Maybe we should be going for 2
Of a total 8 attempts we have converted 6 times(League Best) 75%
Did you notice last year and now this year Calgary makes more two point convert attempts than any other team.
I think the Stamps use the two point convert to fine tune their offence ,instead of just kicking a convert why not practice a play under pressure.Makes them a better team .Good attitude I think.
I would like to see us go for some more practice under pressure and try some two pointers.What do we have to lose ,a point,but we gain experience and score every second or third time?Lets go for it.
BC has more attempts at 2 point conversions between Lulay and Jennings
The two best Western teams go for two point conversions ,figures Wally Buono would use this as a practice under pressure to get better as Dave Dickenson does as well .
Come on Kent ,join the two pointers practice squad!
Or, maybe he could start with just the times when it's obvious that a 2-pt. attempt should be tried. The most recent example, of a few or several bad convert decisions he's made, was in the recent Montreal game, late 2nd QTR, trailing 9-1 and the Cats get a TD. So then, it was 9-7 and they kicked the convert. Dumb! A tied score is much better than being behind by 1. And, being behind by 2 really isn't significant compared to being behind by 1.
That's good logic and helps a coach keep their job.
I still like what the two western teams are doing ,just go for it and get better as the season progresses.
In the fourth quarter ,then do the math and see what you need ,but I like the aggressive approach early in the game and our O improves under pressure in the Red Zone and we could use that .
Another example of Hamilton making the wrong conversion choice occurred late in the home loss to Calgary:
Again, this didn't change the game or become significant but the choice made, makes no sense. With just over 3 mins. remaining in the game Masoli runs in for a TD, making the score CAL 29 HAM 15. So, following the convert play, the Cats could be down 14, 13 or 12. Considering the generally accepted thought among coaches, even if untrue, that success is more likely on a 1 pt. kick than a 2 pt. play, the obvious choice in that situation was to kick. They chose, and succeeded on, the 2 pt. option, leaving them behind by 12. Particularly at that point in the game, there is no advantage to being 12 points behind compared to being 13 back. Again, a small insignificant situation, but this is professional sport and such mistakes shouldn't be made by experienced, professional coaches.
Wow. Now people are complaining when the team scores points...