![]() |
Chiefs Pats scoring discussion.
After Mathieu's pick 6 last night,should Andy have went for 2? They were up 15, a 2 point conversion puts you up 3 scores and essentially ends the game.
|
Kick it.
2 TDs AND 2 2-Point Conversions would be extremely difficult for any offense, let alone that Patriots offense. |
Kick. If your defense gives up two TD’s and two 2pt conversions in the 4th quarter to a Hoyer/Stidham led team, **** you anyway
|
I get kicking it, but you have your best unit being your offense with a chance to end the game.
If you don't get it, you're still up 15. |
Kick it but kick it from 55 since Butker can make consecutive kicks through the uprights on kickoffs but can’t make extra points. A reason I believe it’s Townsends fault
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
If the Patriots don’t convert BOTH 2-point conversions, then it becomes a 3 possession game.
I give the Chiefs a 70% chance of converting for 2. I also give them a 95% chance of making the PAT. I give the Patriots about a 30% chance of converting for 2. So if the Chiefs kick, we have a 95% chance of the margin being 16. 30% x 30% is 9%, which is New England’s chances of tying (and that assumes they can score 2 unanswered TDs). The inverse is a 91% chance that the game becomes 3 possessions. Multiply that by 95% and you get an 86.45% of a 3 possession game, because we kicked the PAT. I’ll take the 86.45% chance over the 70% chance. There are absolutely ZERO flaws in my logic. |
Find me stats on how many teams in the history of football have scored two touchdowns and converted two 2 point conversions in a row. I'll wait.
|
Quote:
|
If it were up to me I'd absolutely go for the 2 point conversion. In that situation the reward outweighs the risk.
|
Don't chase points. You only go for two if youve lost all faith in Butker.
|
The Chiefs should go for 2 every time.
|
Let's assume that we make 48 percent of 2-point conversions (league average - can't find the Chiefs' percentage) and 94 percent of extra points (Butker's historic average).
If you go for the 2-point play, there's a ... 48 percent chance that the bad guys will need 2 TDs and EPs and an FG to tie it. (And change 1 EP to a 2-point play to win it.) 52 percent chance that the bad guys will need 2 TDs, 1 EP and 1 2-point play to tie it. (And change 1 EP to a 2-point play to win it.) If you go for the 1-point play, there's a 94 percent change that the bad guys will need 2 TDs and 2 2-point plays to tie it. (And another score to win it.) 6 percent chance that the bad guys will need will need 2 TDs, 1 EP and 1 2-point play to tie it. (And change 1 EP to a 2-point play to win it.) By kicking it, you're massively decreasing the likelihood that 2 TDs, 1 EP and 1 2-point play will make a difference. You're requiring them to get 2 2-point plays after touchdowns, which in combination will happen only 23 percent of the time even if they get the touchdowns. You're giving yourself a 48 percent chance of completely putting the game out of reach with a 3-score differential, but if they can score two touchdowns they now have a 45 percent chance of tying it up rather than 23 percent chance, and they could also go for the win in that case. In summary, I guess it depends on how likely you think it is that they can score two touchdowns, because these tradeoffs are purely a matter of taste. Kicking it nearly guarantees a lot of difficulty, while going for 2 could effectively end the game but leaves a small window of opportunity for the bad guys. I might change my vote to kicking it. |
The Chiefs 2 point conversion rate was 50% in 2018, 50% in 2019, and so far in 2020 is 100%.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.