I was just wondering why it is that Hamilton never makes a good decision as to when to go for the 2 point convert. By going for the single, it ment that at the end of the game all Edmonton needed was a FG to win.
The coaches need a chart telling them when to go for it because they always make the wrong decisions.
The American Football version of "The Chart" for two-point conversions can be found here:
My rule of thumb is that the coach should go for a two-point conversion whenever it reduces the number of possessions necessary to tie the game if behind. You start "chasing the points" thinking in the fourth quarter, IMHO, so I would have gone for the 2-pointer in that instance on Saturday.
I must have had my TV upside down the whole game
I once asked Al Bruno (back in the day) why not go for 2 points as a rule after every TD?
He thought that it might be a good idea in the long run, and it would help the short yardage team by having more reps doing it...but overall he thought it was a little too radical.
I wonder if there is a 2 point conversion stat league or even team wide?
If it is over 50% successful you know the math!
that would not happen,they would still try longer ones sometimes and be short. With the number of punt and kickoff returns in a game, a few less FG returns would not be noticed much, let alone missed. There is not that many returns per game anyhow. Many are conceded for a single, and many others dont get very far. I would not be much of a loss, compared to the gains.
“Conversions were called “Action Points” and could only be scored via a run or pass play (as opposed to by kick as in other football leagues), and were worth one point. The ball was placed on the five yard line for an Action Point. The XFL employed a similar rule 27 years later.”