The two-point conversion fail

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

A few comments about the 2-point conversion fail:

 

1) McKenzie was taking a lot of grief after the game for going to the corner, as opposed to Scooting upfield and kind of diving in. There is no chance for him to do it on this play. He had no angle other than the corner.

 

2) if you want to blame someone, blame Gilliam. Gilliam blocked the safety, but tried to just blow him up, as opposed to engaging him in a block. The safety just bounced off of him, and made it to the corner to get McKenzie.

 

3) Broader issue. I know the math said to go for 2, but in a game when you aren’t playing your best, you are playing an inferior opponent, and there is a full quarter and a half, why go for two? I would argue that you have to just keep accumulating points. 
 

the 2-point play is at 9-minute mark here:

 

 

 

[Process]

McDermott is aggressive. I love it and wouldn't want it any other way. Players needs to execute. Dorsey needs to call better plays. Plays are there to be made.

[Airseven]

No reason to go for 2 in that spot in the 3rd quarter. Especially a team that can't execute in short yardage.

[atlbillsfan1975]

I like the call, like the play, would like to see Hines get a shot at that play. 

Edited November 22, 2022 by atlbillsfan1975

[FireChans]

7 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

A few comments about the 2-point conversion fail:

 

1) McKenzie was taking a lot of grief after the game for going to the corner, as opposed to Scooting upfield and kind of diving in. There is no chance for him to do it on this play. He had no angle other than the corner.

 

2) if you want to blame someone, blame Gilliam. Gilliam blocked the safety, but tried to just blow him up, as opposed to engaging him in a block. The safety just bounced off of him, and made it to the corner to get McKenzie.

 

3) Broader issue. I know the math said to go for 2, but in a game when you aren’t playing your best, you are playing an inferior opponent, and there is a full quarter and a half, why go for two? I would argue that you have to just keep accumulating points. 
 

the 2-point play is at 9-minute mark here:

 

 

 

You’re wrong. The math is the math for a reason in a situation like that. 
 

Good decision. Decent playcall. Players didn’t execute. Oh well. 

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

13 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

A few comments about the 2-point conversion fail:

 

1) McKenzie was taking a lot of grief after the game for going to the corner, as opposed to Scooting upfield and kind of diving in. There is no chance for him to do it on this play. He had no angle other than the corner.

 

2) if you want to blame someone, blame Gilliam. Gilliam blocked the safety, but tried to just blow him up, as opposed to engaging him in a block. The safety just bounced off of him, and made it to the corner to get McKenzie.

 

3) Broader issue. I know the math said to go for 2, but in a game when you aren’t playing your best, you are playing an inferior opponent, and there is a full quarter and a half, why go for two? I would argue that you have to just keep accumulating points. 
 

the 2-point play is at 9-minute mark here:

 

 

 

 

Yeah, Gilliam needed to get in his way.  Knox also could have done something to get involved in the play. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

Gilliam sucks but sometimes the defense makes plays too. Both things can be true.

Its beyond stupid to carry a FB on a NFL roster. And please don't tell me he can play TE too. That's nonsense. The modern way to play is with two or three TEs and you just line up a #2 or #3 TE as an Hback. 

[poblano]

30 minutes ago, Airseven said:

No reason to go for 2 in that spot in the 3rd quarter. Especially a team that can't execute in short yardage.

They think the game was over and they need practice over and over on short yardage situations, that's why i think they go for it 

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

1 minute ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Gilliam sucks but sometimes the defense makes plays too. Both things can be true.

Its beyond stupid to carry a FB on a NFL roster. And please don't tell me he can play TE too. That's nonsense. The modern way to play is with two or three TEs and you just line up a #2 or #3 TE as an Hback. 

 

 

Lots of teams carry fullbacks.  Most of the times its a core special teamer as well- but they have packages on offense too especially in the RZ.  

 

Modern teams with extra tight ends - https://www.ourlads.com/nfldepthcharts/depthchartpos/TE.  Which one of these #3 TEs is a noticeable upgrade over gilliam at anything?  

 

As for what we could use that roster spot for?  I dunno, but every team has core special teamers.  If its not a FB its an extra WR, or TE, or LB, or Safety.   And most of them don't play offense or defense.  

[Special K]

14 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Gilliam sucks but sometimes the defense makes plays too. Both things can be true.

Its beyond stupid to carry a FB on a NFL roster. And please don't tell me he can play TE too. That's nonsense. The modern way to play is with two or three TEs and you just line up a #2 or #3 TE as an Hback. 

 

I think the defender just made a good play....it would be impossible for McK to fall forward or extend the ball in that situation, because the guy hitting him weighed about 50+ pounds more than him

[Ned Flanders]

I'm old school...don't go for two unless you absolutely need to.

[78thealltimegreat]

To me see that wasn’t really needed right there but no one knows how the rest of the game will go so I can see why he went for 2.

The broader question about Mackenzie is they should be running the jet sweep with him 2-3 times a game. 
Maybe then run a wheel route behind him with Hines but I’m a big wheel route guy to begin with. See Dallas and Tony Pollard yesterday. 

[TheBrownBear]

46 minutes ago, FireChans said:

You’re wrong. The math is the math for a reason in a situation like that. 
 

Good decision. Decent playcall. Players didn’t execute. Oh well. 

Yep.  Liked the decision and liked the playcall.  It was more creative than we've seen lately from Dorsey.  It just didn't work out.  Couldn't find much to criticize there.

[BernieBill]

It was the wrong call (a sad refrain for Sean McDermott's game management).  You put the point up on the board.  Notice how the final margin was 8 ... let's say the Browns had miraculously recovered the onside kick, scored and made a 2 pt conversion ... tie game, potential Bills loss.  It's akin to McDermott's wrong decision not to kick the FG against the Vikings.  

[Arkady Renko]

15 minutes ago, Ned Flanders said:

I'm old school...don't go for two unless you absolutely need to.

What do you think about going for it on fourth down?

2 minutes ago, BernieBill said:

It was the wrong call (a sad refrain for Sean McDermott's game management).  You put the point up on the board.  Notice how the final margin was 8 ... let's say the Browns had miraculously recovered the onside kick, scored and made a 2 pt conversion ... tie game, potential Bills loss.  It's akin to McDermott's wrong decision not to kick the FG against the Vikings.  

Hindsight bias.  The math says it gives you the better odds.  It’s not a guarantee. 

[VaMilBill]

Only thing McKenzie could have done there was put the ball in his right hand and dive while reaching for the pylon. Would take an extremely athletic move, but I think he could have done that 

[TheBrownBear]

10 minutes ago, BernieBill said:

It was the wrong call (a sad refrain for Sean McDermott's game management).  You put the point up on the board.  Notice how the final margin was 8 ... let's say the Browns had miraculously recovered the onside kick, scored and made a 2 pt conversion ... tie game, potential Bills loss.  It's akin to McDermott's wrong decision not to kick the FG against the Vikings.  

You can't just look at the final score and say it was a mistake.  Also, consider that the Browns went for 1 and not 2 on that final touchdown.  Let's say we kick that extra point, get to 23 and ultimately 32.  Then the Browns would merely go for 2 on that last touchdown instead of kicking the EP.  And that's to say nothing of all the little decisions between the failed 2 point conversion and the end of the game (including CLE going for their own 2 point conversion and failing) that are changed by the Bills instead opting for the EP following the Singletary touchdown.  It was analytically the correct decision at the time and we ultimately won, so I can't really find anyway to complain too much about it.

Edited November 21, 2022 by TheBrownBear

[BernieBill]

"The math" says 1 point is better than zero, which is what the Bills got, zero ... 

[RiotAct]

10 minutes ago, Arkady Renko said:

What do you think about going for it on fourth down?

Hindsight bias.  The math says it gives you the better odds.  It’s not a guarantee. 

Exactly. You never know how the rest of the game would have gone had we kicked the Xp.

[ColoradoBills]

I'm not a fan of going for 2 early in the 3rd while leading BUT it's more a 50/50 call in today's NFL.

The play call was fine with me, and it just wasn't blocked as well as when it was drawn up.