More NFL teams should go for two point conversions

Denver did it on Sunday and beat San Diego 39-38


Why kick an extra point and risk losing the coin toss in OT?


And maybe the Game, too

That was pretty cool. Speaking of Denver, here's a stupid story explaining why they're going to be my second favorite team this year.....

Since the Lions always suck, football is no fun without someone to cheer for. I don't really have a team I should like, so I pick one early one that looks like it might be good. The last few years it's been the Patriots. I hate the northeastern US teams in every sport, but Brady went to UM so that's all that counts. Brady is hurt so I have no reason to like the Patriots this year. I was watching this week's Denver game and had little opinion. I was talking with someone about how stupid Jay Cutler was and what a dumb name Jay is and wondering what it stood for (turns out it stands for Jay). I was researching him and it mentioned how he was parodied on South Park once. Stan met him and said "Nice to meet you. You kind of suck, but my dad says you might be good some day". The real Jay Cutler later said in an interview "I thought it was kind of funny. They can make fun of me if they want to." I thought that was great for some reason. While continuing to watch the game, Cutler didn't irritate me. From what I can tell he doesn't kill dogs and he's never been in jail. He went to Vanderbilt, my favorite SEC school, (not that that's saying a whole lot) and got a 26 on his Wonderlic test (basically IQ test for football players...20 is average) so why not? Go Broncos :haha:

But I like the Chargers, and what if you dont get the conversion? then you lose.

ya i would take the chance and kick the extra so you have a chance tyo win if you try the two point and come up short ur screwed

gdennis59 wrote:

But I like the Chargers, and what if you dont get the conversion? then you lose.

Not really; First of all; An extra point can be blocked, or missed[ though that is rare among kickers today; Back in the 60's and 70's more PAT's were missed than they are today; Hanson is money in the bank] or a bad snap could botch it up


Plus there is no guarantee you will get the ball in OT; You lose the coin flip; your offense may not get another chance in sudden death overtime;

I hate OT in the NFL; I like College Football OT better. Both teams get a chance to score

And I don't buy the argument the defense can win a game,either

Sure a game can be won on a interception or fumble return by the defense. Or set by a turnover by the defense for your offense to capitalize on.


But how often does that happen in Overtime? A lot of times the team that wins the toss; gets the ball and kicks a field goal on their first possession.

And considering most teams have kickers that can hit a 40, 45 or even a 50 yard field goal constantly; that is not a difficult way to win

Not only that; But the game is geared towards the offense and the rules favor the QB and the recievers.


A QB can run with the ball for a first down and slide feet first without being nailed


Recievers can't be touched five yards down the field.


I would love to see guys like Dick Butkus, Jack Lambert or Jack Tatum try to play in the NFL today under these rules

catbox_9 wrote:

That was pretty cool. Speaking of Denver, here's a stupid story explaining why they're going to be my second favorite team this year.....

Since the Lions always suck, football is no fun without someone to cheer for. I don't really have a team I should like, so I pick one early one that looks like it might be good. The last few years it's been the Patriots. I hate the northeastern US teams in every sport, but Brady went to UM so that's all that counts. Brady is hurt so I have no reason to like the Patriots this year. I was watching this week's Denver game and had little opinion. I was talking with someone about how stupid Jay Cutler was and what a dumb name Jay is and wondering what it stood for (turns out it stands for Jay). I was researching him and it mentioned how he was parodied on South Park once. Stan met him and said "Nice to meet you. You kind of suck, but my dad says you might be good some day". The real Jay Cutler later said in an interview "I thought it was kind of funny. They can make fun of me if they want to." I thought that was great for some reason. While continuing to watch the game, Cutler didn't irritate me. From what I can tell he doesn't kill dogs and he's never been in jail. He went to Vanderbilt, my favorite SEC school, (not that that's saying a whole lot) and got a 26 on his Wonderlic test (basically IQ test for football players...20 is average) so why not? Go Broncos :haha:

gs78 wrote:

gdennis59 wrote:

But I like the Chargers, and what if you dont get the conversion? then you lose.

Not really; ...

You forgot one other thing. While unlikely, if the Broncos missed the 2 point conversion they could have gone for an onside kick. There was still like 30 seconds to go in the game or something like that.

What's the probability on 2 point conversions these days?

Found it! Okay here we go....
A 2 point conversion is successful 50.9% of time time since 2005 and PATs are successful 98% of the time. In overtime each team has a 50% chance of winning so if you take the XP you have a (.98)(.5) or 49% chance of winning.

By going for two you have a 50.9% chance at winning. It's actually higher than that since you could do an onside kick and have 25 seconds left if you failed your conversion. Recovering an onside kick has a 23% success rate and if you recovered it you'd be at around the 40 with 25 seconds to play needing probably 25 yards to get in field goal range. The odds of getting those 25 yards are tough to calculate, but let's just say it's 33%. So, if you missed the 2 point conversion you'd probably have a (.33)(.23) 7.6% chance of still scoring. Add that to the 50.9% and it's a 58.5% shot at winning vs. 49%. Seems pretty simple if you ask me.

NOTE: These odds didn't take into account the odds of San Diego scoring after the Broncos did their PAT. I guess the odds would be slightly higher after a 2 point conversion than a PAT since they'd have to score, but they'd still be low. SD didn't score so we know the odds are basically 0 in that case since we saw what happened.

catbox_9 wrote:

gs78 wrote:

gdennis59 wrote:

But I like the Chargers, and what if you dont get the conversion? then you lose.

Not really; ...

You forgot one other thing. While unlikely, if the Broncos missed the 2 point conversion they could have gone for an onside kick. There was still like 30 seconds to go in the game or something like that.

What's the probability on 2 point conversions these days?

Found it! Okay here we go....
A 2 point conversion is successful 50.9% of time time since 2005 and PATs are successful 98% of the time. In overtime each team has a 50% chance of winning so if you take the XP you have a (.98)(.5) or 49% chance of winning.

By going for two you have a 50.9% chance at winning. It's actually higher than that since you could do an onside kick and have 25 seconds left if you failed your conversion. Recovering an onside kick has a 23% success rate and if you recovered it you'd be at around the 40 with 25 seconds to play needing probably 25 yards to get in field goal range. The odds of getting those 25 yards are tough to calculate, but let's just say it's 33%. So, if you missed the 2 point conversion you'd probably have a (.33)(.23) 7.6% chance of still scoring. Add that to the 50.9% and it's a 58.5% shot at winning vs. 49%. Seems pretty simple if you ask me.

NOTE: These odds didn't take into account the odds of San Diego scoring after the Broncos did their PAT. I guess the odds would be slightly higher after a 2 point conversion than a PAT since they'd have to score, but they'd still be low. SD didn't score so we know the odds are basically 0 in that case since we saw what happened.

I forgot about the onside kick

You said that seems simple?

Erm...

ya thats not simple ...sorry!

Sure it is. It's just a little basic math.

In short by going for 2 the odds of winning are about 58.5%.
If you take the PAT and go to OT the odds are about 49%.

58.5>49

Yet most teams would go for the extra point rather than go for 2

The win probability added for going for 1 vs. 2 is generally about the same. I wouldn't go for 2 every time. Even though it's slightly better than 50-50 odds, there's still a pretty good chance it fails. If you score 2 TDs and go for 2 twice there's a decent (almost 25%) chance you'll fail twice and end up with 12 points. If the other team also scores two TDs the odds of them failing on two PATs is essentially 0 (0.04%) so they'd almost surely end up with at least 13 points to your 12. When it's go for 2 or have overtime I would always go for 2 because the odds are in your favor. The only "downside" is there's about a 45% chance you'll lose instantly. If you play for overtime the odds of losing are greater, but you won't lose instantly. Then again if you're going to lose is it really worth waiting a while and risking injury to do it?

Going for 2 like the Broncos did would never happen in college OT since it's fair. I still would do it in college though. Just because the overtime is fair, you still only have a 50-50 shot at winning so the odds remain the same.

catbox_9 wrote:

The win probability added for going for 1 vs. 2 is generally about the same. I wouldn't go for 2 every time. Even though it's slightly better than 50-50 odds, there's still a pretty good chance it fails. If you score 2 TDs and go for 2 twice there's a decent (almost 25%) chance you'll fail twice and end up with 12 points. If the other team also scores two TDs the odds of them failing on two PATs is essentially 0 (0.04%) so they'd almost surely end up with at least 13 points to your 12. When it's go for 2 or have overtime I would always go for 2 because the odds are in your favor. The only "downside" is there's about a 45% chance you'll lose instantly. If you play for overtime the odds of losing are greater, but you won't lose instantly. Then again if you're going to lose is it really worth waiting a while and risking injury to do it?

Going for 2 like the Broncos did would never happen in college OT since it's fair. I still would do it in college though. Just because the overtime is fair, you still only have a 50-50 shot at winning so the odds remain the same.

The NFL needs to switch to College OT

Or go back to having No OT in the regular season

Like they did before the Early 70's

The problem with football is any overtime is going to suck. The college OT isn't really any better since it involves no typical football strategy (punting, field position, etc.). I'd say play another half, but that's not really reasonable either.

catbox_9 wrote:

The problem with football is any overtime is going to suck. The college OT isn't really any better since it involves no typical football strategy (punting, field position, etc.). I'd say play another half, but that's not really reasonable either.

Have no Overtime

Except in playoff and Super Bowl games

They could play another half then


I miss Tie Games in College and the NFL

And the NHL


Shootouts suck

Yeah but in the playoffs you'll need OT. There's no good system for football OT.

catbox_9 wrote:

Yeah but in the playoffs you'll need OT. There's no good system for football OT.

I said except for playoffs and Super Bowl


But what's wrong with ties in the regular season?

Football or Hockey

The NFL didn't have Ot in the Regular Season until 1974

The NHL had ties until 2005

Ties are fine. I'm still working out a way to have overtime. NFL is terrible at overtime. College OT is better but still bad.

ya the over time that is set up now honestly i think is a bunch of bull crap but thats just me

catbox_9 wrote:

Ties are fine. I'm still working out a way to have overtime. NFL is terrible at overtime. College OT is better but still bad.

How about giving each team a possesion in OT

If still tied; then go to Sudden Death

That's all right, but the sudden death part still isn't fair. There just isn't a good way to do it I guess.

catbox_9 wrote:

That's all right, but the sudden death part still isn't fair. There just isn't a good way to do it I guess.

Either that or play an entire quarter or half; whoever ahead after it ends is the winner

I like playing another half since it's most fair. Actually to make it fairer, each team needs to start with the ball. What about this...play 2 more halves, each 10 minutes long?

If still tied....try that again? Hockey players can play all night, why not football players?

catbox_9 wrote:

I like playing another half since it's most fair. Actually to make it fairer, each team needs to start with the ball. What about this...play 2 more halves, each 10 minutes long?

If still tied....try that again? Hockey players can play all night, why not football players?