Jump to content

Kick the Ball in Overtime


VaMilBill

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, sullim4 said:

 

The one reason - if it goes to a third possession, it's sudden death and if you score you win.

 

That's the only reason why I can think you'd do it.

This exactly.  You receive the ball every time.  I can't even believe this is a debate.

  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

College teams always choose to play defense first in OT. Not sure why it’s different in the NFL especially when your both guaranteed a possession. I know in the regular season if you score a TD first you win the game so maybe that’s what they thought. Complete coaching blunder on Shannahan. 

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But Mahomes would just go for 2. And you still risk losing never having touched it again and having given him an extra down to get in. Short of stopping the best player in football with 4 downs at his disposal every time the BEST case scenario actually is you bring the game down to a 2 point conversion attempt. That is a better than 50/50 proposition for above average offenses according to the data.

Not if the Chiefs tie it with a field goal.

7 minutes ago, BillMafia716ix said:

College teams always choose to play defense first in OT. Not sure why it’s different in the NFL especially when your both guaranteed a possession. I know in the regular season if you score a TD first you win the game so maybe that’s what they thought. Complete coaching blunder on Shannahan. 

If it goes field goal field goal then the next score wins.  Would you rather have the ball or not have the ball in that situation?  It's different than college.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Process said:

Even if you achieve best case scenario on your opening drive and score a TD, you then put your defense at a big disadvantage because the best QB in the NFL has 4 downs the entire drive to score a TD and then go for 2. 

 

You never take the ball first. 

IMO

 

Why are we assuming they go for 2? 49ers only scored 19 points in regulation. They score a TD on their first possession and now we are afraid they are going to score points every time they have the ball?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with this theory is, after each team scores, it’s back to sudden death. So if you receive and score, and then the opponent scores and ties, your the next team to get the ball. And if you score it’s over.
 

The only way this makes sense is if you plan for going for 2 if you kickoff and then score. But I don’t think anyone’s taking that chance with the game on the line and could easily tie and hope your defense gets another shot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a tough decision between wanting the advantage of knowing if you need to use 4 downs to score or wanting the advantage of only needing a FG to win the game on the third possession of OT. I can see an argument for either way. Had the 49ers defense just been able to hold the Chiefs to a FG on their first possession, then the 49ers offense would have been in the cat bird seat only needing a FG to win the game. 

 

But my gut says kick off and take the 4 down advantage. It is less likely you'll give up back to back scoring drives. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BBFL said:

The bigger question that needs to be asked is why they abandoned the run from the 2nd quarter until late in the 3rd…

 

They win that game if they stuck with it. 
 

Baltimore did the same thing. An incredible rushing team just mailing it in even after immediate success… 

 

I love Kyle Shanahan, but he's done this before.  28-3 is a PRIME example. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

It is a tough decision between wanting the advantage of knowing if you need to use 4 downs to score or wanting the advantage of only needing a FG to win the game on the third possession of OT. I can see an argument for either way. Had the 49ers defense just been able to hold the Chiefs to a FG on their first possession, then the 49ers offense would have been in the cat bird seat only needing a FG to win the game. 

 

But my gut says kick off and take the 4 down advantage. It is less likely you'll give up back to back scoring drives. 

If it’s against Mahomes in the Super Bowl. Or in any game that matters. I’d put money on Mahomes scoring every single drive if needed. 
 

if you get a chance to be guaranteed one more possession than that guy you do it every single time. 

Edited by mrags
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mrags said:

If it’s against Mahomes in the Super Bowl. Or in any game that matters. I’d put money on Mahomes scoring every single drive if needed. 

 

Then receive is still maybe right call. If the Chiefs are going to score every possession, then try and beat them to the punch on the third possession. But you got to hope to either score a TD on your first possession or hold them to a FG on their first possession.

Edited by Sammy Watkins' Rib
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

Then receive is still maybe right call. If the Chiefs are going to score every possession, then try and beat them to the punch on the third possession. But you got to hope to either score a TD on your first possession or hold them to a FG on their first possession.

Correct.  If you're Shanahan and convinced Mahomes will score every time you receive the ball, score a TD, and go for two.  If the Chiefs match the eight points then you get the ball in a sudden death situation with a chance to win it without Mahomes getting the ball again.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did Shanahan know the rules for playoffs? He wanted ball third? 😆 

 

What an idiot:

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/how-kyle-shanahan-lost-the-super-bowl-after-winning-the-ot-coin-flip-061238455.html

35 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

Then receive is still maybe right call. If the Chiefs are going to score every possession, then try and beat them to the punch on the third possession. But you got to hope to either score a TD on your first possession or hold them to a FG on their first possession.

Then why kick the FG if you think Mahomes & Chiefs will score every time.

 

He screwed up royally the advantage that was won with coin toss!

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/how-kyle-shanahan-lost-the-super-bowl-after-winning-the-ot-coin-flip-061238455.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Did Shanahan know the rules for playoffs? He wanted ball third? 😆 

 

What an idiot:

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/how-kyle-shanahan-lost-the-super-bowl-after-winning-the-ot-coin-flip-061238455.html

 

Why is he an idiot? That's exactly why you receive first is to get the third possession. The third possession is sudden death rules. It didn't work out in this scenario but it's easy to see it working out in other scenario's where both teams punt first possessions or both teams match scores. 

 

In the grand scheme of things, this is a nothing burger. There are advantages to both receiving or kicking. What if the 49ers kicked and it was the Chiefs that ended up winning on the third possession with a FG? Would the same people be criticizing Shanahan? 

7 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Did Shanahan know the rules for playoffs? He wanted ball third? 😆 

 

What an idiot:

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/how-kyle-shanahan-lost-the-super-bowl-after-winning-the-ot-coin-flip-061238455.html

Then why kick the FG if you think Mahomes & Chiefs will score every time.

 

He screwed up royally the advantage that was won with coin toss!

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/how-kyle-shanahan-lost-the-super-bowl-after-winning-the-ot-coin-flip-061238455.html

 

Score every time, does not mean score a TD every time. You would think your defense would hold them to a FG. Afterall, this was a 19-19 game at the end of regulation. Not a 31-31 game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BillMafia716ix said:

College teams always choose to play defense first in OT. Not sure why it’s different in the NFL especially when your both guaranteed a possession. I know in the regular season if you score a TD first you win the game so maybe that’s what they thought. Complete coaching blunder on Shannahan. 

 

The college rule is different though. In college there is not sudden death element. No matter how many possessions it goes to, every team has a chance to match. In the NFL, the third possession is sudden death. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

Why is he an idiot? That's exactly why you receive first is to get the third possession. The third possession is sudden death rules. It didn't work out in this scenario but it's easy to see it working out in other scenario's where both teams punt first possessions or both teams match scores. 

 

In the grand scheme of things, this is a nothing burger. There are advantages to both receiving or kicking. What if the 49ers kicked and it was the Chiefs that ended up winning on the third possession with a FG? Would the same people be criticizing Shanahan? 

 

Score every time, does not mean score a TD every time. You would think your defense would hold them to a FG. Afterall, this was a 19-19 game at the end of regulation. Not a 31-31 game.

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.

When San Francisco drove down the field, it did not know that Kansas City would eventually score a touchdown. It’s why Shanahan said he “never thought about” going for it on fourth-and-4. Instead the Niners kicked a field goal.

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.  ..."

 

Face it. Idiot offensive nepobaby whizkid that also blew 28-3 as O coordinator.  What a schmo...

 

I don't feel so bad as a Bills fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ExiledInIllinois said:

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.

When San Francisco drove down the field, it did not know that Kansas City would eventually score a touchdown. It’s why Shanahan said he “never thought about” going for it on fourth-and-4. Instead the Niners kicked a field goal.

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.  ..."

 

Sure. But the 49ers didn't lose because they couldn't force a punt on 4th and 1 from the Chiefs 34 yard line. The 49ers literally could have let the Chiefs march all the way down the field and then held them to a FG inside the red zone. They couldn't do that, and that is why they lost. 

  • Eyeroll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

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.

When San Francisco drove down the field, it did not know that Kansas City would eventually score a touchdown. It’s why Shanahan said he “never thought about” going for it on fourth-and-4. Instead the Niners kicked a field goal.

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.  ..."

That’s why I’d kick off. If your defense gets a stop, ANY stop that first possession, all you need is a FG to win. If they can’t get a stop, you get 4 downs to match. The ONLY advantage the receiving team has is the third possession, assuming both teams scored equally on their touches. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

Sure. But the 49ers didn't lose because they couldn't force a punt on 4th and 1 from the Chiefs 34 yard line. The 49ers literally could have let the Chiefs march all the way down the field and then held them to a FG inside the red zone. They couldn't do that, and that is why they lost. 

They lost because they only scored 3. 😆 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...