The Two-Point Dilemma: Does Going for Two Win Close Football Games?

Upon scoring a touchdown late in a college football game to cut the lead to one, teams are faced with the decision of either tying the game with a point after touchdown (PAT) or attempting a two-point conversion. A PAT typically leads to overtime, whereas a two-point attempt usually results in a win if successful and a loss if failed. In some cases (such as when a team is on the road or the underdog), it is often believed that a two-point attempt is advantageous. This comes from the belief that winning in overtime on the road or as an underdog is unlikely, and the chance of winning is greater by converting a single play for two points. In this paper, we show that there are no situations with statistically significant support for a two-point attempt with a data sample that includes all NCAA games from 2002–2019. Furthermore, there are several circumstances where the data indicates that a team should kick a PAT, including situations where popular sports culture supports going for two.