Take 2 point conversions from 15 yard line?

[GoPGo]

So, now that the extra point kick is spotted at the 15 yard line, what about opting to try for the 2 point conversion at the 15? Is there any rule that says an attempt from the 15 must come out of the kicking formation? If not, given that the Packers love to throw for 2 points, would you take the ball from the 15 to give your receivers more room to operate (depending on the opponent, obviously)? Or would you still opt to take it from the 2 yard line, even in light of the fact that we never seem to convert from there passing the ball?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So, now that the extra point kick is spotted at the 15 yard line, what about opting to try for the 2 point conversion at the 15? Is there any rule that says an attempt from the 15 must come out of the kicking formation? If not, given that the Packers love to throw for 2 points, would you take the ball from the 15 to give your receivers more room to operate (depending on the opponent, obviously)? Or would you still opt to take it from the 2 yard line, even in light of the fact that we never seem to convert from there passing the ball?

While the Packers haven´t been highly succesful on the two-point conversion it´s way tougher to score from the 15-yard line. The only time I would like the team to try a fake is while playing the Eagles exposing Brad Jones recklessly crashing inside.

 

[GoPGo]

While the Packers haven´t been highly succesful on the two-point conversion it´s way tougher to score from the 15-yard line. The only time I would like the team to try a fake is while playing the Eagles exposing Brad Jones recklessly crashing inside.

I'm not talking about a fake. I'm talking about lining up in a normal formation from the 15. I think we'd be more successful throwing from there than from the 2, if history means anything. Of course, you're telegraphing that you're passing the ball, but what do you think they're going to do when they line up 4 or 5 receivers from the 2?

 

[adambr2]

While I'd be ok with a fake once a year or so if you see an opportunity to exploit, I sure hope that they would never line up to attempt a 2 from the 15.

If you're just looking to buy more room, you could easily do that with a delay or false start or two (7 or 12 yard line), neither of which I'd intentionally do either.

I'd much rather just focus on getting better at converting from the 2 rather than running it from a distance that's going to make us completely one dimensional on conversions and completely take a rushing play out of the possibilities. While we haven't been successful in recent years on the 2, I guarantee that over a long enough sample size, we'll have a much higher percentage from the 2 than the 15, and trying conversions from the 15 is going to have a much lower point expectancy than just kicking it from there.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm not talking about a fake. I'm talking about lining up in a normal formation from the 15. I think we'd be more successful throwing from there than from the 2, if history means anything. Of course, you're telegraphing that you're passing the ball, but what do you think they're going to do when they line up 4 or 5 receivers from the 2?

I know what you're talking about but it's a bad idea. Over the last 15 seasons teams have a success rate of only 10% on third- or fourth-and-goal from the 15.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It will be interesting to see how coaches use this new after TD point system. I think some teams will be going for 2 a lot more then others. But will those teams that start getting 2 scored against them, abandon the 1 point and play catch up by going for 2?

I hope the Packers are doing some serious work (drawing up plays/practicing them) in the scoring from 2 yards out department, as well as just picking up 1-2 anywhere on the field on 3rd or 4th down, since this has been a thorn in their side for a long time.

I don't expect and hope not to see many of these new plays during the preseason. Save them for when they really count and your opponent hasn't seen them on film to prepare.

 

[GoPGo]

I know what you're talking about but it's a bad idea. Over the last 15 seasons teams have a success rate of only 10% on third- or fourth-and-goal from the 15.

I'm not talking about "teams." That includes some pretty pathetic passing offenses. I'm talking about the Packers. I would bet we have had more success passing to the end zone from the 15 than we have from the 2.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm not talking about "teams." That includes some pretty pathetic passing offenses. I'm talking about the Packers. I would bet we have had more success passing to the end zone from the 15 than we have from the 2.

You're wrong. The Packers have only had a single play on third- or fourth-and-goal from the 15 since 2000 but didn't score on it. They had five plays with goal-to-go on all down but didn't score on any of them either.

Overall the Packers have had a total of 116 plays from the 15 over the last 15 years and have scored only two TDs (1.72%) on them.

 

[GoPGo]

You're wrong.

Of course.

The Packers have only had a single play on third- or fourth-and-goal from the 15 since 2000 but didn't score on it. They had five plays with goal-to-go on all down but didn't score on any of them either.

Overall the Packers have had a total of 116 plays from the 15 over the last 15 years and have scored only two TDs (1.72%) on them.

Okay, you're talking about all game situations. What I'm saying is this: we know the Packers have had almost no success passing on 2 point conversions the past 4 seasons. Obviously, it's harder to get separation on a 12 yard field. The defense is able to fill the endzone with tightly packed zone coverage making it nearly impossible to get open. It simply logically makes more sense to give your 4 and 5 receiver sets more room to operate and virtually the whole playbook is open to use.

 

[TJV]

It doesn't make any sense to me. If you aren't going to use the element of surprise (by lining up for a kick), if you want more room to maneuver, use adambr2's idea of a pre-snap penalty or two.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Okay, you're talking about all game situations. What I'm saying is this: we know the Packers have had almost no success passing on 2 point conversions the past 4 seasons. Obviously, it's harder to get separation on a 12 yard field. The defense is able to fill the endzone with tightly packed zone coverage making it nearly impossible to get open. It simply logically makes more sense to give your 4 and 5 receiver sets more room to operate and virtually the whole playbook is open to use.

The Packers have converted only 37.5% of the two-point conversions since Rodgers became the starter but that rate is miles above their success from the 15.

The defense would still be able to tightly cover receivers in the end zone as they don't have to worry about five or 10 yards gains.

It's pretty clear that scoring from the 2 is way easier than from 15 yards away.

 

[adambr2]

GoPGo, I've seen you come up with a lot of good ideas but this isn't one of them.

Willingly giving yourself what is literally a 4th and 15 play (and a tougher tighter 15 yard conversion at that than it would be trying from midfield) would be insanity. McCarthy would be crucified in every media outlet for such a decision and rightfully so. You're a football fan, surely you understand how tight the throwing windows are 15 yards out from the goalline and how difficult it is to convert such a play when the defense knows you only have one play and they just need to defend the goalline and can give up everything underneath. You cannot possibly think we could convert this at a 50% rate which is what it would take to make it worthwhile.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The defense would still be able to tightly cover receivers in the end zone as they don't have to worry about five or 10 yards gains.

This is the key reason that any attempt to have to score on one play, from anywhere on the field (15, 20, 30, etc) is difficult.....the defense knows you have to get the ball into the endzone. Furthermore, the further out it is, all they have to really defend against is the pass.

I think its much harder for the defense to stop a team at the 2 yard line, not knowing if it may be a pass, run or even a QB scramble. With Cobb and now Montgomery, maybe the Packers can get a bit more creative with the plays and personnel when going for 2. But as I said above, I really hope they keep whatever their plans are, under wraps until the regular season so teams can't prepare for it.

Personally, I think we will be seeing Crosby out there kicking after most touchdowns.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

A bit off topic.....How frustrated as fans do we get when the Packers have 3rd or 4th and say 15 yards to go and throw to a receiver that is only 10-12 yards out who gets tackled short of the first down? I understand a screen and YAC, but damn it, have your receivers running routes that take them past the first down markers.

 

[TJV]

A bit off topic.....How frustrated as fans do we get when the Packers have 3rd or 4th and say 15 yards to go and throw to a receiver that is only 10-12 yards out who gets tackled short of the first down? I understand a screen and YAC, but damn it, have your receivers running routes that take them past the first down markers.

I couldn't find third-and-long stats - I'll leave that to captainWIMM - but my guess is Packers fans have less cause to complain about this than the majority of NFL fans. What I did find is that the Packers have been in the top 10 percentage-wise over the past 5 seasons. Perhaps Aaron Rodgers accuracy and the vertical routes McCarthy employs are at times taken for granted?

 

[Mondio]

I don't mind it as much when it's 3-2 and we throw a 40 yard pass play, unless of course it goes for a TD, but when we miss, i feel like losing my mind

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Those all or nothing plays are definitely feast or famine and as mad as I get when they aren't completed, I have to trust that AR, who seems to throw less of them then his predecessor, didn't see anything else or thought it was an easy one.

What I was talking about above are the routes run short of first down yardage, even the announcers will make a comment on them "that WR has to finish his route a few yards up the field". Are the routes intentionally being run short in hopes of a yard or two after the catch, or are the receivers not running them quite deep enough?

Agree with you TJV, its hard to complain about the offense we consistently field, but always looking for improvement, so you find the little things. Sure beats those fans in other states reading: "Why is Cutler still our starter?" or "Are we ever going to have an offense that can put points on the board?"

 

[GoPGo]

Okay, somehow this has turned into the idea of taking it from the 15 every time or most of the time when passing. I'm talking about when the situation warrants it, such as teams with strong linebackers but weak secondaries.

 

[Mondio]

I still think it's a bad idea. i want to gain 2 yards over 15 every time

 

[Deleted member 6794]

A bit off topic.....How frustrated as fans do we get when the Packers have 3rd or 4th and say 15 yards to go and throw to a receiver that is only 10-12 yards out who gets tackled short of the first down? I understand a screen and YAC, but damn it, have your receivers running routes that take them past the first down markers.

Interestingly the Packers only rank 26th in the league in first down percentage on 3rd and 4th downs with 15+ yards to go simce Rodgers became the starter. I agree that it drives me crazy when receivers ran routes stopping short of the first down marker.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Okay, somehow this has turned into the idea of taking it from the 15 every time or most of the time when passing. I'm talking about when the situation warrants it, such as teams with strong linebackers but weak secondaries.

There's no situation warranting it though and all stats available clearly back that up.

 

[GoPGo]

There's no situation warranting it though and all stats available clearly back that up.

There are no stats for 2 point conversions from the 15 and other plays from the 15 are not a comparable situation. How many times have you seen offenses bog down inside the 5 yard line due to the compressed field they have to play on? It happens all the time.

Regardless, I just hope to God this stupid rule change gets killed after the season is over with.

 

[adambr2]

There are no stats for 2 point conversions from the 15 and other plays from the 15 are not a comparable situation. How many times have you seen offenses bog down inside the 5 yard line due to the compressed field they have to play on? It happens all the time.

Regardless, I just hope to God this stupid rule change gets killed after the season is over with.

How are 4th and goal from the 15 stats not comparable? It is literally an identical situation in that you must score from the 15 on one play. There is no situation where it is appropriate. If it helped our chances, don't you think we already would have thought of this in recent years and purposely committed some penalties to give us more room?

Give me the worst defense in the NFL, against our offense, one play from the 15, I'll take the odds every time. And that odds is with the defense.

 

[GoPGo]

I still think it's a bad idea. i want to gain 2 yards over 15 every time

The problem is that we pass for 2 point attempts almost every time and we have had almost no success at it from the 2. The field is simply too compressed for receivers to get any separation and Rodgers can only see a smaller portion of the field at any given moment. The advantages of going from the 15 are that there is room for our highly talented receivers to get separation and Rodgers can scan the field much more efficiently. If I had my way we would run Lacy or fake and bootleg every time. But we have a long history of lining up 4 and 5 receivers for these plays and it simply doesn't work from that range. If we insist on using these formations for 2 point conversion, there's no doubt they would be more successful from a little further away.

 

[adambr2]

The problem is that we pass for 2 point attempts almost every time and we have had almost no success at it from the 2. The field is simply too compressed for receivers to get any separation and Rodgers can only see a smaller portion of the field at any given moment. The advantages of going from the 15 are that there is room for our highly talented receivers to get separation and Rodgers can scan the field much more efficiently. If I had my way we would run Lacy or fake and bootleg every time. But we have a long history of lining up 4 and 5 receivers for these plays and it simply doesn't work from that range.

I don't know, first off, why you think receivers are going to have such an easier time. The end zone is still 10 yards either way. You're still working in a compressed area and required to get open in a compressed area. The windows are much smaller because the pass needs to cover a long range. There are no advantages of this vs. starting from the 2.

I grant you that our 2 point play calling has not gotten the job done in recent years, but the solution is to improve at it and mix up the play calling, not back up 13 yards. We do have a good O line and one of the best running backs in the NFL, there's no need to overthink it.