Worst clock management I've ever seen

[Gunga_Galunga]

This was Shanahan out thinking himself. He had to kick a FG because he took the ball first, and let Andy Reed and Mahomes call plays based on having 4 downs to make it.

I doubt he ever makes that mistake again.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Nah. For him it doesn’t even rank in his top 500.

Not even in the top 1000. 97.4% of viewers didnt know the End of 1st OT rules.

 

[DruidTM]

Never bet against Mahomes

There’s the lesson from last night

 

[PittPanther44]

It's not a slight unintended disadvantage... it's a huge disadvantage.

I don't agree with thinking three possessions ahead. Teams that get the ball first are way less aggressive; you may have held KC to 3 or even 0.

After thinking about this a little, I can see that side of it. Also, the college OT is a similar concept except obviously a short field game. All college teams would rather go second. There is an advantage. And the team that went second, does have the first crack at the third possesion.

That said - the third posession can end the game in the NFL.

This will be so rare that it will be a long time to get any meaningful data around it. So I think it’s more of a coin flip, as compared to an obvious play (as opposed to deferring to start a game)

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

After thinking about this a little, I can see that side of it. Also, the college OT is a similar concept except obviously a short field game. All college teams would rather go second. There is an advantage. And the team that went second, does have the first crack at the third possesion.

That said - the third posession can end the game in the NFL.

This will be so rare that it will be a long time to get any meaningful data around it. So I think it’s more of a coin flip, as compared to an obvious play (as opposed to deferring to start a game)

Just feels like a lot has to go exactly according to plan for that third possession to even come into play. Both teams have to not score. Or both teams have to kick a field goal (which includes the second team not going being aggressive and going for a win on 4th and short). Or both teams have to get a TD and an extra point (which includes the second team not wanting to for for two and the win). I just wouldn't be worried about thinking that far ahead at the expense of conceding an extra down, basically.

And I think we're looking too deeply into it to defend it, as opposed to just looking at exactly how it played out:

1) KC got an extra down on their side of the field they may otherwise not have, and

2) SF kicked a FG not knowing they really needed a touchdown, instead

As @Gunga_Galunga alluded to, the 49ers coach's - and other coaches' as well, I would think - decisions in the future will be the real way to judge this. I doubt any take the ball first again. But, as you said, it might be a while before we find out.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Just feels like a lot has to go exactly according to plan for that third possession to even come into play. Both teams have to not score. Or both teams have to kick a field goal (which includes the second team not going being aggressive and going for a win on 4th and short). Or both teams have to get a TD and an extra point (which includes the second team not wanting to for for two and the win). I just wouldn't be worried about thinking that far ahead at the expense of conceding an extra down, basically.

If offenses werent very good then I could see a team picking to go 1st. Like lets say Iowa, the legit worst offense in college football history won the toss with these rules. They go 1st. Hope to get a 1st down or 2 by some miracle. Get a good punt. Hold to 3 and out. Get the ball back around the 40. Miraculously get another 2 first downs and win with a FG. But if the teams have any offense at all, you have to pick to go 2nd because being 2nd is such an advantage because you get 4 downs and you can win with a TD potentially or a TD + 2 pointer.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

If offenses werent very good then I could see a team picking to go 1st. Like lets say Iowa, the legit worst offense in college football history won the toss with these rules. They go 1st. Hope to get a 1st down or 2 by some miracle. Get a good punt. Hold to 3 and out. Get the ball back around the 40. Miraculously get another 2 first downs and win with a FG. But if the teams have any offense at all, you have to pick to go 2nd because being 2nd is such an advantage because you get 4 downs and you can win with a TD potentially or a TD + 2 pointer.

Ironically, you could probably say the same if offenses were very good. We'll get our TD, then you get your TD, then we'll just come down and kick the game-winning FG. Of course, as you mentioned, going for two could be a factor as well.

 

[PittPanther44]

If offenses werent very good then I could see a team picking to go 1st. Like lets say Iowa, the legit worst offense in college football history won the toss with these rules. They go 1st. Hope to get a 1st down or 2 by some miracle. Get a good punt. Hold to 3 and out. Get the ball back around the 40. Miraculously get another 2 first downs and win with a FG. But if the teams have any offense at all, you have to pick to go 2nd because being 2nd is such an advantage because you get 4 downs and you can win with a TD potentially or a TD + 2 pointer.

Or you stop that good offense around your 45. But they flipped the field. They punt and pin you at your 3. Now your back is against the wall. You wind up punting back to midfield. Fresh set of downs. FG you lose.

I don’t know if I totally buy 4th down as a huge advantage as opposed to an unintended one. Remember - it’s a make it or lose situation. Chiefs had inches. They ran a play that looked easy. That gets blown up we are talking about why they were going out of the shotgun. But success there is fresh in our minds. Getting yourself in a 4th down or you lose isn’t ideal.

So I think it’s real close to 50/50, and your personnel and feeling of game flow should factor in.

 

[Gunga_Galunga]

Or you stop that good offense around your 45. But they flipped the field. They punt and pin you at your 3. Now your back is against the wall. You wind up punting back to midfield. Fresh set of downs. FG you lose.

I don’t know if I totally buy 4th down as a huge advantage as opposed to an unintended one. Remember - it’s a make it or lose situation. Chiefs had inches. They ran a play that looked easy. That gets blown up we are talking about why they were going out of the shotgun. But success there is fresh in our minds. Getting yourself in a 4th down or you lose isn’t ideal.

So I think it’s real close to 50/50, and your personnel and feeling of game flow should factor in.

It's not 50/50, and I'd venture it's significantly worse. You're playing for possession #3 which is stupid, because the game could be over by then. What if SF doesn't get bailed out by a KC penalty on 3rd down? Then a FG by Mahomes and company beats you. So many scenarios favor the team going second.

This isn't planning for an entire game. It's sudden death after the first possession and you always want the ball in a sudden death situation.

 

[Ski11585]

Not even in the top 1000. 97.4% of viewers didnt know the End of 1st OT rules.

Except it was explained multiple times before OT started.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Except it was explained multiple times before OT started.

Yeah, but you had to be paying attention when they explained it. And then understood what they were saying.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I don’t know if I totally buy 4th down as a huge advantage as opposed to an unintended one.

4th down probably isn't a huge advantage on 4th down, but it absolutely is an advantage to know on second down and third down that there is going to be a fourth down. You have a whole host of different options on second and long when you know you are going for it on fourth down than when you assume that you are not going for it on fourth down.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Except it was explained multiple times before OT started.

I was watching the Univison feed

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

4th down probably isn't a huge advantage on 4th down, but it absolutely is an advantage to know on second down and third down that there is going to be a fourth down. You have a whole host of different options on second and long when you know you are going for it on fourth down than when you assume that you are not going for it on fourth down.

It has to be an advantage on 4th down as well. It's the difference between a 0% chance of conversion (okay, maybe technically not 0%... they could rough the punter, fumble, etc.) and literally any number higher than 0%.

 

[PITTfanSD]

Could it be SF had a young, inexperienced QB so going first might not put as much game-on-the-line pressure as going second and knowing you need a TD to tie or win? Going first you just go out there and play and put pressure on the other team to have to score.

 

[PittPanther44]

It's not 50/50, and I'd venture it's significantly worse. You're playing for possession #3 which is stupid, because the game could be over by then. What if SF doesn't get bailed out by a KC penalty on 3rd down? Then a FG by Mahomes and company beats you. So many scenarios favor the team going second.

This isn't planning for an entire game. It's sudden death after the first possession and you always want the ball in a sudden death situation.

You aren’t playing for possession 3. That’s just an advantage if you make it there. On the other hand, I don’t like it that if you take the ball first, only the defense has the ability for a game ending play. So I think it really is close, with valid point/counterpoints to be made.

There is no data on it - so it’s all subjective at this point. Maybe some analytics people look at thousands of games and pretend it’s these rules - and then evaluate the % of times 1st posession wins. But even then, you wouldn’t have the 4th down dynamic, and would probably miss some FGs forfeited in lieu of punting deep. So you can’t duplicate it, but could get a directional idea.

 

[PittPanther44]

4th down probably isn't a huge advantage on 4th down, but it absolutely is an advantage to know on second down and third down that there is going to be a fourth down. You have a whole host of different options on second and long when you know you are going for it on fourth down than when you assume that you are not going for it on fourth down.

It’s an advantage in play calling if you got yourself backed up. For example, 2nd and 18 is less daunting.

But I don’t think anyone plans to get in a “4th and you lose the Super Bowl”. I wouldn’t be planning that on 3rd and 6.

It would have been real interesting to see if KC would have gone for it if it was the first possession.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

But I don’t think anyone plans to get in a “4th and you lose the Super Bowl”. I wouldn’t be planning that on 3rd and 6.

No, but on 3rd and 6 a team with a good running game can run the ball, knowing that if they don't get it they have a "4th and you lose the Super Bowl". Whereas if you know you are going to punt on 4th down even a team with a good running game is going to be reluctant to run the ball. Because 4th and 2 and you are punting is worse than 4th and 2 and you still have another chance.

 

[Franb]

No, but on 3rd and 6 a team with a good running game can run the ball, knowing that if they don't get it they have a "4th and you lose the Super Bowl". Whereas if you know you are going to punt on 4th down even a team with a good running game is going to be reluctant to run the ball. Because 4th and 2 and you are punting is worse than 4th and 2 and you still have another chance.

It is somewhat similar to baseball, with the home team knowing how many runs they need to win the game.

 

[Gunga_Galunga]

You aren’t playing for possession 3. That’s just an advantage if you make it there. On the other hand, I don’t like it that if you take the ball first, only the defense has the ability for a game ending play. So I think it really is close, with valid point/counterpoints to be made.

There is no data on it - so it’s all subjective at this point. Maybe some analytics people look at thousands of games and pretend it’s these rules - and then evaluate the % of times 1st posession wins. But even then, you wouldn’t have the 4th down dynamic, and would probably miss some FGs forfeited in lieu of punting deep. So you can’t duplicate it, but could get a directional idea.

It's literarily the reason Shanahan gave for taking the ball, because it's the only thing that could possibly be looked at to provide an advantage.

Sorry, I just can't agree with this. You put yourself at a disadvantage during the first two possessions to hopefully get the third. Nobody will ever do that again.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

1st and Goal from the 3. 35 seconds left. 2 TO's. Need a TD to win. FG to tie. Instead of taking 4 shots at the win, they decided to bleed the clock down to almost 0 and live or die with 1 play. It worked but its the worst clock management I've ever seen.

Apparently you aren’t familiar with Mario Cristobal’s masterpiece.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Apparently you aren’t familiar with Mario Cristobal’s masterpiece.

View embedded media

Well, I didn't know the playoff OT rule so it wasn't bad clock management at all. But yes, Cristobal remains the worst of all time. And he has done that TWICE now resulting in losses.

 

[PittPharm2002]

This was Shanahan out thinking himself. He had to kick a FG because he took the ball first, and let Andy Reed and Mahomes call plays based on having 4 downs to make it.

I doubt he ever makes that mistake again.

He fired his DC
Because shanahan is a great offensive mind - but hates accountability