown to be lower odds, hence the reason no one does it. .

Hell no. I don't accept that. Do you know how long baseball, the most stat-filled sport ever, was run without a stat-driven model? For a CENTURY. People in sports do stuff out of tradition, culture, etc, and not because it's the most logical thing.

Hell, look at the multi-0millionaire QBs starting in the league the past few years. Heck, Tebow was drafted in the 1st round and then subsequently ransomed by the Jets.
Don't use the logical fallacy of "appeal to authority." ESPECIALLY when it comes to people who run sports teams.

Hell no I don't accept that logical fallacy, ESPECIALLY in this case.

 

[tometom]

you probably should add the score of the game to the scenario. If the other team has scored on every single possession and gotten quite a few FG on quite a few of them (so like 45-38 with 8 FGs by the other team and only 3 TDs), then yea, I guess I could see where you might believe they will get another FG. But if it's a pretty low scoring game, like 16 - 9, then you've got to believe you can get a stop so you kick the extra point get it to 16-10.