PNFL

Detroit is currently tied for 7th in touchdown scored but is currently tied for 3rd in points from point afters.
Detroit is 11/16 on 2 point conversions that is a whole point per game increase in scoring vs going for 1.

The only team below 50% on 2 point attempt is Jets who are 5/11 or 45%.

If you can convert over 50% of your 2 point conversion you are leaving points on the field if you go for 1.

And agree until I go for 2 and don't get it and lose by 1.

I think many teams go for it a LOT on 4th and 1. But how do we defend this effectively? If we leave special teams plays in our profiles for defense on 4th and 1, do we know what plays get called by the game when the offense goes for it? If we put defensive lays in via the profile, when the offense punts, we will call a defense against a punt and have no punt return.

Is it realistic for teams to go for first down on 4th and 1 almost routinely?

And same issue on 2 point conversions, which defensive plays get called?

Ban going for it on 4th & 1? Seriously?

I think LA converting a 2-point conversion in the 2nd half against Minnesota this weekend was key to stopping the Viking rally. If LA had kicked the XP instead and only led 24-16 instead of 25-16, Minnesota would have likely gone for 2 to tie the game when they scored their late TD to get to 22. Because Minnesota likely had their profile set to kick an XP if down by 3, LA's prior conversion provided LA enough of a buffer to avoid the tie and force the onside kick.

Dean-Atlanta wrote:I think many teams go for it a LOT on 4th and 1. But how do we defend this effectively? If we leave special teams plays in our profiles for defense on 4th and 1, do we know what plays get called by the game when the offense goes for it? If we put defensive lays in via the profile, when the offense punts, we will call a defense against a punt and have no punt return.

Is it realistic for teams to go for first down on 4th and 1 almost routinely?

And same issue on 2 point conversions, which defensive plays get called?

There are scenarios in the Profiles for each of these.

Statistically speaking it makes sense to go for it on 4th down more than you think. Rich made the case a couple seasons ago. The old adage 3 yards and a cloud of dust refers to the point that if you can consistently gain 3.4 yards on a play you can consistently gain 1st downs. If you consistently go for it on 4th down that gives you four downs to do this and thus reduces that to 2.5 yards per play that you need to gain consistently.

Mitch-Chiefs wrote:Ban going for it on 4th & 1? Seriously?

Who wants to ban it?

If we’re trying to emulate the NFL we shouldn’t ban it, but we should probably limit it. For example:

1st Half: Going for it on 4th & 1 is only allowed within FG range (typically the defense’s 35 or 36 yard line in FBPRO). There are always exceptions, but it’s not unreasonable to assume that most NFL teams aren’t going to gamble unnecessarily in the first half and risk turning over the ball on downs outside of the defense’s 40, so this would be fairly realistic.

2nd Half: Same as first half with the following additions –
A team can go for it on 4th & 1 at any time if down by 8+
A team can go for it on 4th & 1 at any time if down by 1+ within last 5 minutes of the game

The original VPNFL files (the basis of the PNFL) were designed for realism and to allow for teams to have the correct personnel on the field based on down and distance, etc. Going for it on 4th & 1 exists in the NFL so I can’t see banning it completely, but I think limitations like these would be in line with the original spirit of the VPNFL.

There have been 127 4th down conversion attempts in the 63 games played this season. That's roughly 2 attenpts per game... any distance... This is not an issue.

Also, if you play regular defense against a team that punts from midfield, that punt is either going out of bounds or past the 10 yard line anyway.