Gotta say though, as soon as I saw the 12th man on the field and the five-yard penalty, the first thing I thought of was that article.

The concept that the Giants also hit a bunch to Nicks was having Cruz run a 5-yard sit or pivot route with Nicks on a square-in behind him. Love that combo.

The concept that the Giants also hit a bunch to Nicks was having Cruz run a 5-yard sit or pivot route with Nicks on a square-in behind him. Love that combo.

That reality skews the anecdotal evidence given by you more than the concept of teams that “try” versus “practice” 2 pt plays, I think. Most teams and coaches that I know dedicate practice time each week toward specific 2 pt plays.

In a game against somewhat evenly matched opponents, the downside of having to play catch up if you fail the 2 pt play early is not worth the upside of converting it, even if the probability of success is over 50%. 

Kudos for the aggressive mentality, but I wouldn’t consider a thought process that runs counter to it to be laughable.

My bottom line: If you had failed a 2 pt conversion early and are down by 4 late, you could have been down by 3 and would only need a field goal to extend the game versus a touchdown to win it. Touchdowns are harder to score than field goals. Failing the 2 pt conversion earlier in the game forces you to play catchup, when you could play straight up. Taking the counter to that, say you score three TDs and convert all three 2 pt plays. An opponent that plays straight up needs only a field goal to tie. The risk simply outweighs the reward in too many situations, and too many situations are still in play early in a game.