OT Coin Toss = 49'ers Demise? (1 Viewer)

[44slayer]

And you don't give Mahomes the chance to win the game on the second possession,

And this point, is one that gets glossed over in all the other bullet points we listed as to why you dont take the ball first. How many times have you heard, just in regular season games, that X team needs to run the clock down so (Brees, Mahomes, Manning, Brady, etc) doesnt get the ball back? Or, "they left too much time on the clock for Brees". Its literally part of end game strategy to NOT give the ball back to them. Those guys are legends, because they make you pay if you give them the ball back.

So what does Shanahan do? He guarantees Mahomes gets last possession. I mean, just think about that. He ensured that Mahomes controlled his fate. Why on earth, seeing how elite QBs become legends in the NFL, you would think youre that different than anyone else that you wont end up the background noise of Mahomes hall of fame highlight reel?

Ill end this where I started. It was next level dumb. Not just some dumb.

 

[St. Geezy]

All great points in this thread. I’ll admit it; when it first happened I didn’t fully grasp the controversy even though I am definitely a “football guy.” But unlike NFL head coaches, I am not being paid millions of dollars to prepare for things like this or to eat, sleep, and breathe football at all times.

They will never admit it, but I think the 49ers coaching staff flat out just never prepped for this postseason OT wrinkle scenario. They treated it like regular OT without a second thought.

 

[AARPSaint]

All great points in this thread. I’ll admit it; when it first happened I didn’t fully grasp the controversy even though I am definitely a “football guy.” But unlike NFL head coaches, I am not being paid millions of dollars to prepare for things like this or to eat, sleep, and breathe football at all times.

They will never admit it, but I think the 49ers coaching staff flat out just never prepped for this postseason OT wrinkle scenario. They treated it like regular OT without a second thought.

What you said in your second paragraph could be right. It's substantiated that the coaches didn't prepare the players for it.

Agree that it's a good thread, notably lacking in personal attacks and Madden references. More important, it's thought provoking.

I hate to say it--but the referee, whose name I refuse to type, noted that the overtime rules were like beginning "a new game." That alone should have indicated "defer" since that's the usual call for the beginning of the game.

It's shocking to me that Shanahan seemed unprepared for this possibility, doesn't seem to have thought it through, and didn't prepare his players. It's very sloppy and may have cost his team a superbowl..

 

[DaveXA]

...

The problem is you can't win the game on the first possession. And unless you score 8 points, the other team always can win on the second. And no one is going for two if they score a touchdown on the first possession.
...

Well, the defense could score, although I guess that would count as a change of possession.

 

[DCSaints_Fan]

Well, the defense could score, although I guess that would count as a change of possession.

My point was the receiving team can't win on their first possession. But yeah the kicking team (defense) can definitely win on the receiving teams possession

 

[St. Geezy]

Well, the defense could score, although I guess that would count as a change of possession.

Correct…any defensive score in OT ends the game, same as regular season.

 

[faceman]

My point was the receiving team can't win on their first possession. But yeah the kicking team (defense) can definitely win on the receiving teams possession

Yeah, a safety or a pick six and the game is over. I believe Al Harris ended one with a pick six
against the Seahawks when he was with the Packers

 

[St. Geezy]

I actually kind of hate that this is a postseason only rule. Seems like something fundamental to the game and rules shouldn’t change just because of the magnitude of the contest.

If they feel like this is the best way to determine who the better team is during the postseason, the same principle/logic should apply to regular season contests.

 

[Artifactual]

Again, we don't know what happens the other way around either. It's easy to second guess with hindsight.

According to Cam Newton "Hindsight is 50-50". That's the blurred vision Shanahan had. Where's the foresight? This same thread could have been debated prior to the Superbowl and the same consensus would have resulted. The problem for most people is that prior to this game the no brainer decision was to take the ball first in overtime. Most people were unaware of the new rule change and therefore had not given any thought to the pros and cons of taking first or second possession. The 49ers had an opportunity by winning the coin toss to have the upper hand advantage of seeing the game before them play out. By making the wrong decision they gave that advantage away to the Chiefs and it cost them the game.

It's clear that the correct decision is to defer and take 2nd possession. You can call it hindsight if you want but it should have been foresight. What's crazy is that after seeing the result and weighing the pros and cons many still can't see the light.

I posted on page 7 of this thread 3 pros of taking the first possession and 9 pros of taking 2nd possession. That's a 3 to 1 advantage of taking 2nd possession. A part of that post follows:

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 have yet to see anyone add any other valid reason to take first possession nor debunk any of the reasons to take 2nd possession. If you can, do so. I'll wait.

Now, if I'm coach and I have Mahomes, I'm hoping we get the ball last because Mahomes is one of the best ever under pressure. He knows how to win games late.

By this statement you are now validating the argument in favor of why you would want 2nd possession. Shanahan should have realized this as well.


Furthermore, the Chief players have already said that was their plan had they won the coin toss, to defer, and they were shocked and elated when the 49ers chose to take the ball first possession. As far as the emotional lift goes, the KC players were jubilant after the coin toss and the SF players were indifferent. That's called being prepared with a plan and being stunned that your opponent was playing checkers while you were playing chess.

Check out this article from the New York Post yesterday by Christian Arnold

Someone’s ‘getting fired’ for 49ers’ controversial Super Bowl overtime decision: Jay Cutler

The 49ers may want to put the debate over the decision to get the ball first in overtime behind them, but it’s not going to be easy.

nypost.com

“Inside the NFL” captured the moments before and after that fateful coin toss before overtime started and the surprise on the Chiefs’ faces spoke volumes after San Francisco elected to receive to start the extra period.

“They want it. They want the ball,” Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes repeated over and over in shock as he ran off the field after the coin toss.

“They wanted it, baby,” he exclaimed as he meandered around the sideline.

 

[Artifactual]

Well, the defense could score, although I guess that would count as a change of possession.

See bullet point #1 in my post giving reason to take 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.

 

[DaveXA]

I actually kind of hate that this is a postseason only rule. Seems like something fundamental to the game and rules shouldn’t change just because of the magnitude of the contest.

If they feel like this is the best way to determine who the better team is during the postseason, the same principle/logic should apply to regular season contests.

I think the reason it's different is because of time issues and the NFL is OK with allowing ties during the regular season, but not in the playoffs and SB.

 

[DaveXA]

See bullet point #1 in my post giving reason to take 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.

And? I wasn't making the case for anything in my comment. I already understood that point.

 

[Artifactual]

Well, the defense could score, although I guess that would count as a change of possession.

See bullet point #1 in my post giving reason to take 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.

And? I wasn't making the case for anything in my comment. I already understood that point.

And.....You made a case in your comment for one of the reasons to take 2nd possession, knowingly or not. You've been the strongest supporter in this thread to take the ball 1st, and yet, this is one of the reasons to take the ball 2nd.

I set the challenge in my post above to give more than the 3 reasons to take 1st possession versus the 9 reasons to take 2nd possession.

I'm still waiting for someone to validate a 4th reason or more to take 1st possession but have yet to see one. Nor has anyone debunked the 9 valid reasons I presented to take 2nd possession. Right now, it's 3 to 1 in favor of taking 2nd possession (not counting the trophy).

Unless someone can make a stronger case for 1st possession, end of discussion, thread over.

 

[DaveXA]

And.....You made a case in your comment for one of the reasons to take 2nd possession, knowingly or not. You've been the strongest supporter in this thread to take the ball 1st, and yet, this is one of the reasons to take the ball 2nd.

I'm not supporting taking the ball first. I'm saying I get why Shanahan did. And I'm also saying it probably didn't make that much difference. The team who plays better matters more than who goes first or second. What I'm saying is simply that the analytics probably support deferring, but that doesn't mean whoever goes second will win a lot more than not. It's an advantage, and a qb who thrives under pressure like Mahomes will exploit that. Someone else who maybe doesn't do as well under pressure might have a tougher time going second.

If it was flipped and Purdy went second, would be be able to drive down and get a TD and a 2 point conversion to seal the win? No one knows. But I like Mahomes better than Purdy in that situation.

I set the challenge in my post above to give more than the 3 reasons to take 1st possession versus the 9 reasons to take 2nd possession.

I'm still waiting for someone to validate a 4th reason or more to take 1st possession but have yet to see one. Nor has anyone debunked the 9 valid reasons I presented to take 2nd possession. Right now, it's 3 to 1 in favor of taking 2nd possession (not counting the trophy).

Unless someone can make a stronger case for 1st possession, end of discussion, thread over.

Those are your conclusions. I never said you're wrong. I will say that during and immediately after the game, I didn't have all of the facts about the OT rules and scenarios and I've modified my position since this discussion has started.

I still will say that the deferring is ultimately going to marginally impact the outcome of games over a long period of time. Not all that much different from previous iterations.

 

[2009ring]

The 49ers demise began when they hired Kyle Shanahan.