fat mike goes for 2 up 4 with like 4mins left cuz he really thinks the chances of dallas kicking 2 FGs to tie the game in final 4min is greater than his aids defense giving up a TD.

obv if you kick the PAT n give up a TD then a FG wins the game vs only tying it.

i normally am in favor of going for 2 most of the time but in this case seemed pretty awful.

It was awful.

One increment away when up by 11, we've up to two college coaches who elect to go for two.

You are wrong and completely missed the point of going for 2 there. It's an easy go for it.

The Texans, missing their two best defenders, who also haven't stopped the Chiefs once the entire ****ing game, just punted down 12 with 7:30 left in the game on their own 40.

That was terrible. And now he is calling timeouts down 19 with 4 minutes to go.

C'mon man. Don't post like a douche. If he's wrong, explain why. It is a go for 2 situation but I doubt it matters much either way. It only matters in unlikely scenarios. One of the advantages of going for 2 is that if you make it, a FG will make it a 2 score game.

Isn't the biggest advantage of going for it that an XP isn't automatic anymore? So by getting it (making it a 6 point game) if Dallas scores a TD there's still some chance you're not losing? Whereas missing it (4) isn't even that much different than making the XP (5) because should Dallas score a td they'll just go for 2 anyway. It seems like a pretty huge difference to me, I can't think of a single benefit of kicking the XP. You're right though, I should have given my reasoning in the first post.

Eh? If you make it and then Dallas score the TD they auto kick an XP and you lose by 1 the vast majority. As far as I understand your post, the scenario you're talking about (you make, Dallas get TD, no other scoring, they miss XP, you win in OT) is so vanishingly unlikely as to be a non factor. It seems like thousands to 1 to happen.

Like I dunno what making an XP is these days, is it like 95%? Let's go with that, then make 2PC, Dallas miss XP, win in OT is already like 1% and that's assuming that Dallas score TD and no other scoring, which is a big underdog.

Just saw this from yesterday and figured it needed to be posted here.

4th and 3 at BAL 44
(8:50 - 4th) M.King punts 44 yards to end zone, Center-J.Condo, Touchback.

The Raiders were down 27-17 when this happened.

I'm super confused here, as your post seems to be advocating the logic of my post not countering it. You say "if you make it and then Dallas auto kicks an XP and you lose by 1 the vast majority". I obviously agree, but whether Dallas is down 4, 5 or 6 if they, after getting the ball back with 4 min left in the game, score a td they are going to win by that margin a "vast majority". So to GB there really isn't much difference between 4 & 5- the difference lies in Dallas XP % vs 2pc %- as either way if you give up a td you are likely going to lose by that margin. Being up 6 isn't THAT different either, as obviously XPs are still made at a relatively high frequency, but it does at least contain scenarios where you give up a TD and still have ~50% equity, which seems like a pretty big deal.

This has never happened in the Dan Bailey era.

264 in a row to start his career.

then i guess it will never happen

its not a big decision either way

I'm fine with your logic if there's somewhere <4min left in regulation, and the only score you realistically have to consider is your opponent's ensuing drive. However there was way too much time left to think this way, and the exact scenario that happened (you miss the try, opponent scores and kicks PAT, you have time to answer but a FG now only ties the game instead of winning it in regulation) is what you need to worry about. Now GB had a diety under center so it wasn't an issue, but for your average team that's generally only gonna get a FG attempt at the end, you're burning a lot of equity.

Dallas isn't kicking the XP to go up 2, so even in your scenario, GB still often only ties with a FG bc they are down 3 when Dallas gets the 2PC.

But the 2pc isn't automatic for DAL either. You'd be taking the 95% chance and leaving them the 50%.

I guess I'm giving Dallas too much credit in hoping they're smart enough to know to score with as little time left as possible so you don't give Rodgers a chance. I still don't think, equity wise, there's much difference at all between 4-6 in the sense of if you give up a td you're a huge favorite to lose by that margin. So I think trying to create extra scenarios where you give up a td and aren't losing is pretty mandatory, especially since 4 & 5 are nearly identical equity wise.

I hear ya, but as Dallas showed, it's tough to toe that line, they did just about as good a job as possible but scored a play or two too early. (It also doesn't help that their defense is so bad that 1min/0 TO is plenty to score a FG and sometimes a TD against.)

This is frustrating. So kicking the XP to go up 5:

Now every Dallas TD takes the lead. 50% of the time we are down 3, 50% down 1.

Go for 2, and miss: Now every Dallas TD takes the lead, and we are down 3.

Go for 2, and make: Rarely a Dallas TD still results in a tie, but we are always driving for the winning FG.

Going for 2 and making is the only way to ensure that an answering FG wins the game, even ignoring the small chance that Dallas misses an XP after a tying FG. It's not a huge swing in equity to be up 4, 5, or 6 in this spot, but the gap between 6 and 5 is quite bigger than the gap between 5 and 4.

This was just incredible. Pretty sure the Ravens went on about a 7 or 8 minute drive after this obv.

No need to argue, 538 has it all figured out. Kick up 4 with 4 minutes to go, go for 2 with 3 minutes to go, then kick with 2 minutes or less http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...or-2-for-real/

Chris Foerster

End of the first half, trying to get in position to kick a FG, the Cardinals throw to about the Eagles 30. Play ends with 12 sec to go. They appeared to make no effort to either call a timeout or get down the field and lined up. Wind up calling timeout with 4 sec left and missing the field goal. Don't know if it was the coach, Carson Palmer, or AJ Shapley principally at fault, but it was terrible.

http://raiderswire.usatoday.com/2017...it-in-5-years/