OT In Playoffs: Ball first or second?

Yappi

Yappi

Go Buckeyes
I saw an article complaining about Shanahan taking the ball first. When I watched the game, at first I thought that was a mistake. As the game continued, I thought it was the right decision. Then Kansas City scored the winning TD to make it look like a bad decision.

Here's my thought process:

1. Both teams get a possession.
2. The team getting the possession second has a significant advantage in that they know what they need to do to win or tie the game.
3. The team getting the ball first has a significant advantage if the teams remain tied after one possession.

Which advantage is more important? Knowing the outcome of the first drive or having a chance to win the game on your second possession without the other team getting the ball?
 
 
Yappi said:
I saw an article complaining about Shanahan taking the ball first. When I watched the game, at first I thought that was a mistake. As the game continued, I thought it was the right decision. Then Kansas City scored the winning TD to make it look like a bad decision.

Here's my thought process:

1. Both teams get a possession.
2. The team getting the possession second has a significant advantage in that they know what they need to do to win or tie the game.
3. The team getting the ball first has a significant advantage if the teams remain tied after one possession.

Which advantage is more important? Knowing the outcome of the first drive or having a chance to win the game on your second possession without the other team getting the ball?
Click to expand...
What I have read … the nerds say it is like 52% to 48% in favor of the team getting the ball first … to me it is so close that the answer is either

I find it funny the experts on TV criticizing Shanahan for kicking the FG in OT … because “he should have known Mahomes would lead the to a TD” … do they realize KC had something like 14 drives before that … and had only scored 1 TD … and it was when they got the ball on the 16 … so thinking you could hold them to a FG or less was not unrealistic.
 
joesports said:
What I have read … the nerds say it is like 52% to 48% in favor of the team getting the ball first … to me it is so close that the answer is either

I find it funny the experts on TV criticizing Shanahan for kicking the FG in OT … because “he should have known Mahomes would lead the to a TD” … do they realize KC had something like 14 drives before that … and had only scored 1 TD … and it was when they got the ball on the 16 … so thinking you could hold them to a FG or less was not unrealistic.
Click to expand...
But, that last drive KC gets 4 downs. It completely changes the dynamic. And I don't think that was factored into the probability.

If SF scores on their first drive, KC now plays to get into FG range no matter what happens, at minimum, with a shot at a TD to win (or two point conversion if SF scored a a TD) to win. If SF went for it on fourth down, and passed on the FG, if the next drive played out with the game tied, KC punts on fourth down. Next score wins.

Now, had SF NOT scored in OT, KC punts on their possession assuming they got held to a fourth down, and SF has another shot at it. But I wouldn't want to go into OT assuming neither team scores on the other.

Here's all the scoring scenarios:

SF FG, KC has 4 downs until FG range; FG ties it, SF ball; TD wins it
SF TD, KC has 4 downs down the field, TD and 2 point try wins it, SF doesn't get the ball a second time.
SF no score; KC plays normal, any score wins, but 3 downs, and punt if necessary.
SF no score; KC no score; SF ball
 
joesports said:
What I have read … the nerds say it is like 52% to 48% in favor of the team getting the ball first … to me it is so close that the answer is either

I find it funny the experts on TV criticizing Shanahan for kicking the FG in OT … because “he should have known Mahomes would lead the to a TD” … do they realize KC had something like 14 drives before that … and had only scored 1 TD … and it was when they got the ball on the 16 … so thinking you could hold them to a FG or less was not unrealistic.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I think it's a tossup.

The best thing for Shanahan would have been to lose the coin-toss and win the game. That way the other coach made the incredibly bad decision of taking the ball first or the incredibly bad decision of taking the ball second.
 
It's obvious.
You go second in the playoffs.

By knowing what you need to do can give you extra downs, alter play calling.

The analytic folks can go hump a bag of doorknobs with their reasoning.
 
Sykotyk said:
But, that last drive KC gets 4 downs. It completely changes the dynamic. And I don't think that was factored into the probability.

If SF scores on their first drive, KC now plays to get into FG range no matter what happens, at minimum, with a shot at a TD to win (or two point conversion if SF scored a a TD) to win. If SF went for it on fourth down, and passed on the FG, if the next drive played out with the game tied, KC punts on fourth down. Next score wins.

Now, had SF NOT scored in OT, KC punts on their possession assuming they got held to a fourth down, and SF has another shot at it. But I wouldn't want to go into OT assuming neither team scores on the other.

Here's all the scoring scenarios:

SF FG, KC has 4 downs until FG range; FG ties it, SF ball; TD wins it
SF TD, KC has 4 downs down the field, TD and 2 point try wins it, SF doesn't get the ball a second time.
SF no score; KC plays normal, any score wins, but 3 downs, and punt if necessary.
SF no score; KC no score; SF ball
Click to expand...
It is easy to say things after it happened … and if SF had not scored …. there is no guarantee that KC would punt on 4th & 1 anyway … analytics would say go for it … could be different with a longer yardage.

If SF goes for it on 4th … and doesn’t get it … KC gets the ball and only needs a FG to win … Shanahan would get killed by the experts … like they killed Dan Campbell for going for it on 4th down … and the analytic nerds take everything into account when the figure the percentages … one of my former assistant coaches is now one of those nerds in the NFL … we have had many conversations with him about these kinds of things … IMO the percentages are so close that either option is reasonable and will also be criticized if you lose.
 
Thavoice said:
It's obvious.
You go second in the playoffs.

By knowing what you need to do can give you extra downs, alter play calling.

The analytic folks can go hump a bag of doorknobs with their reasoning.
Click to expand...
That is easy to say … then neither teams score on their first drives … and the opponent has the ball with only a FG to win … then all the experts will tell you how dumb you were for going second.
 
Here's a crazy scenario. Both teams get a possession. First team scores and then surprises with a successful onside kick. Is game over because team 2 had a chance for the ball but didn't get it?
 
The other piece of the puzzle here, and I believe Romo mentioned it, was the thought that the 49er defense was gassed after having just been on the field at the end of regulation. By taking the ball 2nd, Shanahan may well have felt they were handing the Chiefs a TD by putting his tired defense right back on the field to start OT. I remember how easily the Patriots went down the field in OT against a tired Falcons defense. If I can remember that, then I'm sure Shanahan remembered that, too, since he was the Falcons' OC in that game.
 
I believe SF made the correct decision. If KC had ball first and scored a TD in typical Mahomes fashion, do you want all the pressure on Purdy just to try to tie?
 
The negativity towards Mike Shannahan is ridiculous. I mean we live in an age where players get no accountability for failure. It's the coaches fault, the officials fault, the OC, DC, anyone other than the players. And what a chicken bleep move by SF to can the defensive coordinator yesterday??? I mean since when is making the super bowl not good enough?

Initially I'd say getting the ball second would make the most sense, but if you play it out, neither team scores, the 3rd possession a FG wins the game...to me that's a HUGE advantage.
 
joesports said:
You are crazy … so the experts didn’t crucify Dan Campbell for passing up the FGs … right … your opinion … percentages say otherwise … period!
Click to expand...
Yes.
Campbell gets hammered because he GAVE UP POINTS on those decisions. He didnt go for it to try and get points, he gave up points.

A coach RARELY will receive criticism for kicking a FG and taking the points, of which I say a coach should TAKE THE POINTS in most situations, especially in a game where it is expected to be nip and tuck.

I am all for being aggressive, but these toolbaganalyticpencilnecknerds are proof positive you cannot simply look at a percentage on a spreadsheet and go with it.

I like Campbell, i really do. I enjoy the aggressiveness but you do so to get into position for points. When you are in that position, man you have to take those points especially in a one and done game.

Even in the regular season in going for two.........go by momentun, gut feeling, how the game is progressing, not a freaking spreadsheet that only has the percentages. Late season game with that substitution/eligible receiver error. After the penalty....just kick the EP but no......hard headed, bone headed, whatever.

I get it, people rave all season when coaches are aggressive, go by analytics, but that is not the end all be all in sports.


Take the freaking points.

Shanahan.....are we CERTAIN he knew the rule? I will admit, I forgot about it was diff in the playoffs.
 
My point is this analytics says it is about a 50/50 choice … so there is no right answer … if you lose you, you are wrong … it is easy to say AFTER you see what happens … just like Seattle and Marshawn Lynch … everyone says how stupid it was not running him on the 1 yd line … what they don’t know or care about was ML carried the ball 5 times that year from the 1 against the other teams GL defense … he scored only once … 1 out of 5 tries … not really a sure thing … yet not running him then was stupid from all the experts who think it was a sure thing … what the coaches knew was they were not good in that situation running the ball … and if they threw it … and they could then run it on 3rd and 4th down if they wanted to … to me the foolish part was not running a play action pass … using ML as a decoy … but throwing the ball was the smart choice … in fact it was something like 100 to 3 TD to INTs … but hindsight says it was dumb … always easy to say when you know the outcome.
 
joesports said:
My point is this analytics says it is about a 50/50 choice … so there is no right answer … if you lose you, you are wrong … it is easy to say AFTER you see what happens … just like Seattle and Marshawn Lynch … everyone says how stupid it was not running him on the 1 yd line … what they don’t know or care about was ML carried the ball 5 times that year from the 1 against the other teams GL defense … he scored only once … 1 out of 5 tries … not really a sure thing … yet not running him then was stupid from all the experts who think it was a sure thing … what the coaches knew was they were not good in that situation running the ball … and if they threw it … and they could then run it on 3rd and 4th down if they wanted to … to me the foolish part was not running a play action pass … using ML as a decoy … but throwing the ball was the smart choice … in fact it was something like 100 to 3 TD to INTs … but hindsight says it was dumb … always easy to say when you know the outcome.
Click to expand...

I get and appreciate the analytics but in this case, I am not giving Patrick Mahomes 4 downs to continue a drive. Once SF kicked the fg, didn’t you just know that Mahomes/KC was going to get a td?

Maybe if you defense is absolutely gassed or you just had a significant injury late in the game on defense; maybe you can make a case to take the ball first but if the qb on the other side is a Mahomes, Montana, Brady type - don’t give them 4 downs to continue a drive.
 
WJ-OSU-STEELERS said:
I get and appreciate the analytics but in this case, I am not giving Patrick Mahomes 4 downs to continue a drive. Once SF kicked the fg, didn’t you just know that Mahomes/KC was going to get a td?

Maybe if you defense is absolutely gassed or you just had a significant injury late in the game on defense; maybe you can make a case to take the ball first but if the qb on the other side is a Mahomes, Montana, Brady type - don’t give them 4 downs to continue a drive.
Click to expand...
The previous 14 drives with Mahomes … 1 ended in a TD … the one where they got the ball on the 16 … so it was not unreasonable to think they could hold them to a FG or less … and would you want it to be tied after the two possession (one for each team) and now give Mahomes the ball with any score to win … it is easy to forget the 3rd possession because it didn’t come to that … but about 30% of overtime games went to at least 3 possessions … my point is this … it is easy to be critical, after the fact … because you know the outcomes … while I am not a 100% behind analytics … they can’t be completely ignored either … if the next time the winner decides to kickoff and they lose on the third possession … these same experts will be saying how dumb it was to kickoff.
 
joesports said:
The previous 14 drives with Mahomes … 1 ended in a TD … the one where they got the ball on the 16 … so it was not unreasonable to think they could hold them to a FG or less … and would you want it to be tied after the two possession (one for each team) and now give Mahomes the ball with any score to win … it is easy to forget the 3rd possession because it didn’t come to that … but about 30% of overtime games went to at least 3 possessions … my point is this … it is easy to be critical, after the fact … because you know the outcomes … while I am not a 100% behind analytics … they can’t be completely ignored either … if the next time the winner decides to kickoff and they lose on the third possession … these same experts will be saying how dumb it was to kickoff.
Click to expand...

And it’s Patrick Mahomes……with the previous 14 drives resulting in only 1 touchdown is all the more reason to not let him have 4 downs to extend a series. The SF defense had played what, 60+ plays? Defense relies on effort, those guys are a 1/2 step slower heading into the OT than they were in the first half.

To each their own but giving Mahomes an extra down is suicide.
 
Remember, Mahomes would get to go for it on 4th down until they got inside the 49ers 40 yard line. At that point, KC would have to weigh their chances of making a first down versus a FG.
 
I love the expression, "I'm not giving Pat Mahomes a chance" It's a game, he's going to have a chance to beat you. As pointed out before, the SF defense really dominated that game for a good part of it. Take out the muffed punt that set up the first TD and it's even more impressive. I don't think you play a game scared by who is on the other team. That's a loser's mentality. Media people just need to talk about something.
 
Yappi said:
Remember, Mahomes would get to go for it on 4th down until they got inside the 49ers 40 yard line. At that point, KC would have to weigh their chances of making a first down versus a FG.
Click to expand...

This is what I mean by 4 downs. In OT KC went for it on 4th & 1/2 a yard from around their own 30 - Mahomes kept it on a read option. KC obviously had to go for it because they were down 3 pts. However, if KC had the ball first, would they have gone for it? Probably so since it it was only 1/2 a yard. But what if it was 4th & 5 from their own 30? Do you try & go for it? If you don’t make it, SF would already be in fg position.

This is why most would prefer to play D first so they know what they have to do on O.
 
WJ-OSU-STEELERS said:
This is what I mean by 4 downs. In OT KC went for it on 4th & 1/2 a yard from around their own 30 - Mahomes kept it on a read option. KC obviously had to go for it because they were down 3 pts. However, if KC had the ball first, would they have gone for it? Probably so since it it was only 1/2 a yard. But what if it was 4th & 5 from their own 30? Do you try & go for it? If you don’t make it, SF would already be in fg position.

This is why most would prefer to play D first so they know what they have to do on O.
Click to expand...
Would you prefer it had it remained tied after the first two possessions .., and the great Mahomes only needed a FG to win?
 
joesports said:
Would you prefer it had it remained tied after the first two possessions .., and the great Mahomes only needed a FG to win?
Click to expand...


My gut tells me if SF takes the ball first and if they do not score a TD, they are losing. Even if SF scored a TD, KC said they had plan on going for two if they scored a td.

A fg doesn’t beat the greats unless it’s the last play of the game.
 
WJ-OSU-STEELERS said:
My gut tells me if SF takes the ball first and if they do not score a TD, they are losing. Even if SF scored a TD, KC said they had plan on going for two if they scored a td.

A fg doesn’t beat the greats unless it’s the last play of the game.
Click to expand...
I understand that … but SF does not know this … and the odds are still 50/50 … which have been my point all along … I don’t think either choice is bad … just a preference … my main objection is calling it a bad decision when it really only comes down to preference.
 
joesports said:
I understand that … but SF does not know this … and the odds are still 50/50 … which have been my point all along … I don’t think either choice is bad … just a preference … my main objection is calling it a bad decision when it really only comes down to preference.
Click to expand...

Is that 50/50 based on a typical game situation, it is not based on Patrick Mahomes.

Again, you are giving Mahomes 4 downs to move the chains to at worse get into fg range to tie or to get the go ahead game winning td.
 
WJ-OSU-STEELERS said:
Is that 50/50 based on a typical game situation, it is not based on Patrick Mahomes.

Again, you are giving Mahomes 4 downs to move the chains to at worse get into fg range to tie or to get the go ahead game winning td.
Click to expand...
… I think you are over rating the 4 downs thing … now days most coaches already got for it on 4th & short … and once they get into FG range it is no different than any other game … and under estimating the the 3rd drive importance … but either way … the odds are so close that neither option is significantly better than the other … you prefer to take it second … not arguing that is a bad decision … but I also thing taking it first has some merits also … neither choice is bad … just a personal preference.
 
joesports said:
The previous 14 drives with Mahomes … 1 ended in a TD … the one where they got the ball on the 16 … so it was not unreasonable to think they could hold them to a FG or less … and would you want it to be tied after the two possession (one for each team) and now give Mahomes the ball with any score to win … it is easy to forget the 3rd possession because it didn’t come to that … but about 30% of overtime games went to at least 3 possessions … my point is this … it is easy to be critical, after the fact … because you know the outcomes … while I am not a 100% behind analytics … they can’t be completely ignored either … if the next time the winner decides to kickoff and they lose on the third possession … these same experts will be saying how dumb it was to kickoff.
Click to expand...
It's hard enough to stop a great QB when they have 3 plays, let alone 4 to gain 10 yards.
By taking the ball, SF gave KC the cliff note version of the rest of the game.

In this scenario, you go 2nd. Plain and simple. No need to try and be the smartest guy in the room and try to make the rest of us hold the bag.

Shanahan screwed the pooch here. No doubt about it.

If that a black coach....his intelligence would be in question but because it's some weasel from a successful coaching tree some are giving him the benefit of the doubt.
 
joesports said:
… I think you are over rating the 4 downs thing … now days most coaches already got for it on 4th & short … and once they get into FG range it is no different than any other game … and under estimating the the 3rd drive importance … but either way … the odds are so close that neither option is significantly better than the other … you prefer to take it second … not arguing that is a bad decision … but I also thing taking it first has some merits also … neither choice is bad … just a personal preference.
Click to expand...
No. We are not over rating that extra down. By going second you know for a fact if you need to go for it and the decision is made.

That whole drive they knew they had 4 Plays to get a first down and you use that to your advantage.

You ain't gonna wiggle yourself out of being on the wrong side of this one.

You always go second when you have rhe chance to match.

Always.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top