What makes this guy an expert? I call BS. How can he arrive at this percentage when there is no prior data? What we now know for sure is that it is 100% the wrong decision based on 1 of 1 as well as all the other reasons that have be pointed out in this thread. I wonder what the Vegas oddsmakers have to say about it.
For all who keep talking about the SF defense being gassed and the right decision was to take first possession to give them a breather ask yourself this. Did the breather stop the Chiefs from scoring a TD? Nope. You can bet that KC would not have went for it deep in their territory on 4th down had they had first possession. They would have punted away and played defense. They had to go for it 4th down. No other choice. They were in 4 down mode the moment they got the ball.
Several of us who are emphatic that the correct decision is to defer and take 2nd possession have stated over and over numerous reasons why there is an overwhelming advantage to do so. Let's summarize the pros and cons of each.
1st possession:
1. You take first possession and go down and score either a FG or a TD. The 2nd possession team now must at least match in order for game to continue.
2. You take first possession and allow your defense a chance to gets a breather while you are in possession of the ball.
3. If both teams are tied after possessions 1 and 2 you now have possession 3 with only a FG needed to win the game.
2nd possession
1. You play defense and get a turnover that puts you in field position to win and eliminates a 3rd possession by the team who had first possession.
2. You play defense and make the team with first possession punt. You then only need a FG to win the game and everyone knows it.
3. You limit the team with first possession to a FG. You now know that's all you need to continue the game, however a TD wins the game.
4. The team with first possession scores a TD. You now know scoring a FG won't keep you in the game so you play 4 down football to stay in the game.
5. The team with first possession scores a FG. You now know all you need is a FG to stay in the game but you could go for it on 4th to score a TD and win,
6. If the team with first possession didn't score at all the 2nd possession team has the choice to play 4 down football or punt the ball away and play defense.
7. If the team with first possession scores a TD they most likely kick the PAT. 2nd possession team knows it must score a TD but could also go for 2 for the win.
8. If a 3rd possession comes about your defense just got rested while you last had possession that ended in a score to tie the game to continue playing on.
9. If 2 overtime periods come to an end with the score tied the team who at first was 2nd possession now gets the ball to start the "2nd half" or 7th quarter regardless of who was in possession of the ball when "quarter #6" ended, and now only needs to score a FG to win the game.
I don't see more than the 3 reasons above to take 1st possession. If there are, what are they?
There are probably more than the 9 reasons I listed to take 2nd possession. 2nd possession advocates feel free to add to my list.
I agree with 44slayer in that as the rule stands, I don't think any coach in the future of the playoffs/Superbowl will take first possession.
As far as those that say the coin toss and choice of 1st possession didn't cost the 9ers the game and that it had more to do with coaching I can agree with the point about coaching. The 49er players were unaware of the new rule and had not been briefed by Shanahan about it. I don't think he had fully evaluated the pros and cons of first or second possession. He definitely didn't have a "game plan" in place for it or he would have explained it to his players. In the past first possession was a no brainer as a TD scored would result in a walk off win (see Patriots/Falcons). Maybe that was a guiding factor in his decision to take first possession. I just can't buy the playing for 3rd possession nonsense and if so, what did that get him? No 3rd possession. Rested defense allowed walk off TD. No trophy.
Contrast that with Any Reid. He had a plan and had discussed it with his players. They said that he would have taken 2nd possession and would have played 4 down football and if matching a TD was required, he would have also gone for the 2 point conversion for a walk off win.
Coaching does matter. Reid has guided the Chiefs to 9 consecutive playoff seasons and eight consecutive division titles while winning 3 Superbowls in the last 5 years. As much as we remember Spags having a record setting poor defense as the Saints defensive coordinator he is respected by Reid and his defenses have been a part of the winning culture with the Chiefs the past 5 years.