Should the 49ers Have Deferred on the OT Kickoff

Originally posted by scooterhd:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by scooterhd:

Originally posted by libertyforever:
You realize if you are going to be stop for no points in your first possession, you need to stop your opponent from scoring for at least one drive to not lose the game. This is regardless of whether you have the ball first or deferred. However, a 3rd possession advantage can significantly increase your winning %, wand this is offset by the information factor.

I don't think you really understand all of the possibilities and probabilities for all the scenarios. And that is why you can't figure out why analytic experts are really split on this.

Lets agree on something. If it goes to a 3rd possession, the team with the ball has an advantage. Your figure was 70% win rate earlier. Thats fine, use that. If it comes to a 3rd possession the team with the ball has a 70% chance to win. OK. But what if it goes to a 4th possession? Well, then the team with the ball has the advantage. What about a 5th, a 6th, 7th, 8th? Yes. Those are less and less likely scenarios to happen and not prioritized because the advantage is delayed, but the team with the ball would have the advantage. In other words, the TEAM WITH THE BALL WHEN THE GAME GOES TO SUDDEN DEATH HAS THE ADVANTAGE. In your words, the 70% win rate lies with the team that possess the ball in a sudden death scenario. Take the 3rd possession phrase out of it. Its not a 3rd possession advantage, it a sudden death possession advantage. Once again for clarity, the team with the ball first in sudden death has a 70% win rate. Its just like the old school OT. This is your claim. By those numbers, we want the ball in the soonest possible sudden death scenario. Having the ball 5th is better then 9th for example. Having the ball 3rd is better then 4th.

OK. How do we get to this clearly advantageous sudden death scenario? There are 4 possibilities.

1. Team 1 turnover. Game immediately becomes sudden death. Any Team 2 score wins. 70% win rate for Team 2 (maybe more depending on field position)
2. Team 1 punt. Game immediately becomes sudden death. Any Team 2 score wins. 70% win rate for Team 2 (more or less depending on field position)
3. Exchange of TDs
4. Exchange of FGs.

So far 2 of the 4 possible scenarios heavily favor the second team. Lets explore the 2 possibilities, touchdown and field goal, of an even exchange of points.

Team 1 Touchdown. In that case, Team 2 would be forced to score a TD obviously. Assuming even teams considering we got to OT in the first place, the odds of Team 2 scoring a TD are slightly higher then Team 1 because they know they need one. 4th and 5 from the 10 yard line, Team 1 might elect to kick a FG (as the 49ers did), whereas Team 2 would go for it knowing they need a TD. 4th and 12 from your own 30, Team 1 likely punts but Team 2 would go for it. 4th and 25 from midfield, Team 1 would surely punt. Team 2 would go for a hail mary or some pitch play. 4 downs is always an advantage. But more importantly for the discussion, if Team 2 scores the matching TD, they know that kicking a PAT would give Team 1 the 70% win rate advantage of a third possession, so they would not do that. They would go for 2. And 2 point conversion rates are over 50% so the advantage lies with them. Therefore, an exchange of TDs does not lead to a third possession, and an exchange of TDs favors Team 2.

Team 1 FG. Obviously Team 2 wants to best that, but if they cannot and find themselves in field goal range in a 4th and X distance where a conversion seems unlikely, then yes, they will kick a FG. As a result, Team 1 would get the 3rd possession advantage. Therefore an exchange of field goals favors Team 1.

There's 4 ways to create sudden death possession advantage. 2 of them actually give the initial sudden death advantage to team 2. 1 of them is theoretical only and does not actually create a 3rd possession. And the field goal, yes, creates a 3rd possession advantage. 1 out of 4 possible scenarios favors your position.

When we say 3rd possession advantage, we are talking about an inherent advantage before the OT start. We are not talking about the shifts in advantage after OT started and something happened.

The reason we are discussing the advantage before OT starts is so we can build simulation model incorporating all probabilities and potential outcome, including if the 1st team throws a pick or had to punt.

Again, many analytical professionals who looked into the current playoff OT format have done simulation models and so far from what we can tell is that it is certain not a no brainer decision to go first or deferred. If you are telling me you haven't done a detail simulation model and you have concluded it is no brainer to deferred, then I certain think you are quite naive and your analysis is a garbage.

Run simulations from all NFL averages and then act surprised when its 50/50. The average offense is as good as the average defense. Therefore advantage to team that has the ball multiple times first if any advantage is to be gleaned. Great. You formulate the exact average team on Madden, go to playoff OT, let them play 100k times under the same 3 down rules with no 2 point conversions, and sure, 50/50 or slight advantage to Team 1. But thats not what happens...

These models are based on the data that we do have. Kudos for a best guess. There is no empirical data related to the new OT rules, so they are simulating situations from all teams across the league under scenarios that DO NOT apply. A 3rd and 10 from the Bears in the first quarter of week 3 is not the same as a 3rd and 10 from the Chiefs in the SB when they know they have a 4th down behind the play. Completely different playcalling. So if you want to average conversion rates on a 3rd and whatever, cool, but its not applicable to the situation. You want to look at conversion rates when the Patriots are in 2 and 8, great. Thats not the same as the Chiefs against a gassed defense in the 5th quarter, knowing they still have 2nd, 3rd, and 4th down. You want to look at league averages of field goals from X distance, great, thats not Harrison Butker. You want to look at 2 point conversion rates of the Falcons, cool, thats not Reid and Mahomes. You want to look at the odds of the Jets with a backup QB producing a scoring drive, great, thats not a superbowl caliber team. The new OT is a completely separate game. The prospect of sudden death changes the strategy. The capabilities of the teams involved changes the strategy. Its a much more complex simulation then you've been made to believe.

Exactly. It is so complex that your brainstorming exercise is not good enough to make a definitive conclusion, especially a conclusion that is different than most detail simulation model conclusion.

Originally posted by scooterhd:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by mcwoot:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Again, many analytical professionals who looked into the current playoff OT format have done simulation models and so far from what we can tell is that it is certain not a no brainer decision to go first or deferred. If you are telling me you haven't done a detail simulation model and you have concluded it is no brainer to deferred, then I certain think you are quite naive and your analysis is a garbage.

These scenarios are based on an average team vs an average team. As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, I'm not sure you get the same answer if they are specifically considering one team having the best QB in the game.

Agree. But also they might have the worst WR group in the NFL. Overall their offense wasn't explosive this whole season.

They scored on their final 4 possessions...

I do think they had a good chance to be in position to kick a FG.

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by scooterhd:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by scooterhd:

Originally posted by libertyforever:
You realize if you are going to be stop for no points in your first possession, you need to stop your opponent from scoring for at least one drive to not lose the game. This is regardless of whether you have the ball first or deferred. However, a 3rd possession advantage can significantly increase your winning %, wand this is offset by the information factor.

I don't think you really understand all of the possibilities and probabilities for all the scenarios. And that is why you can't figure out why analytic experts are really split on this.

Lets agree on something. If it goes to a 3rd possession, the team with the ball has an advantage. Your figure was 70% win rate earlier. Thats fine, use that. If it comes to a 3rd possession the team with the ball has a 70% chance to win. OK. But what if it goes to a 4th possession? Well, then the team with the ball has the advantage. What about a 5th, a 6th, 7th, 8th? Yes. Those are less and less likely scenarios to happen and not prioritized because the advantage is delayed, but the team with the ball would have the advantage. In other words, the TEAM WITH THE BALL WHEN THE GAME GOES TO SUDDEN DEATH HAS THE ADVANTAGE. In your words, the 70% win rate lies with the team that possess the ball in a sudden death scenario. Take the 3rd possession phrase out of it. Its not a 3rd possession advantage, it a sudden death possession advantage. Once again for clarity, the team with the ball first in sudden death has a 70% win rate. Its just like the old school OT. This is your claim. By those numbers, we want the ball in the soonest possible sudden death scenario. Having the ball 5th is better then 9th for example. Having the ball 3rd is better then 4th.

OK. How do we get to this clearly advantageous sudden death scenario? There are 4 possibilities.

1. Team 1 turnover. Game immediately becomes sudden death. Any Team 2 score wins. 70% win rate for Team 2 (maybe more depending on field position)
2. Team 1 punt. Game immediately becomes sudden death. Any Team 2 score wins. 70% win rate for Team 2 (more or less depending on field position)
3. Exchange of TDs
4. Exchange of FGs.

So far 2 of the 4 possible scenarios heavily favor the second team. Lets explore the 2 possibilities, touchdown and field goal, of an even exchange of points.

Team 1 Touchdown. In that case, Team 2 would be forced to score a TD obviously. Assuming even teams considering we got to OT in the first place, the odds of Team 2 scoring a TD are slightly higher then Team 1 because they know they need one. 4th and 5 from the 10 yard line, Team 1 might elect to kick a FG (as the 49ers did), whereas Team 2 would go for it knowing they need a TD. 4th and 12 from your own 30, Team 1 likely punts but Team 2 would go for it. 4th and 25 from midfield, Team 1 would surely punt. Team 2 would go for a hail mary or some pitch play. 4 downs is always an advantage. But more importantly for the discussion, if Team 2 scores the matching TD, they know that kicking a PAT would give Team 1 the 70% win rate advantage of a third possession, so they would not do that. They would go for 2. And 2 point conversion rates are over 50% so the advantage lies with them. Therefore, an exchange of TDs does not lead to a third possession, and an exchange of TDs favors Team 2.

Team 1 FG. Obviously Team 2 wants to best that, but if they cannot and find themselves in field goal range in a 4th and X distance where a conversion seems unlikely, then yes, they will kick a FG. As a result, Team 1 would get the 3rd possession advantage. Therefore an exchange of field goals favors Team 1.

There's 4 ways to create sudden death possession advantage. 2 of them actually give the initial sudden death advantage to team 2. 1 of them is theoretical only and does not actually create a 3rd possession. And the field goal, yes, creates a 3rd possession advantage. 1 out of 4 possible scenarios favors your position.

When we say 3rd possession advantage, we are talking about an inherent advantage before the OT start. We are not talking about the shifts in advantage after OT started and something happened.

The reason we are discussing the advantage before OT starts is so we can build simulation model incorporating all probabilities and potential outcome, including if the 1st team throws a pick or had to punt.

Again, many analytical professionals who looked into the current playoff OT format have done simulation models and so far from what we can tell is that it is certain not a no brainer decision to go first or deferred. If you are telling me you haven't done a detail simulation model and you have concluded it is no brainer to deferred, then I certain think you are quite naive and your analysis is a garbage.

Run simulations from all NFL averages and then act surprised when its 50/50. The average offense is as good as the average defense. Therefore advantage to team that has the ball multiple times first if any advantage is to be gleaned. Great. You formulate the exact average team on Madden, go to playoff OT, let them play 100k times under the same 3 down rules with no 2 point conversions, and sure, 50/50 or slight advantage to Team 1. But thats not what happens...

These models are based on the data that we do have. Kudos for a best guess. There is no empirical data related to the new OT rules, so they are simulating situations from all teams across the league under scenarios that DO NOT apply. A 3rd and 10 from the Bears in the first quarter of week 3 is not the same as a 3rd and 10 from the Chiefs in the SB when they know they have a 4th down behind the play. Completely different playcalling. So if you want to average conversion rates on a 3rd and whatever, cool, but its not applicable to the situation. You want to look at conversion rates when the Patriots are in 2 and 8, great. Thats not the same as the Chiefs against a gassed defense in the 5th quarter, knowing they still have 2nd, 3rd, and 4th down. You want to look at league averages of field goals from X distance, great, thats not Harrison Butker. You want to look at 2 point conversion rates of the Falcons, cool, thats not Reid and Mahomes. You want to look at the odds of the Jets with a backup QB producing a scoring drive, great, thats not a superbowl caliber team. The new OT is a completely separate game. The prospect of sudden death changes the strategy. The capabilities of the teams involved changes the strategy. Its a much more complex simulation then you've been made to believe.

Exactly. It is so complex that your brainstorming exercise is not good enough to make a definitive conclusion, especially a conclusion that is different than most detail simulation model conclusion.

No. As I stated, the simulations from non existent data are complex. The ideas are simple.

Building a evolutionary simulation that produces humans from a single cell organism would be an infinitely complex process. The idea is simple.

I want the ball third

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I want the ball third

Can almost guarantee we don't go for two if we score on that first possession, which is only way to guarantee you can get to that third possession.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Can almost guarantee we don't go for two if we score on that first possession, which is only way to guarantee you can get to that third possession.

I agree. Unlikely first team goes for 2. I imagine some Dan Campbell types do. I dont see KS doing that. 3rd possession guarantee only comes from an 8.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I want the ball third

Can almost guarantee we don't go for two if we score on that first possession, which is only way to guarantee you can get to that third possession.

I just don't see any way around this being a borderline fireable offense type of error. It's the SB and you have no plan, the players are not looped in at all. No discussion of the rules has taken place. These rules went into play years ago is my understanding. The 49ers have been in the playoffs, all that time. Unprepared, all that time.

A child could tell you that you don't want to give Brock 3 downs and Mahomes 4. You don't want to give Mahomes the ball 2nd. KC players mocking our decision process. Jones called it crazy. Mahomes kinda laughed and said yeah we want the ball 2nd, and we talked about this extensively. They've visualized and mapped out OT, with their players, not just tactics on how to take the coin toss, but what the 2pt procedure is. We gave Mahomes and Reid exactly what they wanted.

Cherry on top, is Kyle doesn't trust Wilks, fired him, yet in the Super Bowl, Kyle twice took his O off the field, and asked Wilks D to hold up a lil 3 point lead vs Mahomes. It's just some of the worst strategic maneuvering quite possibly in NFL history. I can't think of any Super Bowl where late game a team effs up this hard (except possibly the other Kyle SBs). You can write a book about all the late game mistakes. It took about 10 separate late game Kyle screw ups to lose. And he nailed em all.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I want the ball third

Can almost guarantee we don't go for two if we score on that first possession, which is only way to guarantee you can get to that third possession.

I just don't see any way around this being a borderline fireable offense type of error. It's the SB and you have no plan, the players are not looped in at all. No discussion of the rules has taken place. These rules went into play years ago is my understanding. The 49ers have been in the playoffs, all that time. Unprepared, all that time.

A child could tell you that you don't want to give Brock 3 downs and Mahomes 4. You don't want to give Mahomes the ball 2nd. KC players mocking our decision process. Jones called it crazy. Mahomes kinda laughed and said yeah we want the ball 2nd, and we talked about this extensively. They've visualized and mapped out OT, with their players, not just tactics on how to take the coin toss, but what the 2pt procedure is. We gave Mahomes and Reid exactly what they wanted.

Cherry on top, is Kyle doesn't trust Wilks, fired him, yet in the Super Bowl, Kyle twice took his O off the field, and asked Wilks D to hold up a lil 3 point lead vs Mahomes. It's just some of the worst strategic maneuvering quite possibly in NFL history. I can't think of any Super Bowl where late game a team effs up this hard (except possibly the other Kyle SBs). You can write a book about all the late game mistakes. It took about 10 separate late game Kyle screw ups to lose. And he nailed em all.

It's really bad in hindsight imo. Not fireable, but one where Kyle should have said yeah I pooched that one, which he will never do. This is where Jed has to say hey bro wtf?

It's been almost a week? Still debating?

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I just don't see any way around this being a borderline fireable offense type of error. It's the SB and you have no plan, the players are not looped in at all. No discussion of the rules has taken place. These rules went into play years ago is my understanding. The 49ers have been in the playoffs, all that time. Unprepared, all that time.

A child could tell you that you don't want to give Brock 3 downs and Mahomes 4. You don't want to give Mahomes the ball 2nd. KC players mocking our decision process. Jones called it crazy. Mahomes kinda laughed and said yeah we want the ball 2nd, and we talked about this extensively. They've visualized and mapped out OT, with their players, not just tactics on how to take the coin toss, but what the 2pt procedure is. We gave Mahomes and Reid exactly what they wanted.

Cherry on top, is Kyle doesn't trust Wilks, fired him, yet in the Super Bowl, Kyle twice took his O off the field, and asked Wilks D to hold up a lil 3 point lead vs Mahomes. It's just some of the worst strategic maneuvering quite possibly in NFL history. I can't think of any Super Bowl where late game a team effs up this hard (except possibly the other Kyle SBs). You can write a book about all the late game mistakes. It took about 10 separate late game Kyle screw ups to lose. And he nailed em all.

You're overblowing this issue. It wasn't some massive strategic failure or anywhere near a fireable offense. The bigger issue is we didn't score a TD or get a stop in the period. The decision arguably influenced both outcomes but the plays still have to be executed.

And again, whether he said it or not initially, there is merit to letting the defense rest in that spot. I would have deprioritized the rest and kicked it, but there's benefit(s) to receiving as well.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I want the ball third

Can almost guarantee we don't go for two if we score on that first possession, which is only way to guarantee you can get to that third possession.

I just don't see any way around this being a borderline fireable offense type of error. It's the SB and you have no plan, the players are not looped in at all. No discussion of the rules has taken place. These rules went into play years ago is my understanding. The 49ers have been in the playoffs, all that time. Unprepared, all that time.

A child could tell you that you don't want to give Brock 3 downs and Mahomes 4. You don't want to give Mahomes the ball 2nd. KC players mocking our decision process. Jones called it crazy. Mahomes kinda laughed and said yeah we want the ball 2nd, and we talked about this extensively. They've visualized and mapped out OT, with their players, not just tactics on how to take the coin toss, but what the 2pt procedure is. We gave Mahomes and Reid exactly what they wanted.

Cherry on top, is Kyle doesn't trust Wilks, fired him, yet in the Super Bowl, Kyle twice took his O off the field, and asked Wilks D to hold up a lil 3 point lead vs Mahomes. It's just some of the worst strategic maneuvering quite possibly in NFL history. I can't think of any Super Bowl where late game a team effs up this hard (except possibly the other Kyle SBs). You can write a book about all the late game mistakes. It took about 10 separate late game Kyle screw ups to lose. And he nailed em all.

So much hyperbole and logical fallacies. Keep on keeping on. Hope your blood pressure holds up.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
You're overblowing this issue. It wasn't some massive strategic failure or anywhere near a fireable offense. The bigger issue is we didn't score a TD or get a stop in the period. The decision arguably influenced both outcomes but the plays still have to be executed.

And again, whether he said it or not initially, there is merit to letting the defense rest in that spot. I would have deprioritized the rest and kicked it, but there's benefit(s) to receiving as well.

Overblowing? the Super Bowl is at stake. There were maybe a dozen tactical errors. Starting around the 2 min mark of regulation. I believe KS was blessed with the 2 min warning, with extra time to think it thru, here's what he came up with, and each one of these is an error:

Pass on 3rd down
get your pass play blown up with a free rusher
have 85 in pass pro (in the backfield), doing nothing
kick a bomb fg on 4th, with your rookie
leave Mahomes the ball, only 3 pt lead, and plenty of time
against Wilks D (who Kyle doesn't trust)
Get to OT, which you never prepared for, or at least admitted you didn't review with players
brief players in a fly by seat of pants style as the OT is getting underway
some players find out not by positional coach, but by the stadium scoreboard
get the coin toss wrong
again throw on 3rd down (and again pass pro is a circus, free rusher again)
popped your center out and voided the area next to Burford
kick a fg on 4th
hand Mahomes again the ball vs Wilks to beat you
watch KC go on 4th down, cuz you gave em 4 downs to play with
we then watch our team leaders postgame, say we were clueless and unprepared

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Overblowing? the Super Bowl is at stake. There were maybe a dozen tactical errors. Starting around the 2 min mark of regulation. I believe KS was blessed with the 2 min warning, with extra time to think it thru, here's what he came up with, and each one of these is an error:

Pass on 3rd down
get your pass play blown up with a free rusher
have 85 in pass pro (in the backfield), doing nothing
kick a bomb fg on 4th, with your rookie
leave Mahomes the ball, only 3 pt lead, and plenty of time
against Wilks D (who Kyle doesn't trust)
Get to OT, which you never prepared for, or at least admitted you didn't review with players
brief players in a fly by seat of pants style as the OT is getting underway
some players find out not by positional coach, but by the stadium scoreboard
get the coin toss wrong
again throw on 3rd down (and again pass pro is a circus, free rusher again)
popped your center out and voided the area next to Burford
kick a fg on 4th
hand Mahomes again the ball vs Wilks to beat you
we then watch our team leaders postgame, say we were clueless and unprepared

There's nothing inherently wrong with calling a pass on 3rd and 4, even if a run would be viewed as preferable.

The OL wasn't to blame for that final 3rd down in regulation. Brock failed to execute the play. There's going to be free hitters throughout a game on blitzes. You execute to get through it. Note that this is different than what happened on our final 3rd down in OT.

We've been over the OT decision.

——

Let's understand where responsibilities fall and not pretend normal playcalls (like a pass on 3rd and 4) are some kind of egregious errors in hindsight.

No it wasn't wrong considering the defense was utterly exhausted. What they should've done is get in EZ instead of stopped inside opposing 10 yard line.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
There's nothing inherently wrong with calling a pass on 3rd and 4, even if a run would be viewed as preferable.

The OL wasn't to blame for that final 3rd down in regulation. Brock failed to execute the play. There's going to be free hitters throughout a game on blitzes. You execute to get through it. Note that this is different than what happened on our final 3rd down in OT.

We've been over the OT decision.

——

Let's understand where responsibilities fall and not pretend normal playcalls (like a pass on 3rd and 4) are some kind of egregious errors in hindsight.

It is egregious for multiple reasons. First, it's more or less an admission the pass has to work, or we kick (and we did kick). I feel he passed, cuz he closed his mind to the possibility of 4 downs. Yet 4 downs, and converting a first, essentially hands us the SB. Running is also far more our team MO, than passing. Run blocking I would say is more sound than our pass pro. Watch the breakdowns, JTO takes big issue with having CMC wide, and Kittle all cute next to Brock. Kittle is in the backfield. Why are we doing this? Why did Kittle pick up no one? Good questions to ask. If Kittle gets a pickup, maybe we aren't hot. Maybe we win the SB and hit the layup throw, without the pressure.

Go to the other pass pro eff up. You see JTO and Schwartz hating that popping of the center, more cute Kyle BS. I hate it also.

It's not coincidence why we keep losing these big games. It's sub optimal move, after sub optimal move, until it rains confetti for some other team.