I think there is logic in both kicking or receiving, but I think I agree with this. Even if the argument is that the Chiefs would have gone for 2, then we are basically talking about the game coming down to 1 play. I'd rather try to stop Mahomes on 1 play then letting them get the ball with the 3rd possession and having to stop him for a whole series of downs. The problem of course is the 49ers had to settle for a fg so the 2 point conversion didnt come into play, but that doesn't necessarily make it poorly thought out.
vrable would punt
With the new rules in OT the first chance to win the game is to go for 2 on the second possession. Ain't no analytics that can deny that fact..... Shanahan screwed up.... the 3rd possession is a non-factor because anyone using analytics knows that your best chance to win is to go for a 2 point conversion vs. giving the other team the ball with a FG to win the game
Analytics also told me SF’s Defense stopped KC for more than 3 qtrs to zero TDs. One of the 2 TDs they got was off a lucky PR break.
similarly, the reason KC was even in OT was their Defense holding SF to FG or worse all game.
No question that either team making a statement in OT that their D would hold is the better play than putting the game entirely on the offense to score.
to me, SF made the right call taking the ball and didn’t make a wrong call kicking the FG.
Your argument makes absolutely no sense... If the Niners defense has been stopping the KC offense all game then put the defense on the field to stop them and then your offense knows what it needs to do the win the game.
If the Niners had the ball where they did and knew that they needed a TD then they would not have kicked a FG.
The knowledge you gain from what happens in the 1st possession is invaluable.
As I stated earlier, I don't think analytics is gonna tell any team to kick the extra point and give the other team a possession to win the game vs. going for the 2 point conversion.
Or, you put pressure on an offense because they are now in a single possession they absolutely have to score not to mention your offense had very little pressure because the result of their drive was only determining the value the opposing offense has to score.
So the real chess move is to go for the TD on the first possession, then go for 2. Let’s see the other team do that!
vrable would punt
Every 2023 OT game this season
week 1: NYJ beats Buf walk off PR, 2nd possession (bills won coin toss, RX)
Week 2: sea 1st possession TD over Det (sea won toss, RX)
Ten 2nd possession kicks FG over LAC (LAC win coin toss, RX)
Week 3: Indy on 5th possession kick FG over Balt (Ind won toss, RX)
Week 4: LAR 1st possession TD over Indy (LAR won toss, RX)
PHI 2nd possession FG over Wash (was won toss, RX)
week 8: NYJ 2nd possession FG over NYG (NUG won toss, RX)
week 12: Buf 1st possession kicks FG, phi 2nd possession TD wins (buf won toss, RX)
Week 13: ten kicks FG 1st possession, Indy gets TD 2nd possession. (Ten won toss, RX)
Cin kicks FG 2nd possession over Jax (Jax won toss, RX)
Week 14: balt PR TD 3rd possession over LAR (Balt won toss, RX)
Week 15: Cin 3rd possession FG over Min (Cin won toss, RX)
Hou 4th possession over Ten (titans won toss, RX)
13 OT games, 100% count toss winner recieved ball.
7x the 2nd possession won (1 was the PR)
2 of those, the team scored on the first possession.
2 games, 1st possession ended the game TD
4 games went to at least the 3rd possession, none of which both teams scored a FG.
whatever the analytics are, it seems every team that wins the toss is taking the ball.
Now if the analytics say because an offensive TD doesn’t win the game changes that all the way to favor getting the ball second, I’d like to see the proof.
Another piece of the speculation is that Shanahan and SF was unaware of the OT change for the playoffs. Despite the ref saying only a D score would end it on the first possession.
my argument is that I don’t think either decision is truly a “better” choice. Someone else mentioned it, giving the D a little longer break may have played a factor in their choice to take the ball too.
Then the decision still weighs on a 4th and 4 from KC 9, go or kick?
week 1: NYJ beats Buf walk off PR, 2nd possession (bills won coin toss, RX)
Week 2: sea 1st possession TD over Det (sea won toss, RX)
Ten 2nd possession kicks FG over LAC (LAC win coin toss, RX)
Week 3: Indy on 5th possession kick FG over Balt (Ind won toss, RX)
Week 4: LAR 1st possession TD over Indy (LAR won toss, RX)
PHI 2nd possession FG over Wash (was won toss, RX)
week 8: NYJ 2nd possession FG over NYG (NUG won toss, RX)
week 12: Buf 1st possession kicks FG, phi 2nd possession TD wins (buf won toss, RX)
Week 13: ten kicks FG 1st possession, Indy gets TD 2nd possession. (Ten won toss, RX)
Cin kicks FG 2nd possession over Jax (Jax won toss, RX)
Week 14: balt PR TD 3rd possession over LAR (Balt won toss, RX)
Week 15: Cin 3rd possession FG over Min (Cin won toss, RX)
Hou 4th possession over Ten (titans won toss, RX)
13 OT games, 100% count toss winner recieved ball.
7x the 2nd possession won (1 was the PR)
2 of those, the team scored on the first possession.
2 games, 1st possession ended the game TD
4 games went to at least the 3rd possession, none of which both teams scored a FG.
whatever the analytics are, it seems every team that wins the toss is taking the ball.
Now if the analytics say because an offensive TD doesn’t win the game changes that all the way to favor getting the ball second, I’d like to see the proof.
Another piece of the speculation is that Shanahan and SF was unaware of the OT change for the playoffs. Despite the ref saying only a D score would end it on the first possession.
my argument is that I don’t think either decision is truly a “better” choice. Someone else mentioned it, giving the D a little longer break may have played a factor in their choice to take the ball too.
Then the decision still weighs on a 4th and 4 from KC 9, go or kick?
Especially considering they were just on the field against full drive to tie the game. Pitting em back out there immediately seems foolish.
Yeah, they made the right decision to take the ball. Do analytics take the possession before overtime in to account?
SF fired their DC… damn. Numbers weren’t good, but didn’t see that coming. Coach himself tossing the rock seemed more deplorable to me…. Holdin KC to 3 in the big game first half is admirable, and he lost his on field general. Oooof.
yes you could certainly do that, but it still doesn't guarantee a win.
that is why with the playoff OT rules the 2nd possession is so important because it is the first time that a team can actually win the game.
Why do teams always take the ball in regular season OT??? Because it gives them the first chance to win the game.
Well actually the 1st time you can win the game is with a defensive TD.....another reason to not take the ball to start playoff OT.
Last edited by a moderator:
I can see either side. Really doesn’t matter considering both teams guaranteed possession. SF had the game in hand on 4th and 1. If Bosa hadn’t bitten on the ball fake, it’s over. I don’t find any fault in taking the possession there, given that SF defense had just been out there for a full field drive prior to flip. I am sure that it was discussed and likely analytics was part of it. Honestly, not a lot of data to draw from being a new rule only 2 years old. Has there been an overtime PO game since the change? I can’t remember one. It’s possible that us going for it on 4th and one with a delayed run to Henry was the wrong call vs Bengals. Best punter in the league and they had zero answer for our pass rush. 11 sacks (9 counted) and little time to drive field. Who knows!? Can’t prove an unknown. Instead, we still have game in hand, and Jackrabbit gives up the ghost of Tits history.
Last edited by a moderator:
Because defensive touchdowns happen so often...Dallas led the league with 5 followed by Miami with 4
The entire argument is not proven by any analytics.
The idea is that Mahomes is “so good” that you don’t want him to have the ball second so you know how much points you need, but if Mahomes gets the TD, which is presumably why they’re so scared to give him the ball second, then your offense must score a TD and either go for a 2 pt win or give the ball right back and now a Mahomes FG drive wins the game.
Ultimately it seems like the argument is no matter what, if you’re against Mahome at least, you go for a TD and 2 pt conversion, regardless of number of 4th downs and placement on the field or distance to go.
bottom line is that SF taking the ball wasn’t a mistake period. You can make an argument for either way, but neither was wrong.
The idea is that Mahomes is “so good” that you don’t want him to have the ball second so you know how much points you need, but if Mahomes gets the TD, which is presumably why they’re so scared to give him the ball second, then your offense must score a TD and either go for a 2 pt win or give the ball right back and now a Mahomes FG drive wins the game.
Ultimately it seems like the argument is no matter what, if you’re against Mahome at least, you go for a TD and 2 pt conversion, regardless of number of 4th downs and placement on the field or distance to go.
bottom line is that SF taking the ball wasn’t a mistake period. You can make an argument for either way, but neither was wrong.
Defensive TDs don't happen very often.... but you can not argue that a defensive TD is the first way to win in a playoff OT
No one is arguing the rule, your logic of letting the other team have the ball hoping for a defensive TD is what's in question
Can you imagine telling your O that you’re not getting the ball, because we don’t want y’all tossing a sack fumble for TD… that’s crazy thinking. In OT winners want the ball! That’s the best way to produce points.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
