can u explain?

why did the Panthers go for 2 when they could have been with in a touch down yes i lost my over bet i would have pushed had they kicked the extra point at that time i wasnt that worried because there was like 5 minutes left to get at least a point but that doesnt matter i lost ok but you tell me the logic in going for 2 to get to be 6 down you were never going to get the ball back 2 times to kick 2 field goals too tie it been doing this a long time and i may be out of the loop or this game has gone to sht

You are basically trying to give yourself a slightly better chance to WIN the game on 2 drives and 1 or 2 defensive stops.  Instead of driving to TIE it on those 2 drives and needing at least 1 more drive in OT on the road, along with at least 1, and likely 2, more defensive stops in OT to WIN.

The old age of trying to win it right away on the road instead of playing to win it in OT plays a part as well.

The issue is the game flow, momentum, personnel, your performance on twos in the past, home field, etc.

There are many links that go over the math in detail in these situation and I have broken it down before in a few places.

This link explains it a bit from a broad outlook:

https://heavy.com/sports/nfl/carolina-panthers/why-panthers-went-for-2-down-8-packers-controversial-decision/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

I am not saying I agree with it always -- I am just saying what the reasoning is.

you don’t believe this. This is called rationalization. That decision was silly, dumb and uncharacteristic of winning football. Stop trying to act like it’s normal 

It's the new norm now with analytics. Just like how they go for it on 4th way more now. Hell they rather kick a field goal instead of trying to score in the redzone if they're down 10. Shit is stupid to me imo. Just gameplan to rig the game

What do I not believe?

The math or the reasons they say it is better long term to result in a positive result?

It doesn't matter if I believe it or not.  The math is the math.

I am not trying to say it is 'normal'.  

The guy just asked the reason why they went for 2 and I explained why -- I did not say I agreed with.  I just said I understand the math behind it and why teams do this nowadays.

Correct.  But it is all situational.

I have always said that teams should kick the FG as SOON as possible!!

Look at how often teams get within reasonable TD range and spend all of their time and timeouts trying to score a TD.

TIME is so much more valuable at the end of the game and so are TIMEOUTS.

But look at how many times teams go for it on 4th and do NOT get it -- we remember those.

But do we remember the times when they DO get it.

Etc., etc.

either manipulation or just stupid woke coaching.  Nowadays, they have more excuses for the stupid decisions they make.

These are things that I have seen in a lot of games (now more than ever) that have always had me go........hmmm 

.

..

@Raiders22

 I think it’s better to go for it on the last TD because you have momentum. But I don’t coach in the nfl.  Canales is one of the worst coaches in the NFL. Analytics this or that, he shouldn’t be a head coach. He does this shit all the time. His team sucks. He makes boneheaded decisions early in games that cost him late in games. 

@clark17

The over was 46.5... there's your answer. They aren't even hiding it anymore because they know the sheeple too stupid. I mean the sheeple did take a death jab for a fake virus.

@Raiders22

@NONEED4LUCK

You can make that point and I understand it.

But the way it works out it is better to go for it the first time.  I know it may seem counterintuitive but it works out better over time to go for it the first time.

Assuming even teams then if you kick both times and go to OT you have a 50% chance to win.

Obviously, if you are a big underdog or have been playing that game very poorly you might want to try for the win in regulation and not risk a 'better' tam or one that is playing 'better' to beat you there.  Then there is the case for going for it on the road, injuries, short week, etc.

So, when do you go for it is the key.  Assuming all things are even by the numbers it is 50/50 if you go for the 2-point conversion.

So, if you go for it the first time and make it -- you win the game because you obviously kick the PAT on the next TD.  So, 50% of the time you win in regulation.

If you miss it then you have to go for it the second time.  So, you lose in regulation 25% of the time.

It is all about MAXIMIZING any winning possibility you have and MINIMIZING any losing possibility. 

So, if you are giving yourself TWICE the chance to win in regulation by going for it.  Then mathematically, you should go for it.

That must aside other variables, like team strength, injuries, etc.

Because if you have the 'better' team then you should -- in theory -- be okay going to OT.  Because it gives you a longer timeframe for you strength to win out.

For example, if a 'better' team does not score first it is not that big of a deal to them because they have a whole game left for their 'betterness' to win out.

But a weaker team certainly has to take advantage to maximize their chances at every opportunity.

The reason for going for it on the first basically boils down to you have DECIDED when you want to win the game and what give you the best mathematical chance to do it.

It does NOT mean it is the best because of game flow OR that on the 2nd TD you have the defense scrambling now -- it takes all of that out of it.  Because your read on the game situation might be wrong -- the math is never wrong and does not care about the other stuff.  If you wait unit the 2nd TD the DEFENSE now KNOWS what they NEED to do to WIN the game.

The early strategy also gives you a chance to win in regulation, rather than merely force overtime.

The fundamental principle: When you're down 14, don't wait until the final touchdown to discover whether you need one or two points. Find out after the first touchdown so you can plan the second scoring sequence accordingly.

That's why analytics generally favor going for 2 after the first of two touchdowns.

But you are correct that each game might be best to decide how to do it on a case by case basis.

BUT if you FAIL you better be able to answer why you chose that option in the press conference.

@Raider4life22

I get all of that.  I am not saying I agree with it.  I am simply pointing out that is what the analytics say is the best longterm way to play it out.  Just because it does not work out one time does not mean it will not work out to your advantage if you could play it the same way 100 times.

I like the old way where you at least give your team a chance by going to OT and telling you team you trust them to win it in OT.

BUT the game is changing and I understand it.

To keep the game under 47. This same exact thing happened with Dal vs TB a few weeks ago, the cowboys failed a 2 point conversion and the total stayed under by 1/2 point