Raise Your Hand If You Love Going for the 2 Point Conversion

Mingjai wrote:

Mingjai wrote:

I didn't hate going for two, but in hindsight we shouldn't have any time we tried it this year. What I did hate is the play calls on every one of them. Love Ty, but he is 0-3 on making a good play call for a 2 point conversion.



Does anyone have the stats on the success rate of 2 point conversions in College Football and at BYU? Spiffcoug?

Through 2013, it was historically about 42% while PATs were around 94.5%.

Make Prediction, Ty is 0-3 but BYU is 0-9 in 2 point conversions.



Mingjai, it is historically about 38% while PATs are around 90.5%. This is why most coaches don't like going for 2 unless they are forced to in OT or to go for the tie to get to over time. If you are up big and go for it to practice it for later in a real game environment then it is OK.

Just as a point of order, here are numbers calculating direct from the 2016 NCAA FBS Record book:



2000-2015

PATs: 75,138 / 78,420 = 95.8%

2-Pt: 1,648 / 4,023 = 41.0%



1958-2015

PATs: 193,318 / 208,861 = 92.6%

2-Pt: 9,944 / 23,686 = 42.0%

In other words, if you went for two every time, you would score less points than if you kicked the extra point every time. That is good to know. It reinforces the idea that you only go for two in the fourth quarter if you have to (need 16 points with enough time for two possessions or 8 in one).



I think this is also instructive on whether or not to go for the tie or win at the end of the game. If you feel you have worse than a 42% chance to win in overtime, you go for the two point conversion. Otherwise, you kick the PAT. I love Kalani's aggressiveness, but I hope he learns from this not to chase points, and he continues to build BYU into a well-oiled machine.

1967cougar wrote:
Had BYU scored on that last drive, this wouldn't even be a thread.

Probably correct. Also, if BYU was undefeated, no one would be wishing we had more wins this year. And so on and so forth.

McY wrote:

Had BYU scored on that last drive, this wouldn't even be a thread.

Probably correct. Also, if BYU was undefeated, no one would be wishing we had more wins this year. And so on and so forth.

Why not? It was a mistake, and so an opportunity to learn. Even in wins, we need to take opportunities to learn.

Cougarfan87 wrote:

TheDean wrote:

runbyu1 wrote:
I didn't hate going for two, but in hindsight we shouldn't have any time we tried it this year. What I did hate is the play calls on every one of them. Love Ty, but he is 0-3 on making a good play call for a 2 point conversion.



Does anyone have the stats on the success rate of 2 point conversions in College Football and at BYU? Spiffcoug?

Through 2013, it was historically about 42% while PATs were around 94.5%.

Make Prediction, Ty is 0-3 but BYU is 0-9 in 2 point conversions.



Mingjai, it is historically about 38% while PATs are around 90.5%. This is why most coaches don't like going for 2 unless they are forced to in OT or to go for the tie to get to over time. If you are up big and go for it to practice it for later in a real game environment then it is OK.

Just as a point of order, here are numbers calculating direct from the 2016 NCAA FBS Record book:



2000-2015

PATs: 75,138 / 78,420 = 95.8%

2-Pt: 1,648 / 4,023 = 41.0%



1958-2015

PATs: 193,318 / 208,861 = 92.6%

2-Pt: 9,944 / 23,686 = 42.0%

In other words, if you went for two every time, you would score less points than if you kicked the extra point every time. That is good to know. It reinforces the idea that you only go for two in the fourth quarter if you have to (need 16 points with enough time for two possessions or 8 in one).



I think this is also instructive on whether or not to go for the tie or win at the end of the game. If you feel you have worse than a 42% chance to win in overtime, you go for the two point conversion. Otherwise, you kick the PAT. I love Kalani's aggressiveness, but I hope he learns from this not to chase points, and he continues to build BYU into a well-oiled machine.

Good stats, and good point that the expected payoff of going for two is less than going for one.



Loyal Cougars had a great article after the Utah game. Prior to reading the article, I thought the same as Mingjai--go for two only in special circumstances at the end of the game. After reading the article, I think you go for two only if two will get you to a tie.



http://www.loyalcougars.com/2016/09/13/byu-football/8534-stats-going-for-2-a-losing-decision-every-time/



As for the WVU game, because we converted a FG while they scored a TD, we were down a point. We could try to get that point back at any time. Going for two at the time of the TD or at any point later in the game was only somewhat risky--down by one is the same as down by two in football. So I'm OK with going for two on that or any one of the subsequent touchdowns. But going for 2 the second time was absolutely the wrong choice. Making it puts you down by 1 (and you'd have to make another), but not making it puts you down by 3, and at that point a FG ties rather than wins. The downside of the second 2-point conversion attempt is significantly worse than the downside of the first.



I'm wondering about how much Ty has thought about 2-pt conversions. They don't have them in the NFL. And they're a whole lot easier in High School. I think this is an instance of inexperience. Hopefully he learns. I feel like I did.

CrimsonCoug wrote:
I'm wondering about how much Ty has thought about 2-pt conversions. They don't have them in the NFL.

https://media.giphy.com/media/6zXo5MAkNJwKQ/giphy.gif" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

snoscythe wrote:

I'm wondering about how much Ty has thought about 2-pt conversions. They don't have them in the NFL.

Alright. Full disclosure, I haven't watched a lot of NFL since I was a kid when I learned the rules of the game, when they didn't have a 2pt conversion and I don't recall seeing one as an adult. Just looked up the history on wikipedia. Yup, mea culpa; the NFL adopted it in 1994 when I graduated from HS. So Ty would have started his NFL career without it, but would have had it for most of his time in the League. There goes that excuse, Ty. :whistle:



PS, I just felt old.

Mingjai wrote:

Mingjai wrote:

I didn't hate going for two, but in hindsight we shouldn't have any time we tried it this year. What I did hate is the play calls on every one of them. Love Ty, but he is 0-3 on making a good play call for a 2 point conversion.



Does anyone have the stats on the success rate of 2 point conversions in College Football and at BYU? Spiffcoug?

Through 2013, it was historically about 42% while PATs were around 94.5%.

Make Prediction, Ty is 0-3 but BYU is 0-9 in 2 point conversions.



Mingjai, it is historically about 38% while PATs are around 90.5%. This is why most coaches don't like going for 2 unless they are forced to in OT or to go for the tie to get to over time. If you are up big and go for it to practice it for later in a real game environment then it is OK.

Just as a point of order, here are numbers calculating direct from the 2016 NCAA FBS Record book:



2000-2015

PATs: 75,138 / 78,420 = 95.8%

2-Pt: 1,648 / 4,023 = 41.0%



1958-2015

PATs: 193,318 / 208,861 = 92.6%

2-Pt: 9,944 / 23,686 = 42.0%

You made my point that 2 point conversions are bad idea except in OT where you are forced to go for it by rule or if you need the 2 points in order to send it to OT.

TheDean wrote:

TheDean wrote:

runbyu1 wrote:
I didn't hate going for two, but in hindsight we shouldn't have any time we tried it this year. What I did hate is the play calls on every one of them. Love Ty, but he is 0-3 on making a good play call for a 2 point conversion.



Does anyone have the stats on the success rate of 2 point conversions in College Football and at BYU? Spiffcoug?

Through 2013, it was historically about 42% while PATs were around 94.5%.

Make Prediction, Ty is 0-3 but BYU is 0-9 in 2 point conversions.



Mingjai, it is historically about 38% while PATs are around 90.5%. This is why most coaches don't like going for 2 unless they are forced to in OT or to go for the tie to get to over time. If you are up big and go for it to practice it for later in a real game environment then it is OK.

Just as a point of order, here are numbers calculating direct from the 2016 NCAA FBS Record book:



2000-2015

PATs: 75,138 / 78,420 = 95.8%

2-Pt: 1,648 / 4,023 = 41.0%



1958-2015

PATs: 193,318 / 208,861 = 92.6%

2-Pt: 9,944 / 23,686 = 42.0%

You made my point that 2 point conversions are bad idea except in OT where you are forced to go for it by rule or if you need the 2 points in order to send it to OT.

I didn't make your point about two-point conversions only being a good idea when you need the 2 to force OT (or when forced to by rule). What if (a) you're the road team, (b) you have a tired or inferior defense, or (c) you have a worse kicking game than the other team, or some combination thereof such that you think that your win probability in OT is less than 41.0 percent (or whatever your subjective conversion success rate is)? In that case the rational thing is to go for two.



And I disagree about your idea of trying two-point conversions when up big as a way to practice them in game situations. Most college teams have handful of those conversion/4th-and-short plays that they have practiced to perfection, so the last thing you want to do is give your opponents more game tape of your do-or-die short plays than absolutely necessary.



This leads me to a final point, which is that a new offensive coach and scheme probably hurt because on conversions and 4th-and-short because the team has only had one off-season to work on these plays. Remember the 4th down pass play to Pitta against OU that BYU executed with no huddle because the play was presumably one of their perfected conversion plays--an example of senior leadership having had 3 years to perfect a short TE pass. If only BYU could have done the same on the conversion against Utah.