[RogerGoodellSucks]

http://profootballta...nse-with-tebow/

Quote

Jets coach Rex Ryan can’t remember where he first heard it, but after his team acquired Tim Tebow, Ryan heard an idea he found intriguing: Someone suggested that Tebow is such a good goal-line quarterback, as both a runner and a passer, that the Jets ought to go for two after every touchdown“I don’t know where it came from but they were like, ‘They ought to go for two every time this year.’ That might make sense,” Ryan said.

Intrigued by the notion, Ryan gave it some thought. He said that it’s not realistic to simply do away with the one-point extra point, but it is realistic to think the Jets can feel much more confident than most teams when they go for two, thanks to Tebow.

“Now, we’re not going to, I can tell you that right now, but I can understand where the guy’s coming from, whoever came up with that, because it’s 11-on-11 football and he’s a 250-pound man who’s running downhill at you, or throwing. That’s the other thing. It’s not just that he can run it but he can throw it as well,” Ryan said.

Obviously, no team is ever going to go for two after every touchdown. There are certain game situations when having a nearly 100 percent chance of making a one-point extra point is a much safer bet than going for two. But if there’s a team that has good enough personnel for goal-line situations that it believes it can convert a two-point conversion more than 50 percent of the time, then that team should go for two most of the time.

So far, there’s never been a team that took that approach: The one-point conversion is the default choice for every team. But maybe Ryan can be persuaded to use Tebow on two-point conversions even when the “chart” says he should kick. Ryan might just be enamored enough with Tebow’s skills to defy conventional wisdom, and regularly go for two.

[RazorStar]

If you score three touchdowns a game, and you make 2 out of every 3 conversions, that's an extra point a game. Might be a small difference, but when you're a big bruising defensive minded team, that one point could be all the difference you need.

[BC]

How'd I know this would be another fucking Tebow thread

[blotsfan]

I do think teams should go for two more often than they do. I don't know the exact percentage or perfect formula to figure it out, but I know right now they play it too safe.

[RazorStar]

Right now, the success rate for a two point conversion is about 48%, while an extra point succeeds 99% of the time. If teams ran for the two point conversion a bit more, it's likely the percentages would be higher.

[oochymp]

BC, on 02 August 2012 - 11:15 PM, said:

How'd I know this would be another fucking Tebow thread

I don't know, was it the fact that his name is in the title that gave it away?

as for the substance of the thread, I really don't know that the percentage would go up if teams went for it more, it might initially, but I think defenses would eventually start game planning for it. The only reason you might see the overall average go up would be selection bias: there's always going to be teams that are better and teams that are worse in any aspect of the game, but unlike most aspects of the game teams that are bad at two point conversions have a way to avoid them, kick the field goal. So you'd have teams that are good at two point conversions going for it more while teams that are bad at them sticking with the field goals and taking their (relatively) easy point.