This situation happened in the Giants-Dallas game.
Let's say you are down by 14 and get a touchdown to cut the lead to 8. The time remaining is limited enough so that you will lose in regulation unless:
1) you get a defensive stop or onside kick recovery
2) you score another touchdown.
Let's assume that all extra point kicks are good. Also assume that you will kick if you are down by 1. But now you are down by 8, do you go for 1 or go for 2?
Given our assumptions, if you go for 1, you will go to OT.
If you go for 2 you have the following possibilities:
1) Make it - then your next touchdown wins in regulation.
2) Miss it, but make a conversion after your next touchdown - go to OT
3) Miss it, and miss it after your next touchdown - lose in regulation.
It would appear that your chances of winning the game go up if you go for 2. You have to miss both 2 point attempts to lose in regulation.
Of course NFL coaches won't do this as they are generally not blamed for a strategy that leads to overtime, but it is an interesting idea. Note that the rule of thumb is "not to go for 2 until you have to", but in this case you are in a situation where any score by the other team means you lose anyway.
wikipedia has a Mathematical analysis of the two-point conversion that says otherwise, but in theory it should work. (also a 14 point strategy that you led with).
wiki - ( New Window )
- The team down 14 will score two touchdowns, otherwise the coach's decision is irrelevant.
- Any score by the other team after the first score ends the game, otherwise the coach's decision is irrelevant.
- Overtime is a 50-50 proposition.
The key thing to remember is that kicking two extra points to tie up the game does nothing more than extend the game but it still only gives the team that caught up a 50% chance of winning.
2-pt conversion rates have been cited as being anywhere from 40%-55% successful. Let's use 40% to be conservative. With that number, your chance of failing both conversion attempts is 36%.
If you get the conversion on the first try, you win the game on your next TD (since you are guaranteed to make the XP). Thus, going for two on the first try means that 40% of the time, you have a 100% chance of winning.
The other 60% of the time, you have to hope to get the second conversion attempt. This too is 40%, but getting it only sends it to overtime, which is a 50% chance of winning.
So really, the equation is
(40% x 100%W) + 60% x (40% x 50%W)
=
.4W + .12W = .52W.
Thus, using the conservative estimate of a 40% 2-point conversion success rate and a 50% chance of winning in OT, going for two when down 8 gives you a 52% chance of winning.
If you use the higher estimate of 55%, then it goes to
(55% x 100%W) + 45% x (55% x 50%W)
=
.55W + .12375W = .67375W
Thus, a 55% success rate on two point conversions means that going for two when down by 8 gives the team a 67.375% chance of winning.
Coaches, however, will typically choose the XP route because that is standard operating procedure and coaches don't get fired/blamed for making the conventional decision.
There is no requirement to convert both two point conversions. You only need one.
I concur with the weighted probability analysis by PBTSU.
wikipedia has a Mathematical analysis of the two-point conversion that says otherwise, but in theory it should work. (also a 14 point strategy that you led with). wiki - ( New Window )
The "we go for it on 4th down, every time no matter what", and the "we onsides kick every kickoff no matter what" philosophy?
I just wonder how that would actually work in the NFL
My gut says the team coming back from 14 down would have momentum (and possibly defensive fatigue) on their side, thus upping their odds of winning in OT. But I don't know if this matches the actual numbers.
wikipedia has a Mathematical analysis of the two-point conversion that says otherwise, but in theory it should work. (also a 14 point strategy that you led with). wiki - ( New Window )
NYTimes had an article on this today stating that Rex should utilize the no punt strategy from here on out. They have a strong running game (6th best per rush avg I think) and he has nothing to lose. Basically claim it'll pad his resume as a coach willing to go against the norm.
I would however press the issue and go for 2 - however, the rest of the NFL is on to our shotgun draw for 2 points at the goal line. the spread 4 wide draw has worked though - but we typically do the shotgun draw or fade
If my team puts together 2 late TD drives (& a defensive stop or a successful on-side kick recovery sandwiched in between), they've earned every opportunity to try to win in OT. I would never risk taking away that opportunity from them because of missed 2 point conversions, when they werent absolutely necessary.
Thats the reason coaches never go for 2 point conversions early in the game... you take the points (extra kick), and only take the risk of a 2 point conversion when its necessary, otherwise, its by definition, an "unnecessary risk".
Same logic... when a team is down 15 points, and they score a TD, they kick an extra point after, and push back the 2 point conversion to the 2nd TD required to tie the game. You always push back taking risks until you have to.