ONCE AGAIN.....THE 2 POINT CONVERSION HAS RUINED FOOTBALL

@jimc0911

 You whine about this every time it happens. Pretty simple. Stop watching and change the channel. It's not going away because you don't like it.

oops...............

YOU WHINE ABOUT THIS EVERY TIME IT HAPPENS. PRETTY SIMPLE. STOP WATCHING AND CHANGE THE CHANNEL. IT'S NOT GOING AWAY BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE IT. 

Fair enough.

Even though I disagree on your +200, at least you answered the question.

@ArtSchlichterJr

 At home you kick it , on the road you go for the W. That’s the 1 thing you must not know or forgot while you were trying to be a douche 

Regular season is different than playoffs.

It is not generally worth the extra wear and tear on the body to play for OT in a regular season game.  Smart coaches realize this and go for 2.

IT WAS 100% A STUPID DECISION. 

HOME/ROAD HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. THAT IS AN ANTIQUATED VIEWPOINT FROM BACK WHEN THERE WAS NO OVERTIME IN COLLEGE FOOTBALL.

YOU KICK THE EXTRA POINT AND GO TO OVERTIME. IF IT WERE A SMART DECISION, IT WOULD BE BEING DONE THE MAJORITY OF THE TIME IN THAT EXACT SITUATION.

@carl42

 THE SAME COACH HAS DONE IT THE PAST 2 WEEKS. DUMB CALL BOTH TIMES. 

Very interesting way of wording it.    I do not know if it is the "ONLY PLAY" or if it is "100%" the choice.  But if you are making the assumption that if you make the conversion the game is over, it is a very good choice.  You are on the road with your backup QB against an elite QB.  Practice all week for one play.  Get off the bus then run one play with your offense and never let Rodgers run a single play and go home.  Of course, the guy brings up a good point about the time left on the clock and Rodgers needing only a FG.  But like the other guy said they had stopped Rodgers last couple of times.

But, if you are a huge dog on the road your chances over the course of 60 minutes might well be way worse than converting on a single play.  But risky because you are not getting this opportunity 100 times.  This is a one time deal that makes you look good or bad.  For sure, a players-coach type decision.  Somewhat akin to making sure you receive the ball in OT if you win the coin toss in NFL but not in NCAA.

The only thing that always concerns me is why teams do not have a solid play ready to go for this situation or 4th and 1s, etc.  So , many of the plays just look unpracticed or flat out wrong calls.  Of course, the game dynamics and defense play a part in this.  But if your mindset one or two drives ahead -- or even, before the game -- is to go for 2 in this situation, then be more prepared. 

Last I recall the odds I saw were in the neighborhood of -150 running, +125 passing, and +105 period.  But either way the backlash is usually not worth it if you do not make it.  It has to be an established, successful coach that can get away with doing this.  Especially, like the one guy said, if you do it in two games and miss it -- then it looks like you cost yourself a playoff spot.  Because the public will NOT know if you would have won IF you did go to OT at all.

At any rate -- interesting way of wording it by you. 

@jimc0911

 Then contact the Baltimore organization vs whining about it here. Tell them how you feel. I am sure they will listen to you

I still think the chance of a TIE in OT is largely being ignored.

A tie would have helped the Ravens.

The line for converting the 2pt would be around -140 i think

Maybe, maybe not.  The game dynamics come into play as well.  Momentum, the opponent surprised at the time that you are risking the game by not taking your chances in OT, etc.  The point may be made that if you leave it a tie an elite QB, at home, can relax knowing he only needs a FG -- Or he can go to OT and have a better chance than the other inexperienced QB for sure. 

Or, if the elite QB is down, but now KNOWING he HAS to have a FG to WIN now and not ever going to even get a chance in OT.  Maybe that elite QB will still feel the pressure and not convert a drive.  The case can easily be made that this is NOT the situation you want Rodgers to be in AND I am sure Harbaugh is well aware of this.

I am not saying it is a clear-cut-and-dry decision OR that the decision is the same each time.  I am simply saying the case could be made that you should go for 2 in this particular spot.  I understand going for the extra point as well.  You do have possibly the best kicker, ever, yourself.  But the momentum had clearly changed AND why put your defense in a spot to have to stop Rodgers again.  I think even the defensive players would be okay with going for 2 in this spot -- they had done better than expected to get them back in the game.  Why put them in that situation, yet again.

I do not know if the LINE is that good AND it depends on run or pass.  But should be much closer to even just for the play itself.  Granted, I haven't looked lately.  But I would be very surprised if it had changed that much in a few year's time.

You are pretty sure of this line?

@Raiders22

 He is just speculating.

But I asked the question to tell me the line to prove a point.

It is not "crazy" or "stupid" to go for 2.  Every answer has been around the 50% mark.  Lots of folks have results bias around here.

@vanzack

 That is what makes for the discussion I think.  Even the opinions are fairly evenly spread.  Pretty sure I looked up the implied odds with current % of making the 2 pt play at that time and the odds were around what I posted.  So, it makes it much make of a 50-50 play. 

@Raiders22

 RAVENS WERE AT HOME. HOME/ ROAD LIKE I SAID SHOULD NOT MATTER. IT WAS A BAD FOOTBALL DECISION. IT'S ALWAYS A 50/50 OUTCOME, YOU CONVERT IT OR YOU DON'T. THE DIFFERENCE IS, IF YOU DON'T CONVERT, YOU LOSE THE GAME. 

FOR THE SITUATION THEY WERE IN, IT WAS A TERRIBLE DECISION.

YOU ARE TELLING YOUR TEAM WE HAVE TO PUT IT IN THE END ZONE TWICE ON THE SAME DRIVE. 

@jimc0911

 You are correct they were at home -- I did not differentiate that well enough.  I was trying to address the guy that said that about the NCAA.  It might come into play more if you are a road dog if you have the momentum or it might be better if you are a home dog and 'feel' you have the momentum.  I just do not think in the NFL that matters as much as folks think it does. 

I am not saying you are flat out wrong.  I am just saying I can see the support for it.  It is not like they needed two drives to win.  They needed one more short yardage play to MAYBE win.

I would just hate to put my defense in the position of having to stop Rodgers a third time in a row. 

However, you COULD make the case that YOUR defense had the 'momentum'  AND let them do it again.

I just can see both sides.

I get some folks say never try to win it there.

An example that is similar to this and the feel for the game, momentum and those sorts of things was the Patriots and Colts game some years back.

I do not recall the complete details.  Belichick decided to go for it on his own 40 or so on 4th and 2 with little time left.  He decided on this because Manning had got hot in the second half and did not want to give the ball back to him.

So, he decided to try to win the game right there.  It did not work out.  But the analytics showed in that situation he was correct by a very small margin to try it.

My main point is that even if you are correct in trying BUT do not make it -- THAT is all folks are going to remember. 

I think you have to admire that somewhat.

@vanzack

 NFL Teams convert 49% of 2 pt tries

The line would be +102

Harbaugh should have ran the ball as The conversion rate is closer to 60% when teams run

Ravens should have kicked the field goal on the very first drive!!!

Yes.  That’s about what I posted and remembered.  

Hopefully you looked it up and verified it. 

But the question is always will they expect you to run with an inexperienced QB and this time be more ready for a run?

A lot goes into this back and forth during a game.  

Isn't there some weird CFL rule where  the team kicking off can get a point or 2 ?

@Raiders22

 Yes, verified.

The 5 year average on all running plays over 2 yards is about 65%.

I agree with your assessment.

I like the call to go for it, i just believe that a running play would have been alot better than the actual play called.

Especially since he threw to Andrews. Th Ravens are the #1 or #2 rush offense, Huntley is athletic, and Green Bat=y defense was a bit winded. I think i prefer the run.

Rookie qb is good point, i would like to see his decision making with ball in hands, rather than a low % pass play. He was throwing alot better last night between number, than to outside.

Good discussion