Duke game thoughts

[TXnumbCAT]

The Bengals went for 2 in middle of the third quarter, down by 5. They converted though. And still lost the game.

 

[CatManTrue]

The Bengals went for 2 in middle of the third quarter, down by 5. They converted though. And still lost the game.

Their coaching staff also blew time management at the end of OT to give the Steelers a chance to win it. Not a great example.

 

[CatManTrue]

The two pony conversion decision was absolutely the correct one. If you make it it’s a 3 point game and a FG ties. If you kick the extra point you still need a TD to take the lead, same as you did by missing the two point conversion. The missed conversion did not factor into the game at all.

Wrong.

 

[phatcat]

I have seen no evidence at all to support this claim.
It would be difficult to do such an analysis scientifically because, unlike kicking, the success of every single 2 point conversion attempt is extremely dependent on the quality of the offense and defense.

But if you have evidence, please share a link or two...

Otherwise, for the sake of discussion...

You make about 90% of your extra point kicks. Thats about 0.9 points per opportunity.
You make some percentage of your two point attempts.
It depends on the quality of your offense versus their defense.
It varies game by game.
If your chance of success on a 2 point attempt is 60%, then in a vacuum you should go for 2 every time.
Similarly, if your chance of success on a 2 point attempt is 30%, then in a vacuum you should kick every time.

The main factor that determines your decision is the points that can be scored afterwards and how that affects your chance of winning. If there are 15 seconds left and the score is tied, you kick the extra point (unless you have a really terrible kicker)

If you are down 5 in the 3rd quarter and there is "plenty of football to be played" you should choose the option that offers the higher expected value (in this case kicking the extra point because our chance of converting the 2 point try was probably around 25-35%).

Viewed differently, its a simple question - which of these is better with 17 minutes to go?
a) 90% chance of down by 4 or 10% chance of down by 5
b) 67% chance of down by 5 or 33% chance of down by 3

From my perspective that makes it clear that we should have kicked the extra point.
Obviously, if we had a 50% chance to get the 2 points, you'd do that.

I feel like we never make 2pt conversions but I'm sure that's just selective memory. All those OT games had to have some 2s

 

[freewillie07]

I feel like we never make 2pt conversions but I'm sure that's just selective memory. All those OT games had to have some 2s

I think having a semi-mobile QB helps. I feel like Thorson made at least a few in his day.

Of course the famous failed conversion that will stick in my memory forever is the 2010 Outback Bowl…

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

I feel like we never make 2pt conversions but I'm sure that's just selective memory. All those OT games had to have some 2s

There are times from NU's history that I was really confident that if we went for two we would convert. Usually it was after we just worked our way down the field, gaining yardage play after play. There are times when the offense is just dominating the defense.

But that wasn't how we scored against Duke. Our drive consisted of 10 plays. We hit a 17 yard pass to start, then ran 8 plays, none of which gained 5 yards, but got a crucial pass interference call, faced a 4th and 3 from the Duke 39, threw a short pass to Hull and he ran for the touchdown.

 

[NUCat320]

Their coaching staff also blew time management at the end of OT to give the Steelers a chance to win it. Not a great example.

I still can’t figure out why they kicked on 3rd down in OT. Didn’t the same unit just miss a PAT?

 

[TXnumbCAT]

I still can’t figure out why they kicked on 3rd down in OT. Didn’t the same unit just miss a PAT?

If it was a bad snap, they could try to kick again on 4th.

 

[NUCat320]

If it was a bad snap, they could try to kick again on 4th.

Right, that’s the typical logic when the kicking game can be reasonably expected to convert. But, given that they had just missed a similarly short chip shot, that reasonable expectation was out the window. Zac Taylor is probably a better coach than me, tho.

 

[ricko654321]

Right, that’s the typical logic when the kicking game can be reasonably expected to convert. But, given that they had just missed a similarly short chip shot, that reasonable expectation was out the window. Zac Taylor is probably a better coach than me, tho.

I'm pretty sure the prior one was blocked rather than missed. So maybe he figured "there's no way we will let that happen twice in a row). But that still is a failure of the overall kicking unit. And incidentally, on the next one have to think the bad snap was a big part of why McPherson hooked it way left. He has a very good long-term track record, it seemed like the rest of the kicking unit was more of the problem yesterday.

What a crazy set of finishes to the 1pm games, fun NFL Sunday. More fun than it was watching the Cats on Saturday...

 

[JournCat]

I think having a semi-mobile QB helps. I feel like Thorson made at least a few in his day.

Of course the famous failed conversion that will stick in my memory forever is the 2010 Outback Bowl…

Fairness dictates we recall the wide receiver pass (from Brewer?) on an earlier 2-pointer that tied the game ...

 

[NUCat320]

I'm pretty sure the prior one was blocked rather than missed. So maybe he figured "there's no way we will let that happen twice in a row). But that still is a failure of the overall kicking unit. And incidentally, on the next one have to think the bad snap was a big part of why McPherson hooked it way left. He has a very good long-term track record, it seemed like the rest of the kicking unit was more of the problem yesterday.

What a crazy set of finishes to the 1pm games, fun NFL Sunday. More fun than it was watching the Cats on Saturday...

Yeah, missed and blocked are still failures. And the block — of a game-winner — was also tied to the snapper.

To tie this back to the Cats, it just seemed like a Scott Frost move to kick rather than to be aggressive. Taylor looked downright ‘Frosty’ when it went wrong.

 

[ricko654321]

Yeah, missed and blocked are still failures. And the block — of a game-winner — was also tied to the snapper.

To tie this back to the Cats, it just seemed like a Scott Frost move to kick rather than to be aggressive. Taylor looked downright ‘Frosty’ when it went wrong.

Yeah for all the use of analytics in the NFL I feel like almost all of those coaches are still stubbornly conservative whenever it seems a FG can win the game. They often don't even really try to get closer to make it an easier FG - once they get to the 25-30 yard line just default to run plays and then try the FG rather than continuing to run the normal offense. I know NFL kickers are good, but they aren't automatic - it's a weird blind spot they seem to have against what is generally an analytics oriented profession now.

 

[TheC]

T

Yeah, missed and blocked are still failures. And the block — of a game-winner — was also tied to the snapper.

To tie this back to the Cats, it just seemed like a Scott Frost move to kick rather than to be aggressive. Taylor looked downright ‘Frosty’ when it went wrong.

The regular long snapper was injured earlier in the game, so that was a backup TE snapping. Now, why you don't have your designated back-up long snapper practice this skill enough times is beyond me. I can see screwing up once because you're nervous, but twice??!!!

The Bengals didn't deserve to win anyway. They turned the ball over about 20 times.