2pt Conversion vs Red Zone Efficiency

[flippy]

Does anyone feel confident we'll convert every 2pt conversion after a TD, but end up with a FG every time we're in the RedZone?

Seems like we're more aggressive and put the ball in Ben's hands on the 2pt conversions, however in the RedZone, we like to go with jumbo packages and try to force the run more.

No idea how the stats compare. Maybe we're just as aggressive in the red zone. But the overall approach and play calling seems to differ. If we could play like the 2pt conversion unit when we're in the RedZone, I think this team could score 50/game against anyone.

[Slapstick]

Deangelo looked pretty good in the RZ on Sunday...

[K Train]

Does anyone feel confident we'll convert every 2pt conversion after a TD, but end up with a FG every time we're in the RedZone?

Seems like we're more aggressive and put the ball in Ben's hands on the 2pt conversions, however in the RedZone, we like to go with jumbo packages and try to force the run more.

No idea how the stats compare. Maybe we're just as aggressive in the red zone. But the overall approach and play calling seems to differ. If we could play like the 2pt conversion unit when we're in the RedZone, I think this team could score 50/game against anyone.

so dramatic

EVERYONE is disappointed settling for a FG but the steelers are 4th is scoring touchdowns in the RZ, not just scoring, scoring touchdowns. Last year they were 20th in walking away with a TD 51% of the time, this year through 2 games theyve walked away with a TD 87.5% of the time.

Ben is 5th in RZ QB rating...

[steelsnis]

Does anyone feel confident we'll convert every 2pt conversion after a TD, but end up with a FG every time we're in the RedZone?

Seems like we're more aggressive and put the ball in Ben's hands on the 2pt conversions, however in the RedZone, we like to go with jumbo packages and try to force the run more.

No idea how the stats compare. Maybe we're just as aggressive in the red zone. But the overall approach and play calling seems to differ. If we could play like the 2pt conversion unit when we're in the RedZone, I think this team could score 50/game against anyone.

Weren't they 5 out of 5 in the Red Zone on Sunday?

[RuthlessBurgher]

Weren't they 5 out of 5 in the Red Zone on Sunday?

Yup, with the exception of Heyward-Bey's TD reception from 35 yards out, the other 5 TD's scored against SF all came from the red zone (2 yard pass to Heath, 7 yard pass to Antonio, and 3 TD runs by DeAngelo from 2, 2, and 1 yard out).

[SteelerOfDeVille]

Last year they were 20th in walking away with a TD 51% of the time, this year through 2 games theyve walked away with a TD 87.5% of the time.

which leads to a more interesting discussion, IMO... For those questioning, this math also supports the 2pt reasoning by the way. Assuming 51% RZ would also translate to only 51% of 2pt conversions, you net you more points by going for 2 every time.

The flaw in this math is, you get 4 downs and possibly a first down and more plays. With a 2pt conversion, you have only 1 play from the 2 yard line to get in.

I've looked at the statistics and am amazed at how many 2 point conversions are made thus far... would make you wonder, "why is 3rd and 2 so hard if you can covert at such a high rate on a 2 pointer?"

[Jooser]

[URL]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/09/24/roethlisberger-says-steelers-will-keep-going-for-two/[/URL]

Roethlisberger says Steelers will keep going for two

Posted by Michael David Smith on September 24, 2015, 6:12 AM EDT

The Steelers went for two after their first two touchdowns to jump out to a 16-3 lead on Sunday, an unheard of approach in an NFL where coaches only go for two when they need the points late in games. Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger says they won’t change that approach.

“Oh, we’re going to keep doing it,” Roethlisberger said, via ESPN. “We don’t practice it this much to not do it. We practice it every single day. . . . I tried to tell you guys early on that we would do it, and I think you guys kind of didn’t quite believe it. But it’s something we feel comfortable with.”

The Steelers’ approach is smart: They’re 3-for-3 on two-point conversions while kicker Josh Scobee is 4-for-5 on one-point kicks. As long as they’re averaging 2.0 points per two-point conversion attempt and 0.8 points per one-point kick attempt, they’d be foolish not to keep going for two early in games.

The big question is why the Steelers are the only team going for two early in games. Every team should at least be thinking about going for two as the default approach after a touchdown, and for a team with a good goal line offense and/or a shaky kicker, going for two is the clearly superior choice. The Steelers should keep going for two, and other teams should follow suit.

[K Train]

which leads to a more interesting discussion, IMO... For those questioning, this math also supports the 2pt reasoning by the way. Assuming 51% RZ would also translate to only 51% of 2pt conversions, you net you more points by going for 2 every time.

The flaw in this math is, you get 4 downs and possibly a first down and more plays. With a 2pt conversion, you have only 1 play from the 2 yard line to get in.

I've looked at the statistics and am amazed at how many 2 point conversions are made thus far... would make you wonder, "why is 3rd and 2 so hard if you can covert at such a high rate on a 2 pointer?"

I think its all mental, on third and two you like to think you know what the team will do as a defense. On a 2 point conversion try you JUST gave up a TD, the offense can run or pass and you have no idea its like a fresh start....id bet the vast majority of 3rd and 2 are run plays, while the majority of 2 point plays are pass plays.

Also the majority of 3rd and 2 plays arent going to come at the 2 yard line, when you are backed up against the endzone it is true that the windows are tighter for the offense but the defense has way less margin for error as well. Its a big mistake to go all out vs the run or bracket the endzone it really must be frustrating to defend.

Is covering slants, outs, screens, flats, runs any different than any other play? No not really, but if you guess wrong chances are you are giving up 2 points.

Im glad they will keep doing it, im sure others will follow.

[RuthlessBurgher]

One difference is when you are down at the goal line, you can reach out with the ball and as soon as any part of it breaks the plane, then the play is over...conversion successful. If you are in the middle of the field on 3rd and 2, and try to reach out with the ball for the first down marker, the play doesn't end as soon as you cross that line...defenders can knock that ball loose until you are down by contact.