In the NFL, what is the percentage of succesful 2-point conversions per attempt? It seems to me that it’s close to 50%, but that’s just a WAG on my part. If it’s greater than 50%, then wouldn’t it make more sense for a team to always go for 2, since they would score more points in the long run that way?
Well, I can’t find the statistics, but a PAT is almost always a given. The record for consecutive PATs is 344 by Elam, when he missed the first one in the game against the Colts on Sunday Night Football a couple weeks ago in Denver. I think, that most coaches would rather take the extra point, as that is what everyone else does, than play fast and loose with trying to get a few extra points that might or might not break a game.
If you ever watched the XFL, you saw what it was like to have no kicked pats. Honestly, I didn’t really like it, as conversions were rare.
A recent sports show said the success rate has been increasing and is up to around 45%.
I haven’t seen any recent stats but in the early days about 1 in 3 were successful. Thus it is unwise unless it is late in the game. Coaches have tables that tell them when to try it. For example, if there is one minute left and you were 8 points behind and score a TD, it is a no-brainer. On the other hand, if you were 9 points behind, it would be stupid, since your only hope is to get the ball back somehow, onside kick or use up your TOs and you are clearly much better being 2 points behind than 3, while there is no practical difference between being behind by 1 or by 2. If you were 10 points behind and scored, it is more problematic, but my instinct is that it is better to take your point and pray.
Also a tie is better than a loss. Many scenarios play out for a tie and hope to win rather than play for the win and maybe loose.
Since there is overtime, there is almost no reason to play for a win instead of a tie.
The only reason I could think for going for a win instead of a tie with a 2-pointer in the NFL would be if the coach felt his defense had suffered too many injuries and wouldn’t be able to stop the other team in an extra period.
John Clayton of ESPN.com reports that coming into today’s games, NFL teams converted 45.9% of all 2 point conversions while kicks were converted at a 98% rate.
The full article has some interesting thoughts on theories of when to go for 2.
This brings a related question to my mind: the coin flip for first overtime posesstion seems incredibly unfair to me; what are the odds of winning a game if you win the first overtime posession?
I believe, historically, the odds of winning an overtime game have been pretty close to 50% if you win the coin toss, but this year it’s gone up to 60%.
Thanks for the article, BobT, though I disagree with some of the author’s arguments (How was Fassel to know that the Titans were going to come back from a 12-point deficit in the 4th quarter, for example). By those numbers, teams are better off going for 1 point the majority of the time. But by my estimation, if the 2-point conversion rate climbs to 49.35%, then they would break even in the long run.
From this article, “Coming into the 2001 season, in 73 percent of NFL overtime games each side had at least one possession, while a narrow 51 percent of victories went to the team winning the OT coin toss.” While the percentage may be higher this season, there haven’t been nearly enough OT games for that to be statistically significant, so don’t count on that trend continuing.
For the 2-point conversion question: given the percentages, it’s best to kick the PAT until the 4th. Since you just don’t know who’s going to score what before then, it’s not worth going for 2 earlier. Late in the 4th, it’s smart to go for 2 if the touchdown leaves you down 2, 5, or 9, and maybe 12 or 18. Earlier in the 4th, you might go for 2 on these scores (there might be a couple others as well), depending on how much time is left & how much (and what kinds of) scoring seems likely. The coaches all have charts that say something like this. When they make a 2-point conversion decision that ends up possibly costing them the game, they usually blame the chart.