Was Ferentz asked about timing of 2 point Conversion?

[MelroseHawkins]

People seem to take the 2 point make after a second td for granted. They point out that missing the first one made it impossible to win but for some reason don't care that missing the second one would make it impossible to win too. They just wanted hope for a few more seconds of gametime I guess.

One of the rare times I'm going to have to disagree with you. I have a response with my logic above.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

But it doesn't increase odds to take the 98% before the 47% shot. You have to chase 15 points no matter what. People keep saying there wasnt time for 2 possessions but there were.

Because you completely shoot yourself in the foot and lose all chance going for the 2 first and not making it. Then the 1 minute and seconds left don't come into play at all as there is no chance at all left. At least if you kick the Pt first, you still have the 1 min and seconds left to have miraculous plays happen.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

If you kick the pat and miss the 2 points on the second td, you still need another onside kick. You need a 2 point conversion either way, and not sure kicking the pat first increases your odds of winning. The Hawks needed 15 to tie so not sure it matters which order you do it in.. People are making too much of this IMO.

Even if you can convince me that this does matter, there are bigger reasons why Iowa lost this game.

Pretty sure nobody is thinking in that scenario of needing a 2nd onside kick to win. Wouldn't be enough time on the clock. I'm sure most are thinking just give yourself a chance to convert the 2pt conversion and take your chances in overtime. That has to be what the coaches are thinking. Just try to find a way to tie it up before the end of regulation.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

So even using that angle, with all of the mishaps in that game and the season going for 2 points when down 9 points is the best you've got?

no, kelley, it is under the umbrella of what going for 2 when we did, represents, can you now understand the other issues surrounding the program. Understand?

 

[MelroseHawkins]

ss, my point is that going for 2 when we did is a representation of what is wrong with this program. yes, there are many things that need to be fixed in the program. I am not assigning a priority list of items; I am saying that this event is an insight to the ills of our program; namely, a modern day incompetence.

This is what I came away with as well. It's more disturbing to me that the coaches don't understand the logic or do the correct math. Coaches are responsible to put the players in position to succeed. They don't do that and didn't give their players the chance with this play call for the best % to succeed.

 

[Calculator]

I don't care about the 2 pt conversion. I want the coordinators to be available for post game pressers. Why they throw Nate Stanley under the bus to explain for that shit show is beyond me.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

So even using that angle, with all of the mishaps in that game and the season going for 2 points when down 9 points is the best you've got?

No, it's just another stupid F'ing coaching decision they biffed on.

KF is known for being so calculated and playing to the odds. This is why it doesn't make sense.

 

[mopkins]

its simple really...if you get an onside kick with 1 minute left would you rather be down 8 points or 9 points?

You always kick the PAT first....always

 

[MelroseHawkins]

My point is who cares if there is one minute left when you know your fate instead of 1 second. At least if you know your fate with 1 minute left, you have a chance to change your fate with a miracle. If you find out your fate with 1 second left, you are done for sure.

Our fate that game was missing a 2 point conversion. You can't change that fate by saying "I know we missed it that time but maybe we would have made it the next time had we just waited longer".

Competent coaches use every second of the clock available to try to win, football, basketball or whatever. If there is a chance, you use everything you have at your disposal including all seconds of a clock.

This showed incompetence, especially when a game could have been tied, even with the slimmest of chances. It is the mind frame of it all. I think most can agree that chances were slim at best, but college coaches making this $$$$ should play to win the game and use all seconds of the clock. I think that is my and Ardvarka's point above.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

We needed 15 points, so two scores including an extra point and a two point conversion. There is no difference mathematically at least between going for two on the 1st or 2nd TD. If you missed the 2 on the 2nd TD same result.

Nobody's argument is that it is mathematically different.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

stunning, PC. just stunning.

I thought the same thing. He's usually pretty objective and spot on. I think he's been reading too many of JoshBrown's poll questions.

Drop mic.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

I haven't watched the Iowa Football show on Sunday nights since the 2015 season. Why listen to two drips spin fake positives and act like nothing is wrong with the program.

I don't know why, but Gary Dolphin bugs the _ell out of me for some reason.

 

[EstronHawkKing]

I don't know why, but Gary Dolphin bugs the _ell out of me for some reason.

His lisp absolutely drives me up the wall, I try my best to never listen to him. He's a UofI puppet.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

its simple really...if you get an onside kick with 1 minute left would you rather be down 8 points or 9 points?

You always kick the PAT first....always

Agree. They had a minute left, crazier shit has happened. Nobody watched the Ohio St. game weeks ago??????

 

[MelroseHawkins]

His lisp absolutely drives me up the wall, I try my best to never listen to him. He's a UofI puppet.

This is probably it with me. I'm sure he's a nice guy and I don't have any personal reasons against him.

If there is one guy who pees on you and tells you it's just raining, it's him, pertaining to anything Iowa.

 

[PCHawk]

I had this argument with my 10 yr old son. If you kick the Pt, you at least give yourself a chance to with whatever time was left, albeit very slim. Going for 2 first and not making it has you lose that slim chance.

If the team were able to get an onside and miraculously score, maybe momentum and getting the D on their heals could be an advantage scoring the 2 pt conversion to tie. A team would be pretty pumped by then if that scenario played out.

By going for the 2 first and not making it, you give up any slim shot and pretty much give the game away with time left on the clock.

Your second paragraph is good and I've admitted that that part plays a factor. Your first paragraph is why I'm debating this whole thing. You are already concluding there is a zero percent chance at the first try because you have hindsight of knowing the outcome. Your last scenario says "going for two first and not making it has you lose that slim chamce". The part you aren't accounting for is going for 2 the second time and not making it also takes away that slim chance. It just takes it away a little later.

 

[PCHawk]

The 2 point conversion is such a huge part of the equation. You can't start the equation after the attempt and compare it to the odds before the attempt. By doing that, it would be by far the right choice if you make the first one. But that's not true either. It's extremely close either way. Way too close to call stupid.

 

[DJI9424]

My understanding of KF's decision-making is that he plays the long established percentages, that's why I cannot understand why he went for 2 on the first score. There's really nothing to think about, you need at least two touchdown scores to tie or win the game, so once you score the first TD, you have to kick the extra point in order to keep the 1 possession TD (with 2 point conversion) in play.

The percentage of successfully kicking the extra point are roughly 98%, the percentage of the 2 point conversion cannot be much better than 50%, in fact, it may even be below 50%. So, if you're the historical percentage guy, you kick the point after the first TD and live to play for the onside kick recovery and a one possession game.

But when I factor in KF's historical game management decisions, I can explain why he did it, i.e. it was just another poor game management decision. I hope he wrote a note to himself in his little notebook, that will help him remember what to do in the event this same scenario occurs in the future. (sigh)

 

[Joshbrown]

I don't care about the 2 pt conversion. I want the coordinators to be available for post game pressers. Why they throw Nate Stanley under the bus to explain for that shit show is beyond me.

KF considered it but then a waterboy passing by said, "But what if his fist misses the wall and hits a reporter's face?"

 

[David79]

You always go for the two point conversion when down 15 and you score a TD. Odds are more in your favor of winning the game. There is a reason why coaches fail to go for 2 in this situation, and why smart fans also think it’s correct to take the safe points. It’s because they’re focused on keeping their hope alive as long as possible.