Sean McDermott has been studying two-point strategy
Sean McDermott’s game strategy has often come under the microscope, as it would for any NFL head coach where in-game decisions are over-analyzed and discussed to death. Many questions about McDermott’s game management stem from a decision to punt in overtime against the Indianapolis Colts two years ago in a game the Bills absolutely had to win. The punt raised concerns about McDermott’s overall in-game strategy and whether or not he was aware of what the optimal decision would be to make in each specific situation.
In 2019, McDermott’s game management has seen a huge improvement and can be pointed to as a reason why the Bills find themselves five games above .500 in December.
One area where McDermott has demonstrated a strong knowledge of sound in-game strategy is with two-point conversions. McDermott has done a good job of electing to go for two in certain situations where it should be called for. This goes back to the Bills’ September home opener against Cincinnati. In that game, the Bills scored a touchdown to go up 6-0. On the extra point, a Cincinnati penalty gave the Bills the option of putting the ball at the one-yard line to try a two-point conversion. Even though it wasn’t necessary to go for two at that point in the game, McDermott understood that converting that one yard was likely and that an 8-0 advantage would benefit the Bills throughout the game. McDermott went for two and the Bills converted. Buffalo won by four points in a game where Cincinnati had the ball deep in Buffalo territory late in the game, but had to play for a touchdown instead of a field goal.
On Sunday against the Ravens, McDermott again made a shrewd decision following a Bills’ touchdown. Trailing 24-9 in the fourth quarter, the Bills found the end zone to pull within 9, 24-15. Most NFL coaches in this situation will likely kick an extra point to make it a one-possession game, giving their teams a chance to tie the score later on in the fourth quarter.
This, however, is not the optimal strategy for that situation. The proper play analytically is actually to go for two and make it a seven-point game. The obvious benefit is now you don’t need a two-point conversion to tie the game the next time you score a touchdown. With a seven-point game, you can also try to play for the lead by going for two if you score again.
The main reason, though, for going for two with a nine-point deficit is that if you don’t get it, you still have time to play for two scores to make up the deficit. If you wait and go for two to tie that game later in the fourth quarter, you likely will not have time to recover if you don’t convert. With 7:00 to play when the Bills scored to cut the lead to 24-15, they still had time to rally for two scores even if they couldn’t cut the lead to seven. It’s better to know the outcome of the two-point conversion sooner and have time to strategize for the rest of the game.
McDermott had to have understood this in order to make the decision yesterday. This is a great sign for him going forward as it gives fans confidence that McDermott is willing to make the correct analytical decision in specific in-game situations. That would put the Bills ahead of the curve of most teams in the league, who often fail at this. The Bills have been one of these teams for years.
It would have been interesting to see what the Bills would have done had they scored a touchdown on their final drive. Would McDermott have gone for two and tried to take the lead with less than a minute to go, or would he have made the conventional, conservative play and kicked the extra point to set up overtime against Lamar Jackson? Unfortunately, we were deprived of the opportunity to find out.