Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

 

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.

Posted (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 by dave mcbride
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted
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

 

 

Posted
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. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (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 by row_33
Posted
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. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

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

 

 

Posted (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 by Binghamton Beast
Posted (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 by MJS
Posted (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 by dave mcbride
Posted
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.

Posted (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 by dave mcbride
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted (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 by ILBillsfan
Posted (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 by dave mcbride
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted
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.

Posted (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 by dave mcbride
Posted

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

×
×
  • Create New...