Well, there is a rather direct correlation - at least in theory: the riskier a single-point attempt gets, the less risky a two-point conversion COMPARED TO THE PAT gets. Just imagine this: you get two setups: a.) you have 10 bags, 9 of which have a 1 dollar bill in them, one is empty. b.) you have 10 bags, 4 of which have a 2 dollars in them, the other 6 are empty. You can pick one bag and keep what's inside. Which setup wpould you choose? It's easy to see that most people wopuld only go for setup #2 if they really NEED 2 dollars, 1 is not enough - the seciond setup is simply way more risky than the first one. Now, change the setups a bit: a.) you have 10 bags, 7 of which have a 1 dollar bill in them, the other three bags are empty. b.) you have 10 bags, 5 of which have a 2 dollars in them, the other 5 are empty. This is definitely a more challenging decision - the odds come much closer, so now it may be tmepting enough for some to go for the 2 bucks even if they don't necessarily need 2. That's the theory behind it. In practice... we'll see what happens. I tend to agree with Urschel in thinking there wont be significantly more 2-point attempts., especially when the score mathematics doesn't make it more favourable. In other words, not many coaches will go for two "just because".
