Soggust Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Everyone is postulating the sudden death scenario of TD + TD, but there are a lot of other sudden death scenarios, including FG + FG. I am honestly leaning on taking the ball first being right, regardless of the defense being gassed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Just now, mse326 said: There is a slight advantage, hence why I said I'd lean deferring (by which I meant taking the ball 2nd). But in poker you don't lose the advantage if you don't capitalize on it. Here not only do you lose the advantage, the other team gets the advantage if you can't end it on your possession. If I wasn't someone who pretty strongly believes in going for 2 to end, which I am, then I'd probably take the ball first, because if you aren't committed to doing that there is a massive risk if giving the advantage to the other team instead. Rather than think about it as advantage lost, maintained, or gained, that's a different decision. In this case, our decision is that we can either take the ball immediately and have an unknown number of points needed to win, or we could wait and go on defense, eventually resulting in a known number of points needed to win. In the latter scenario, you have the option to "settle for the game winning FG", which does not exist in the former. That's the extra value. You're correct that stuff can happen in between, but that's not an advantage gained, maintained, or lost from the take ball/punt ball decision, that's win probability changing from the defensive playcalling and should be judged separately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefer Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 1 minute ago, Soggust said: Everyone is postulating the sudden death scenario of TD + TD, but there are a lot of other sudden death scenarios, including FG + FG. I am honestly leaning on taking the ball first being right, regardless of the defense being gassed. Chiefs seem to disagree with you. I think the dynamic has shifted there, you want four downs to work with when you have a great QB or a high powered offense. You know exactly what you need to do and there’s a lot of power in that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Football_Bachelor08 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 4 minutes ago, Chiefer said: I mean there’s no guarantee that anything could happen ever, I’m just telling you the plan they’ve had since training camp I don't doubt this is true. My only point is that giving up a touchdown became an automatic loss because the Niners only got a field goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 2 minutes ago, Soggust said: I think it was the right decision. Their defense was gassed at the end of the 4th, which we know because they let the Chiefs walk right down the field basically uncotested. Add the sudden death scenario and I think it was clearly the right decision. In general, I would want my team to have the ball 2nd, but I can kind of give Shanahan the benefit of the doubt in this particular game. The SF defense was clearly gassed after the last KC drive in Q4. Even then, I think I'd still want the ball 2nd just to know exactly what was needed and play accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Just now, Chiefer said: Chiefs seem to disagree with you. I think the dynamic has shifted there, you want four downs to work with when you have a great QB or a high powered offense. You know exactly what you need to do and there’s a lot of power in that 49ers seem to disagree with you, but I guess we know now who was right =p But in all seriousness, I think it's just easy to say in hindsight. If Kyle kicks and the defense gets sliced up immediately I think there is a different narrative today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BetterCallSaul Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Absolutely. It’s the smart play to do that in OT. They fumbled that decision. Mahomes wasn’t gonna be denied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 3 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: In general, I would want my team to have the ball 2nd, but I can kind of give Shanahan the benefit of the doubt in this particular game. The SF defense was clearly gassed after the last KC drive in Q4. Even then, I think I'd still want the ball 2nd just to know exactly what was needed and play accordingly. Good point about the SF D being a bit fatigued, but think that handing KC that fourth down option - was a mistake IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefer Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 10 minutes ago, Soggust said: 49ers seem to disagree with you, but I guess we know now who was right =p But in all seriousness, I think it's just easy to say in hindsight. If Kyle kicks and the defense gets sliced up immediately I think there is a different narrative today. That’s the thing though. Chiefs assumed they’d likely give up a TD in OT, because defenses are generally gassed because it’s freaking Overtime lol. Like what defense isn’t going to be gassed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jameson_Neat Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 3 minutes ago, Chiefer said: That’s the thing though. Chiefs assumed they’d likely give up a TD in OT, because defenses are generally gassed because it’s freaking Overtime lol. Like what defense isn’t going to be gassed? Yeah, that was my thought as well. A few more minutes isn't going to freshen up guys that are spent. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefer Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 1 minute ago, Jameson_Neat said: Yeah, that was my thought as well. A few more minutes isn't going to freshen up guys that are spent. Even the Chiefs defense got sliced up all the way down the field in OT until it held firm in the redzone. They were spent too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 3 minutes ago, Chiefer said: That’s the thing though. Chiefs assumed they’d likely give up a TD in OT, because defenses are generally gassed because it’s freaking Overtime lol. Like what defense isn’t going to be gassed? The one that gets to rest while their offense takes the ball first lol. This honestly feels like a hypothetical discussion regardless, because the Chiefs didn't need to make a 4th down decision to decide if they needed to score a TD or FG. Maybe you could argue that SF would have been forced to go for it instead of kicking a FG, but there's no guarantee the drive ends up like that given the different circumstances anyway. Even if we agree it's an edge to take the ball second, I think it's such a minor edge that it could negated by other factors including a gassed defense or not wanting to put the pressure of having to drive the field on your second year Mr. Irrelevant QB. 49ers have been some front running breakdancers for a big part of the year, so I can see why the thought might be to play looser when you have a team that doesn't include Patrick Mahomes or Tom Brady. 1 minute ago, Jameson_Neat said: Yeah, that was my thought as well. A few more minutes isn't going to freshen up guys that are spent. MMA / Boxing fighters would disagree, but even if you're right - they are CERTAINLY going to be more refreshed than not taking a break, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Wait - isn't Kyle also like 1-40 or something when trailing late in the game by a TD? Seems like you'd rather play from ahead in that scenario, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 41 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: The Chiefs are correct in that taking the ball second is better, but I don't see an advantage in locking yourself into going for 2 (unless the idea is their offense is so good they like the odds markedly better than a 50/50). Would have been a ballsy call though in SB overtime good lord. I would say it depends on what you think has higher odds, you converting a 2 point conversion, or you stopping the opposing team from kicking a FG. Since it's true sudden death, if you take the tie and kickoff, you give yourself a scenario where the opposing team only really needs like 40 yards of offense to ice it, and you never see the ball again. Our defense is awesome, but full holding a team is not easy. Especially one as good as San Fran. And our D was certainly getting tired too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jameson_Neat Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 1 minute ago, Soggust said: The one that gets to rest while their offense takes the ball first lol. This honestly feels like a hypothetical discussion regardless, because the Chiefs didn't need to make a 4th down decision to decide if they needed to score a TD or FG. Maybe you could argue that SF would have been forced to go for it instead of kicking a FG, but there's no guarantee the drive ends up like that given the different circumstances anyway. Even if we agree it's an edge to take the ball second, I think it's such a minor edge that it could negated by other factors including a gassed defense or not wanting to put the pressure of having to drive the field on your second year Mr. Irrelevant QB. 49ers have been some front running breakdancers for a big part of the year, so I can see why the thought might be to play looser when you have a team that doesn't include Patrick Mahomes or Tom Brady. MMA / Boxing fighters would disagree, but even if you're right - they are CERTAINLY going to be more refreshed than not taking a break, right? Is it enough to make that much of a difference against a guy like 15? I don't think it's some egregious mistake on its own, but taking the ball, driving down to the 9 and kicking a FG is a bit deflating IMO. Maybe I watch too much Dan Campbell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.