OT Coin Toss = 49'ers Demise? (2 Viewers)

[saintsmarchin]

If not for saint vs Vikings nfcc game.. 49ers would be champions

 

[Artifactual]

Didn't give it a second thought when SF won the OT coin toss and chose to get the ball first.
But apparently that gave the advantage to the Chiefs.
Shanahan will be explaining his decision for a long time.

How Kyle Shanahan's 49ers lost the Super Bowl after winning the OT coin flip

Shanahan faced a decision never before made in Super Bowl history, thanks to the new playoff overtime rules, and he proceeded to defer an advantage three possessions into the future ... against Patrick Mahomes.

www.yahoo.com

The most important take away from this article is that 28-3 continues get new life and will forever live on.

Shanahan’s decision will be picked apart like many others in this defeat — getting away from the run game that could have killed clock, the inability of the offense to do much of anything in the early third quarter, and the fact that Shanahan now has three brutal Super Bowl defeats — two in San Francisco plus a blown 28-3 lead to New England when he was the offensive coordinator in Atlanta.


Now back on topic. There were no analytics to refer to. The new rule allowed for both teams to get a least one possession unless there was a defensive TD on the first possession; Ie: a pick 6 or a scoop and score.

From the article:

By choosing to receive rather than kick, Shanahan allowed the Chiefs and Patrick Mahomes to get the ball with more information to factor into their play-calling. It also meant less data for him.

That meant Kansas City knew it needed to score and would never consider punting as an option.

As such, when the Chiefs faced fourth-and-1 from their own 34-yard line, they went for it. Had that same scenario played out on the first drive of overtime, Kansas City would have almost assuredly punted and allowed San Francisco to win it with a field goal.

Allowing the Chiefs to go for it on fourth down was akin to a turnover. The decision also allowed Kansas City to make second- and third-down calls throughout the drive knowing it would have an extra play. It incalculably changed the decision-making.

If San Francisco had scored a touchdown and Kansas City responded, head coach Andy Reid would have had the option of winning the game with a 2-point conversion.

Shanahan essentially gave all the power and all the advantage of winning the coin flip to Kansas City for the first two possessions of the game and needed a specific result to get to the point of the game to regain it. (A 3rd possession.)

My Take:

There is no good reason to argue taking the ball first was the correct thing to do when all the above says otherwise. Also consider that taking the ball first has you starting at your own 25 with the pressure to score in some way or another without having to punt and give the opponent the upper hand to only need a FG to win. Without a Defensive Holding call that bailed out the 49ers that is exactly what would have happened. Shanahan should have deferred which is what the analytics say to do in the college game in overtime when both teams have at least one possession in OT which is what they do 95% of the time.

The second mistake Shanahan made was not going for the TD on 4th down from the 5 yard line. A TD there would have forced KC to score a TD. A turnover on downs would have made KC drive at least 55 yards to attempt a FG. Either way, all odds shifted in the Chiefs favor when the 49ers elected to take the first possession in OT.

With this new rule for playoff games now having played out the analytics will now clearly say to defer to 2nd possession when winning the coin toss. Having proved itself in the brightest lights of the Super Bowl it will be in bold print the next time it comes into play. You can count on that!

 

[DaveXA]

Is this wrong! You take the ball first and if you score a TD you win right ?

Not anymore, I made that same assumption before realizing the rule had changed. Both opponents are guaranteed at least one offensive possession in OT now. It's never happened, but I guess in theory, an offense could chew up the entire OT period in one possession. That's the only reason I can think of not to defer.

 

[Joey bourque]

Is this wrong! You take the ball first and if you score a TD you win right ?

No. That was the old rule. Now each team gets a chance

 

[stadanko]

Does anyone else just want to go back to sudden death? Both teams had 4 quarters of chances. If you don't win the toss, play defense. They just keep adding if/else statements because every 4 or 5 years someone's favorite QB doesn't get a chance to win in overtime.

 

[Joey bourque]

Not anymore, I made that same assumption before realizing the rule had changed. Both opponents are guaranteed at least one offensive possession in OT now. It's never happened, but I guess in theory, an offense could chew up the entire OT period in one possession. That's the only reason I can think of not to defer.

That is a possibility in regular season games because the period is 10 minutes. On the SB it was 15 minutes. It is like a brand new game

 

[limeyjohn]

Personally l would still take the ball first
If both teams get a field goal or a touchdown or go three and out then the next score would win
All 3 above scenarios are very possible

 

[Mr. Coach Klein]

Romo mentioned that both defenses were gassed going into overtime. The 49ers even more so, because the chiefs ended the 4th quarter with and 11 play scoring drive. So getting the ball first and allowing your defense a breather isn't a horrible idea.

Didn't think about this. Great point.

You could also point to the49ers being the only group of people on the planet that did not know Mahommes was keeping it on that 4th down QB run for a first down. They lined up in shotgun...

I think wilks called a really bad game. Shan had to burn a TO to save his butt when he wanted to go cover 0

 

[Mr. Coach Klein]

Does anyone else just want to go back to sudden death? Both teams had 4 quarters of chances. If you don't win the toss, play defense. They just keep adding if/else statements because every 4 or 5 years someone's favorite QB doesn't get a chance to win in overtime.

College has it right. Move it back 10 yards for pros maybe.

 

[DaveXA]

Personally l would still take the ball first
If both teams get a field goal or a touchdown or go three and out then the next score would win
All 3 above scenarios are very possible

That's a really good point. Definitely worth considering. It's a tougher call than I think people realize.

 

[0rion]

Romo mentioned that both defenses were gassed going into overtime. The 49ers even more so, because the chiefs ended the 4th quarter with and 11 play scoring drive. So getting the ball first and allowing your defense a breather isn't a horrible idea. That 3rd down in the redzone where nobody so much as looked at the pass rusher, much less tried to block him, cost them the game more than anything. Once they kicked the field goal, the game was over. Love him or hate him, Pat Mahommes is a game-winning-drive machine. You could also point to the49ers being the only group of people on the planet that did not know Mahommes was keeping it on that 4th down QB run for a first down. They lined up in shotgun...

Regardless, good game. I don't fault coaches for going for it and I don't fault them for kicking the FG. If it works they're geniuses and if it fails they're idiots and should've done the opposite.

As far as I'm concerned, as long as the refs stay out of it, I'm good with calling it a good win by the winner instead of a horrible loss by the loser.

Agreed

 

[Eeyore]

I had no problem with the 9ers taking the ball first.

They rested their defense and, if the score remained tied after each team had a possession, the 9ers would have had the ball first in sudden death.

 

[Goatman Saint]

Does anyone else just want to go back to sudden death? Both teams had 4 quarters of chances. If you don't win the toss, play defense. They just keep adding if/else statements because every 4 or 5 years someone's favorite QB doesn't get a chance to win in overtime.

I never liked sudden death. Very few teams are balanced. Either offense of defense is stronger. So, why just allow one team the right to come out and win the game? Start at the 20-25 yard line, with modern kickers you really only have to get 40-45 yards. Field goal and done. I never liked it

 

[SweetT]

If the Niners would’ve won, then Shanahan would’ve been seen as a mastermind. Now that they lost, he’s back to being the choke artist that he is and im cool with that. My hate goes back to the NFC West days. Couldn’t stand them back then and I can’t stand them now.

 

[StudioSaint]

That's a really good point. Definitely worth considering. It's a tougher call than I think people realize.

Statistical analysis, analytics, is a useful tool, but coaches shouldn't be subservient to it. Payton has said as much and he's a big analytics guy. Human beings defy statistical odds all the time, including in football and for better and worse.

The Saints had over a 90% chance of beating Green Bay in the second half according to analytics. How useful or accurately predictive were those odds?