Figster Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 3 minutes ago, MJS said: They had the better defense statistically. true that MJS, You would however agree both Mahomes and Brady in all likelihood was going to score on their 1st possession in OT, and probably a TD with the knowledge a TD ends the game. Smart HC's with elite QB's have a huge advantage winning the coin toss in OT in my humble opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 Just for the playoffs, have 10 minutes of OT. If it's still tied, then a QB throwing balls into trash cans contest. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, MJS said: They had the better defense statistically. I'm not willing to accept that without looking at the data. My guess is that teams have a slight advantage by getting the ball first, but that it is not significant. I'd have to see the data though. OK, here goes. This is for the postseason only because I want to focus on good teams, and just for games in the past 25 years, going back to the 1994 season (i can't find game logs from 1995 and earlier). I've bolded the winners who got the ball first and won, and bolded and underlined the teams that got the ball first and scored on the opening drive. 1998 -ATL/MN: Minnesota gets ball first but ATL eventually wins. 2000: Miami/Indy: Miami gets ball first, but doesn't score; Indy misses a FG; Miami then scores and wins. 2001: NE/Oakland: NE gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2002: TN/Pitts: TN gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2003 - GB/SEA: Seattle gets ball first, but GB wins. 2003: Carolina/STL: Carolina gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins in double OT 2003: GB/Philly: Philly gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins on second possession after a Favre INT. 2004 - SD/Jets; SD gets ball first; but Jets win (SD misses a FG on their second possession). 2006 - Chi/Seattle: Seattle gets ball first but doesn't score; Bears win. 2007 - GB/NYG: Packers get ball first but turn it over; Giants win. 2008 - SD/Colts: SD gets ball first; scores on first drive and wins. 2009 - GB/AZ: GB gets ball first; strip sacked fumble return TD for AZ; AZ wins 2009: NO/MN: Saints get ball first and score on first drive; win. 2011 - Den/Pitt: Den gets ball first; score on first play from scrimmage and win. 2011 - NYG/SF: Giants get ball first but don't score; they do eventually win, however. 2012: Den/Bal: Ravens get ball first but don't score; eventually win in double OT. 2014: Seattle/GB: Seahawks get ball first and score on opening possession to win. 2015: AZ/GB: Arizona gets the ball first and scores on first possession; wins. 2016 - NE/ATL: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NE/KC: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NO/LA: NO gets ball first but LA wins. -- My takeaways: 1) In four of the last five postseason games, the team that won the toss scored on their first possession. There's a trend going on of late. Perhaps it's a function of the recent rule changes that favor the offense? 2) The overall record of teams that get the ball first is 14-7. This is important because by starting first and going last, it means they get an extra possession -- always one more than their opponent. In the last 9 OT playoff games, 8 of the teams that received the ball first won. 3) In 9 out of 21 games, the team that won the toss won on their first possession alone. That is a REALLY high rate. Edited January 22, 2019 by dave mcbride 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 1 hour ago, dave mcbride said: OK, here goes. This is for the postseason only because I want to focus on good teams, and just for games in the past 25 years, going back to the 1994 season (i can't find game logs from 1995 and earlier). I've bolded the winners who got the ball first and won, and bolded and underlined the teams that got the ball first and scored on the opening drive. 1998 -ATL/MN: Minnesota gets ball first but ATL eventually wins. 2000: Miami/Indy: Miami gets ball first, but doesn't score; Indy misses a FG; Miami then scores and wins. 2001: NE/Oakland: NE gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2002: TN/Pitts: TN gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2003 - GB/SEA: Seattle gets ball first, but GB wins. 2003: Carolina/STL: Carolina gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins in double OT 2003: GB/Philly: Philly gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins on second possession after a Favre INT. 2004 - SD/Jets; SD gets ball first; but Jets win (SD misses a FG on their second possession). 2006 - Chi/Seattle: Seattle gets ball first but doesn't score; Bears win. 2007 - GB/NYG: Packers get ball first but turn it over; Giants win. 2008 - SD/Colts: SD gets ball first; scores on first drive and wins. 2009 - GB/AZ: GB gets ball first; strip sacked fumble return TD for AZ; AZ wins 2009: NO/MN: Saints get ball first and score on first drive; win. 2011 - Den/Pitt: Den gets ball first; score on first play from scrimmage and win. 2011 - NYG/SF: Giants get ball first but don't score; they do eventually win, however. 2012: Den/Bal: Ravens get ball first but don't score; eventually win in double OT. 2014: Seattle/GB: Seahawks get ball first and score on opening possession to win. 2015: AZ/GB: Arizona gets the ball first and scores on first possession; wins. 2016 - NE/ATL: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NE/KC: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NO/LA: NO gets ball first but LA wins. -- My takeaways: 1) In four of the last five postseason games, the team that won the toss scored on their first possession. There's a trend going on of late. Perhaps it's a function of the recent rule changes that favor the offense? 2) The overall record of teams that get the ball first is 14-7. This is important because by starting first and going last, it means they get an extra possession -- always one more than their opponent. In the last 9 OT playoff games, 8 of the teams that received the ball first won. 3) In 9 out of 21 games, the team that won the toss won on their first possession alone. That is a REALLY high rate. the sudden death system was within one percentage point for the coin toss winner/loser eventually winning so going with the improved system made it way worse bring back sudden death again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan_34 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 8 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said: if they were that bad the Putz would have scored over 45 points. just saying. Chiefs DC fired- just sayin’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 8 minutes ago, row_33 said: the sudden death system was within one percentage point for the coin toss winner/loser eventually winning so going with the improved system made it way worse bring back sudden death again I am only talking about playoff games - games between teams with offenses that are presumably competent at worst. I can't speak to the regular season. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetermansRedemption Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 Will be an interesting off season to see if the NFL deems this an issue and addresses it. I know at least one owner will be raising hell about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) win the toss with a 50.3% chance of eventually winning the game lose the toss with a 49.5% chance of eventually winning the game NO FAIR, DESTROY THIS!!!! GIVE US SOMETHING THAT MORE HEAVILY FAVOURS THE COIN TOSS WINNER.... and let us whine and moan and B word all the livelong ***** day Edited January 22, 2019 by row_33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 On 1/20/2019 at 11:36 PM, The Frankish Reich said: I really don't see any reason why - in the playoffs - we don't simply play it NBA or soccer style and add on a normal 15 minute period. The chances of a tie after the additional period are low enough that it would probably resolve 80-90% of ties without anyone whining about "fairness." It can't be unfair because it's just a continuation of the same game with the same rules, not based on something random like which side a coin lands on. If it's tied after the additional period, well, that's when some other rule more arbitrary rule can come into play. This makes the most sense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 when it was sudden death teams took it more seriously now with mommy/daddy/mommy/daddy/whaaaaaaaa/it's not fair attempts to interfere and the promise of maybe a second chance it is far worse just like any false safety net fascinating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) like I said pages back, play a whole 15 minutes of OT. At the 7:30 mark the clock stops and the team that kicked off to start the OT now receives. Also, all conversions are of the 2 point variety. Both teams get 2 TO’s each “half” of the OT for a total of 4 each. you After that, sudden death. Visiting team gets the ball first. The home team had 5 quarters of football on their own turf to win the game. Edited January 22, 2019 by Binghamton Beast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, dave mcbride said: OK, here goes. This is for the postseason only because I want to focus on good teams, and just for games in the past 25 years, going back to the 1994 season (i can't find game logs from 1995 and earlier). I've bolded the winners who got the ball first and won, and bolded and underlined the teams that got the ball first and scored on the opening drive. 1998 -ATL/MN: Minnesota gets ball first but ATL eventually wins. 2000: Miami/Indy: Miami gets ball first, but doesn't score; Indy misses a FG; Miami then scores and wins. 2001: NE/Oakland: NE gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2002: TN/Pitts: TN gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2003 - GB/SEA: Seattle gets ball first, but GB wins. 2003: Carolina/STL: Carolina gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins in double OT 2003: GB/Philly: Philly gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins on second possession after a Favre INT. 2004 - SD/Jets; SD gets ball first; but Jets win (SD misses a FG on their second possession). 2006 - Chi/Seattle: Seattle gets ball first but doesn't score; Bears win. 2007 - GB/NYG: Packers get ball first but turn it over; Giants win. 2008 - SD/Colts: SD gets ball first; scores on first drive and wins. 2009 - GB/AZ: GB gets ball first; strip sacked fumble return TD for AZ; AZ wins 2009: NO/MN: Saints get ball first and score on first drive; win. 2011 - Den/Pitt: Den gets ball first; score on first play from scrimmage and win. 2011 - NYG/SF: Giants get ball first but don't score; they do eventually win, however. 2012: Den/Bal: Ravens get ball first but don't score; eventually win in double OT. 2014: Seattle/GB: Seahawks get ball first and score on opening possession to win. 2015: AZ/GB: Arizona gets the ball first and scores on first possession; wins. 2016 - NE/ATL: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NE/KC: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NO/LA: NO gets ball first but LA wins. -- My takeaways: 1) In four of the last five postseason games, the team that won the toss scored on their first possession. There's a trend going on of late. Perhaps it's a function of the recent rule changes that favor the offense? 2) The overall record of teams that get the ball first is 14-7. This is important because by starting first and going last, it means they get an extra possession -- always one more than their opponent. In the last 9 OT playoff games, 8 of the teams that received the ball first won. 3) In 9 out of 21 games, the team that won the toss won on their first possession alone. That is a REALLY high rate. Your last point about 9 of 21 games winning on their first possession in over time tells me that they often don't win on their first possession. It takes them multiple possessions to win the game, which means they are often only scoring a field goal first and then their defense eventually stops the other team from scoring. One team getting the ball first is a moot point. One team has to get the ball first. The only question is how often the other team gets a chance on offense themselves, and it appears that more often than not they do get a chance. Edited January 22, 2019 by MJS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 20 minutes ago, MJS said: Your last point about 9 of 21 games winning on their first possession in over time tells me that they often don't win on their first possession. It takes them multiple possessions to win the game, which means they are often only scoring a field goal first and then their defense eventually stops the other team from scoring. One team getting the ball first is a moot point. One team has to get the ball first. The only question is how often the other team gets a chance on offense themselves, and it appears that more often than not they do get a chance. Scoring on what is effectively an opening drive at a 43 percent rate is very, very high. More importantly, though, it means that in only 57 percent of the games will the opposing team even have a chance at the ball. If given a choice, no team will defer given these numbers. And if they fail, the team that won the toss gets a SECOND possession to their one. Most of the games above that weren't decided on the first possession were over by the third possession. Only a small handful dragged on into 4th and 5th possessions. Anyway, 14-7, 8 out of the last 9, and 4 out of the last 5. Those numbers are extremely difficult to argue with. Edited January 22, 2019 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 2 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Scoring on what is effectively an opening drive at a 43 percent rate is very, very high. More importantly, though, it means that in only 57 percent of the games will the opposing team even have a chance at the ball. And if they fail, the team that won the toss gets a SECOND possession to their one. Most of the games above that weren't decided on the first possession were over by the third possession. Only a small handful dragged on into 4th and 5th possessions. Anyway, 14-7 and 8 out of 9. Those numbers are extremely difficult to argue with. I have no problem with that, honestly. It shows me that the defense of the first team is stopping the offense of the second team. Not sure how anyone can argue that they don't deserve to win if they are getting it done on offense AND on defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, MJS said: I have no problem with that, honestly. It shows me that the defense of the first team is stopping the offense of the second team. Not sure how anyone can argue that they don't deserve to win if they are getting it done on offense AND on defense. 14 out of 21, 8 out of 9, and 4 out of 5. You said above that you assumed the bias would be small. I have collected data that shows that the bias toward the coin flip winner is actually massive and only getting more and more pronounced (possibly because of rules that favor the offense). The numbers are the numbers. Edited January 22, 2019 by dave mcbride 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILBillsfan Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, dave mcbride said: OK, here goes. This is for the postseason only because I want to focus on good teams, and just for games in the past 25 years, going back to the 1994 season (i can't find game logs from 1995 and earlier). I've bolded the winners who got the ball first and won, and bolded and underlined the teams that got the ball first and scored on the opening drive. 1998 -ATL/MN: Minnesota gets ball first but ATL eventually wins. 2000: Miami/Indy: Miami gets ball first, but doesn't score; Indy misses a FG; Miami then scores and wins. 2001: NE/Oakland: NE gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2002: TN/Pitts: TN gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2003 - GB/SEA: Seattle gets ball first, but GB wins. 2003: Carolina/STL: Carolina gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins in double OT 2003: GB/Philly: Philly gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins on second possession after a Favre INT. 2004 - SD/Jets; SD gets ball first; but Jets win (SD misses a FG on their second possession). 2006 - Chi/Seattle: Seattle gets ball first but doesn't score; Bears win. 2007 - GB/NYG: Packers get ball first but turn it over; Giants win. 2008 - SD/Colts: SD gets ball first; scores on first drive and wins. 2009 - GB/AZ: GB gets ball first; strip sacked fumble return TD for AZ; AZ wins 2009: NO/MN: Saints get ball first and score on first drive; win. 2011 - Den/Pitt: Den gets ball first; score on first play from scrimmage and win. 2011 - NYG/SF: Giants get ball first but don't score; they do eventually win, however. 2012: Den/Bal: Ravens get ball first but don't score; eventually win in double OT. 2014: Seattle/GB: Seahawks get ball first and score on opening possession to win. 2015: AZ/GB: Arizona gets the ball first and scores on first possession; wins. 2016 - NE/ATL: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NE/KC: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NO/LA: NO gets ball first but LA wins. -- My takeaways: 1) In four of the last five postseason games, the team that won the toss scored on their first possession. There's a trend going on of late. Perhaps it's a function of the recent rule changes that favor the offense? 2) The overall record of teams that get the ball first is 14-7. This is important because by starting first and going last, it means they get an extra possession -- always one more than their opponent. In the last 9 OT playoff games, 8 of the teams that received the ball first won. 3) In 9 out of 21 games, the team that won the toss won on their first possession alone. That is a REALLY high rate. you should not include the team that won the coin but won after their first possession . you guys are trying to point that the OT rules are flawed those scenarios would say they are not flawed that defense did the job and both teams possessed the ball 5 of the last nine have won if they won the coin toss quite a statically diff then 8 of 9 and only 9 of those 21 games the team winning the coin flip won on the opening possession again showing the current OT rules are fine. Edited January 22, 2019 by ILBillsfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, ILBillsfan said: you should not include the team that won the coin but won after their first possession . you guys are trying to point that the OT rules are flawed those scenarios would say they are not flawed that defense did the job and both teams possessed the ball A team that gets a stop yet doesn't score itself allows the opponent a second chance. If the coin flip winner scores on the second possession, the ratio remains an unfair 2-1. It's basic math. The team that wins the coin flip wins 2/3 of the time historically, and 88 percent of the time in the last few years. In the last five matches, 80 percent of the coin flip winners scored ended the game on their opening drive. Edited January 22, 2019 by dave mcbride 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 2 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: 14 out of 21, 8 out of 9, and 4 out of 5. You said above that you assumed the bias would be small. I have collected data that shows that the bias toward the coin flip winner is actually massive and only getting more and more pronounced (possibly because of rules that favor the offense). The numbers are the numbers. I'm concerned with the numbers of the offense scoring first and ending the game. If both offenses get a shot, the outcome is irrelevant to me. Nobody complains about an overtime that goes to 3+ possessions. You have a 50/50 shot of getting the ball on the coin flip, and even if you don't you have a 60/40 chance of getting a shot on offense anyways. That seems fair to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, MJS said: I'm concerned with the numbers of the offense scoring first and ending the game. If both offenses get a shot, the outcome is irrelevant to me. Nobody complains about an overtime that goes to 3+ possessions. You have a 50/50 shot of getting the ball on the coin flip, and even if you don't you have a 60/40 chance of getting a shot on offense anyways. That seems fair to me. But it's not actually 50-50 even if the team doesn't score right away. In trading possessions, they will get more chances to expose a tired defense than the opponent. It's very simple math. 9 out of 21 first round knockout punches, 14 out of 21 wins total, 8 out of the last 9 going to the coin flip winner, and 4 out of the last 5 ending in a first round knockout. At what point do the numbers register with you? Edited January 22, 2019 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILBillsfan Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 f those playoff OT games both teams had an opportunity to score and defenses actually prevented them form doing so. its not total possessions it does a team have the chance to score in OT and since both teams did possess the ball they both had opportunities to win. Again they also had 60m to in the chiefs game score some pts in the first half case closed. Stop three third and long situation's case closed Stop cherry picking data to try to say OT is flawed its fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 1 minute ago, ILBillsfan said: f those playoff OT games both teams had an opportunity to score and defenses actually prevented them form doing so. its not total possessions it does a team have the chance to score in OT and since both teams did possess the ball they both had opportunities to win. Again they also had 60m to in the chiefs game score some pts in the first half case closed. Stop three third and long situation's case closed Stop cherry picking data to try to say OT is flawed its fine I'm cherry picking data? Come on. The data is exactly as I've shown it: 67 percent of the time, the coin flip winner wins the game, and 43 percent of the time he does it in a first round knockout in a quarter that's ostensibly 15 minutes. I'm doing the opposite of cherry picking here. You don't offer any evidence yourself except cliches about "stopping them on D." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILBillsfan Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 8 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: I'm cherry picking data? Come on. The data is exactly as I've shown it: 67 percent of the time, the coin flip winner wins the game, and 43 percent of the time he does it in a first round knockout in a quarter that's ostensibly 15 minutes. I'm doing the opposite of cherry picking here. You don't offer any evidence yourself except cliches about "stopping them on D." nine of the 21 teams winning the coin flip won on the first possession that is it........... by you adding they eventually won you are inflating the numbers so yeah your cherry picking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 17 minutes ago, ILBillsfan said: nine of the 21 teams winning the coin flip won on the first possession that is it........... by you adding they eventually won you are inflating the numbers so yeah your cherry picking Huh? Seriously. My point -- and my only point, really -- is that winning the coin toss bestows an inarguable advantage to a team. Even if they don't score on the opening possession -- an again, a 43 percent opening-drive score rate is high -- they still end up with an advantage because mathematically they're more likely to end up with more possessions than their opponent overall and hence more opportunities to exploit weaknesses of a tired defense. Equally important, look at the recent trend line. 4 out of the last 5 games (80 percent) have ended with a first round knockout. Coincidentally, rules changes that favor the offense have gone into effect in that same period. In the regular season, teams that win the toss win 52.7 percent of the time, which is not insignificant (think of a baseball team that goes 85-76). In the postseason, though, where the quarterbacks are generally better (and playing in a rules system that is increasingly friendly to good QBs), it goes up to .667 percent, which is obviously very high. The team that gets it first in postseason OTs is also working with a 43 percent chance of delivering a knockout blow with no possibility of a response. Again, that's really high. It's not as if the opponent is going to score 100 percent of the time after making a stop (not even close, actually). The fact that 8 out of the last 9 wins have gone to the coin flip winner should register with people, but apparently it's not. Edited January 22, 2019 by dave mcbride 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 4 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Huh? Seriously. My point -- and my only point, really -- is that winning the coin toss bestows an inarguable advantage to a team. Even if they don't score on the opening possession -- an again, a 43 percent opening-drive score rate is high -- they still end up with an advantage because mathematically they're more likely to end up with more possessions than their opponent overall and hence more opportunities to exploit weaknesses of a tired defense. Equally important, look at the recent trend line. 4 out of the last 5 games (80 percent) have ended with a first round knockout. Coincidentally, rules changes that favor the offense have gone into effect in that same period. In the regular season, teams that win the toss win 52.7 percent of the time, which is not insignificant (think of a baseball team that goes 85-76). In the postseason, though, where the quarterbacks are generally better, it goes up to .667 percent, which is obviously very high. The team that gets it first in postseason OTs is also working with a 43 percent chance of delivering a knockout blow with no possibility of a response. Again, that's really high. It's not as if the opponent is going to score 100 percent of the time after making a stop (not even close, actually). The fact that out of the last 9 wins have gone to the coin flip winner should register with people, but apparently it's not. Good argument dave, thanks for the time and effort buddy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Figster said: true that MJS, You would however agree both Mahomes and Brady in all likelihood was going to score on their 1st possession in OT, and probably a TD with the knowledge a TD ends the game. Smart HC's with elite QB's have a huge advantage winning the coin toss in OT in my humble opinion. Smart HCs and elite QBs always have huge advantage..... throughout the entire game. That's why they win. Edited January 22, 2019 by OJ Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 3 minutes ago, OJ Tom said: Smart HCs and elite QBs always have huge advantage..... throughout the entire game. That's why they win. true that, Its also something most teams normally have that go deep into the playofs IMO. Good coaching, franchise QB's 3 hours ago, dave mcbride said: OK, here goes. This is for the postseason only because I want to focus on good teams, and just for games in the past 25 years, going back to the 1994 season (i can't find game logs from 1995 and earlier). I've bolded the winners who got the ball first and won, and bolded and underlined the teams that got the ball first and scored on the opening drive. 1998 -ATL/MN: Minnesota gets ball first but ATL eventually wins. 2000: Miami/Indy: Miami gets ball first, but doesn't score; Indy misses a FG; Miami then scores and wins. 2001: NE/Oakland: NE gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2002: TN/Pitts: TN gets ball first and scores; wins on first possession. 2003 - GB/SEA: Seattle gets ball first, but GB wins. 2003: Carolina/STL: Carolina gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins in double OT 2003: GB/Philly: Philly gets ball first but doesn't score; eventually wins on second possession after a Favre INT. 2004 - SD/Jets; SD gets ball first; but Jets win (SD misses a FG on their second possession). 2006 - Chi/Seattle: Seattle gets ball first but doesn't score; Bears win. 2007 - GB/NYG: Packers get ball first but turn it over; Giants win. 2008 - SD/Colts: SD gets ball first; scores on first drive and wins. 2009 - GB/AZ: GB gets ball first; strip sacked fumble return TD for AZ; AZ wins 2009: NO/MN: Saints get ball first and score on first drive; win. 2011 - Den/Pitt: Den gets ball first; score on first play from scrimmage and win. 2011 - NYG/SF: Giants get ball first but don't score; they do eventually win, however. 2012: Den/Bal: Ravens get ball first but don't score; eventually win in double OT. 2014: Seattle/GB: Seahawks get ball first and score on opening possession to win. 2015: AZ/GB: Arizona gets the ball first and scores on first possession; wins. 2016 - NE/ATL: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NE/KC: NE gets ball first and scores on opening drive to win. 2018: NO/LA: NO gets ball first but LA wins. -- My takeaways: 1) In four of the last five postseason games, the team that won the toss scored on their first possession. There's a trend going on of late. Perhaps it's a function of the recent rule changes that favor the offense? 2) The overall record of teams that get the ball first is 14-7. This is important because by starting first and going last, it means they get an extra possession -- always one more than their opponent. In the last 9 OT playoff games, 8 of the teams that received the ball first won. 3) In 9 out of 21 games, the team that won the toss won on their first possession alone. That is a REALLY high rate. Let me bump this post up to the next page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 I totally understand the reason why people are mad. I just don't agree. I like overtime how it is. If your defense is getting victimized on the first drive of overtime and you lose the game, then get a better defense. The Chiefs have had a bad defense all year and ultimately their bad defense lost them the game in overtime. And that's the price we pay for having an offensive league. The big money goes to the offense and teams focus on building great offenses. The problem is not with OT rules, it is with teams not focusing enough money or effort on building elite defenses (and rule changes hampering them). I don't agree with the sentiment that each team needs to have a fair shot on offense and both teams need an equal number of offensive possessions. That, again, lessens the importance of defense. Both teams are on the field 100% of the time. Both teams have 11 guys on the field at all times. Defenses can make big plays too. If they aren't doing that, then too bad for them. Better luck next time. Better yet, beat them in regulation and don't risk the coin flip in OT. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) 22 minutes ago, MJS said: I totally understand the reason why people are mad. I just don't agree. I like overtime how it is. If your defense is getting victimized on the first drive of overtime and you lose the game, then get a better defense. The Chiefs have had a bad defense all year and ultimately their bad defense lost them the game in overtime. And that's the price we pay for having an offensive league. The big money goes to the offense and teams focus on building great offenses. The problem is not with OT rules, it is with teams not focusing enough money or effort on building elite defenses (and rule changes hampering them). I don't agree with the sentiment that each team needs to have a fair shot on offense and both teams need an equal number of offensive possessions. That, again, lessens the importance of defense. Both teams are on the field 100% of the time. Both teams have 11 guys on the field at all times. Defenses can make big plays too. If they aren't doing that, then too bad for them. Better luck next time. Better yet, beat them in regulation and don't risk the coin flip in OT. Probably about as good an argument as you can make MJS, and its not like both teams don't have a 50/50 shot at winning the coin toss. We're not die hard Chiefs fan though, so its allot easier for us to say stop being a bunch of cry babies and get over it. Myself personally , I would prefer OT in the playoffs to be as close as you can get to a game ending in regulation. Adding an extra quarter would suffice in my humble opinion. Edited January 22, 2019 by Figster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 The current rules are fine, a TD is a significant score to give up. It was a travesty under the old rules where a field goal on the first possession would end the game. A field goal is a partial victory for the defense and thus giving up one on the opening possession is not sufficient enough to make a game end without the other team having the ball. The current rules are fine, don't give up a TD ever, if you give up a field goal that's a partial defensive victory, that should not on the first possession end the game. Also OP the Saints possessed the ball in OT and they turned it over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turk71 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 53 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: The current rules are fine, a TD is a significant score to give up. It was a travesty under the old rules where a field goal on the first possession would end the game. A field goal is a partial victory for the defense and thus giving up one on the opening possession is not sufficient enough to make a game end without the other team having the ball. The current rules are fine, don't give up a TD ever, if you give up a field goal that's a partial defensive victory, that should not on the first possession end the game. Also OP the Saints possessed the ball in OT and they turned it over. Why is the onus of preventing a td only on one team, the one who loses the coin flip? However important playing good defense is, there is definitely an advantage to winning the toss and not having to play any defense whatsoever in ot. That much should be obvious to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 55 minutes ago, Turk71 said: Why is the onus of preventing a td only on one team, the one who loses the coin flip? However important playing good defense is, there is definitely an advantage to winning the toss and not having to play any defense whatsoever in ot. That much should be obvious to anyone. That's a fair point however there will almost always be the possibility that one team will have the ball more unless you always give the other team the chance to respond even after 3 or more possessions. If lets say you win the coin toss score a TD, then the other team gets a possession scores a TD, and the team that won the toss scores again does the game end? If so one team got an additional possession. I think you could make an argument in the post season maybe there should be last licks. But in the regular season in the interest of avoiding ties and additional injuries I think the current system is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 10 hours ago, dave mcbride said: 2011 - Den/Pitt: Den gets ball first; score on first play from scrimmage and win. Tebow time!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turk71 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 44 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: That's a fair point however there will almost always be the possibility that one team will have the ball more unless you always give the other team the chance to respond even after 3 or more possessions. If lets say you win the coin toss score a TD, then the other team gets a possession scores a TD, and the team that won the toss scores again does the game end? If so one team got an additional possession. I think you could make an argument in the post season maybe there should be last licks. But in the regular season in the interest of avoiding ties and additional injuries I think the current system is fine. I agree with the 2nd paragraph except only one possession each in regular season guaranteed and equal possessions until a winner in postseason sounds reasonable. No one would think that the shootout in hockey was fair unless each team gets equal opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 57 minutes ago, Turk71 said: I agree with the 2nd paragraph except only one possession each in regular season guaranteed and equal possessions until a winner in postseason sounds reasonable. No one would think that the shootout in hockey was fair unless each team gets equal opportunity. I have no issue in the regular season an offense not seeing the field if a defense yields a TD, its the regular season, get these teams off the field on reasonable terms. I am coming more around to the idea of a post season last licks system but I do not think the current system is as big a travesty as it was when teams would stop trying to score after getting into the redzone in order to preserve a field goal opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerlyofCtown Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) On 1/20/2019 at 11:15 PM, BuffaloButt said: The OT rule needs to change giving the other team an opportunity to match a TD scored. Falcons & Chiefs both lost due to a fricken coin toss! They also lost due to not being able to stop the other team from scoring. Maybe Teams should also have to play an additional 16 games to decide a tie-breaker for a wildcard birth. OTs only purpose is to break a tie. Im more concerned with phantom calls then OT rules. I dont think the game should have ever been in OT. Edited January 23, 2019 by formerlyofCtown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlottebillsfan2 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Its the playoffs, you play a 15 minute quarter. If after the quarter your still tied you play another 15 minutes. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Charlottebillsfan2 said: Its the playoffs, you play a 15 minute quarter. If after the quarter your still tied you play another 15 minutes. Seems like a no brainer to me. Overtime with the chance to go to the Superbowl and one team never touches the football. Good grief, how sad can you get. Play another quarter, its an easy fix... Edited January 23, 2019 by Figster 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Go back to sudden death. You don't win the coin flip, then play defense and force the other team to punt. If not, you lose...even on a FG. I don't like the way they do it now, let alone making additional changes so that it is "fair" to the team that can't stop anyone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 19 minutes ago, LabattBlue said: Go back to sudden death. You don't win the coin flip, then play defense and force the other team to punt. If not, you lose...even on a FG. I don't like the way they do it now, let alone making additional changes so that it is "fair" to the team that can't stop anyone. the whiners and crybabies would never agree to that they just want the game to keep going until their team is ahead on the scoreboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 On 1/20/2019 at 11:15 PM, BuffaloButt said: The OT rule needs to change giving the other team an opportunity to match a TD scored. Falcons & Chiefs both lost due to a fricken coin toss! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts