What would you do with the new OT rule? Defer or take the ball?

[Virgil]

You have to take the ball in a purely offensive game.   Assume both teams will score and that you’ll get the ball again for a sudden death drive.  
 

Now, whether you go for 2 or not is the question.   
 

Regardless, whoever wins the coin toss has complete control over the outcome. 

[What a Tuel]

2 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

No what is said is the only way for team #1 to guarantee  a 3rd possession is if team 1 scores a TD and a 2 pt conversion.  All of the others ways would give a 3rd possession correct and have been mentioned previously, but non are guaranteed.

 

The difference being if Team 1 performs any of the first 4 options - team 2 has a chance to finish the game and outright win or lose without ever getting to sudden death.  That does not mean they will, but they have that ability.

 

There is absolutely nothing Team #1 can do that wins the game on the 1st possession.  Team 2 will always get the ball and have a chance to win or tie the game.

 

 

 

Team one can guarantee a 3rd possession by limiting the opposing offense to whatever they scored or ending the game with a stop.

 

Team 1 scores a td and a 2 pt conversion

Team 2 can be stopped altogether, be stopped from scoring a td and a 2 pt conversion

 

Team 1 scores a TD and an extra point.

Team 2 can either be stopped altogether, be stopped from scoring a TD, be stopped from scoring an extra point to force a 3rd possession, be stopped from scoring a td and a risky 2 pt conversion.

 

Team 1 scores a field goal

Team 2 can either be stopped altogether, be stopped from scoring a field goal, be stopped from scoring a td

 

Team 1 scores nothing

Team 2 can either be stopped altogether or game over. 

 

Why would you want to let the opposing team dictate what you need to do?

 

 

Edited March 29, 2022 by What a Tuel

[Virgil]

The benefits of going second is know what you need to match with score, always going for it on 4th, and potentially win the game by going for 2. 
 

However, if they starting team goes for 2 and gets it, then the 2nd team is completely at the mercy of their defense, as if the rule never changed.  
 

I’ll take the ball every time and I’m going for 2

[Maybe Someday]

You take the ball every time, try to score and put the pressure on the other team. Even if the other team scores I think they kick the XP to tie and keep the game going 99% of the time. I can’t see any team going for 2 in OT of a playoff game unless you don’t trust your kicker or your defense. 

 

I think some of you put too much into analytics in that situation. Definitely more than most NFL coaches do. The few coaches that did use analytics a lot didn’t make the playoffs. 
 

 

[Orlando Buffalo]

If I have the better offense I take the ball knowing that if we both score I can end it, if my defense is awesome I kick to see what I have to do. If the question is only about the Bills, we have Josh, give him the ball as much as possible 

[Ralonzo]

Defer to when? Next game?

[nedboy7]

Dare I say I think both are acceptable.  And that’s the point of changing the rules. Really depends on the flow of the game and how the D/O are playing.  Maybe the D needs a rest.  Maybe you wanna attack a depleted defense.  I hate to see what the reaction is when McD has to make this decision.  
 

 

Edited March 30, 2022 by nedboy7

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

2 hours ago, Virgil said:

The benefits of going second is know what you need to match with score, always going for it on 4th, and potentially win the game by going for 2. 
 

However, if they starting team goes for 2 and gets it, then the 2nd team is completely at the mercy of their defense, as if the rule never changed.  
 

I’ll take the ball every time and I’m going for 2

I’ll take the ball every time and not gamble on the 49% 2pt conversion rate 

24 minutes ago, Ralonzo said:

Defer to when? Next game?

exactly.  

[Augie]

7 hours ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

Shout Box wants to know 

 

what would you do?

 

Take the 27 mph wind at your back! 

[klos63]

Take the ball, in the KC game with the new rule, If Allen leads us to a TD to tie, KC gets the ball next in sudden death. I'd assume both teams will score.

[Rochesterfan]

2 hours ago, What a Tuel said:

 

Team one can guarantee a 3rd possession by limiting the opposing offense to whatever they scored or ending the game with a stop.

 

Team 1 scores a td and a 2 pt conversion

Team 2 can be stopped altogether, be stopped from scoring a td and a 2 pt conversion

 

Team 1 scores a TD and an extra point.

Team 2 can either be stopped altogether, be stopped from scoring a TD, be stopped from scoring an extra point to force a 3rd possession, be stopped from scoring a td and a risky 2 pt conversion.

 

Team 1 scores a field goal

Team 2 can either be stopped altogether, be stopped from scoring a field goal, be stopped from scoring a td

 

Team 1 scores nothing

Team 2 can either be stopped altogether or game over. 

 

Why would you want to let the opposing team dictate what you need to do?

 

 

 

None of those are guaranteed to happen.

 

You could go first and fumble the kickoff and lose before your offense ever gets out and that is a viable outcome.

 

The point being - if you take the ball first because you want the ball first in Sudden Death - you are already looking past the first 2 drives and are assuming you will still be tied - so you can then get the ball to win.

 

The reality is whoever gets the ball first can do any number of things from punting, getting stopped on downs, turnovers, safety, field goals, TDs, and TDs with 2 point conversion.

 

The 2nd team has the exact same ability to do all same things, but with an advantage - they know exactly what they need to do to win.  That does not mean they can do it, but they know exactly what must be done.

 

Essentially after team 1 goes and does whatever they are going to do - it almost immediately becomes sudden death because if you kicked a field goal - the other team knows a TD wins.  You score a TD and kick the XP - they know to avoid the third possession- go for two - I will win or lose right then.

 

Why would I want another team to dictate what I am doing - I don’t want them to dictate - I want to know what I have to do to win the game.  Team 2 could could just as easily stop team 1 - the difference is the 4th downs.

 

Team one faces a 4th and 4 at the 30 yard line on the opening drive - do they kick the FG or do they go for it.  Most likely they are kicking the FG to get the score.

 

Team 2 faces the same decision 4th and 4 at the 30 yard line after holding the other team to a FG - what decision do you make?  Because they know team 1 then can win with any score - I think teams are more likely to go for it and win or lose that way.

 

Think of the Bills going for the win in Tennessee rather than tying the game.  It might not always work, but if I am a coach - I want that option of playing a drive to win at the end.

 

 

[JESSEFEFFER]

Too much to sort through but. my suggestion is the winner of toss likely does not "defer," they choose an End Zone to defend.  Thus they get benefit of knowing if they must use 4th downs to extend a TD matching drive and any wind advantage.  I'd make the team scoring a TD on a 1st OT possession kick xp.  Second team must follow with 2 PT try assuming the kick was made.  Two matching FGs put the game into sudden death (an advantage for team with the 1st possession of OT.)

 

 

 

[Rochesterfan]

2 hours ago, Maybe Someday said:

You take the ball every time, try to score and put the pressure on the other team. Even if the other team scores I think they kick the XP to tie and keep the game going 99% of the time. I can’t see any team going for 2 in OT of a playoff game unless you don’t trust your kicker or your defense. 

 

I think some of you put too much into analytics in that situation. Definitely more than most NFL coaches do. The few coaches that did use analytics a lot didn’t make the playoffs. 
 

 

 

So you think a coach that just watched a team drive down the field to score on your defense and then you matched - you now know that it will go to sudden death and you may never touch the ball and you think the majority of coaches go for the tie.

 

No way - this is not the 70’s - we saw it play out a bunch during the season - many teams even in the regular season went for 2 and the win.  In addition- several teams passed on tying FGs to try and score TDs to win games.

 

I think there would be a rare coach that might try to tie, but I think the majority go for the win.

 

 

[Rochesterfan]

16 minutes ago, klos63 said:

Take the ball, in the KC game with the new rule, If Allen leads us to a TD to tie, KC gets the ball next in sudden death. I'd assume both teams will score.

 

So the question becomes quite simply if you take the Ball and Allen leads us to a TD - are you kicking the XP or going for 2.  Because if you take the ball and are assuming both teams are going to score - I can assure you Reid would be going for 2 on his terms to keep the ball from Allen on the sudden death round.

 

 

[Patrick Duffy]

12 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

So the question becomes quite simply if you take the Ball and Allen leads us to a TD - are you kicking the XP or going for 2.  Because if you take the ball and are assuming both teams are going to score - I can assure you Reid would be going for 2 on his terms to keep the ball from Allen on the sudden death round.

 

 

If the game is anything like we saw couple months ago I believe you go for 2.

[Norcalbillsfan]

Comes down to momentum to me, if the bills just drove the feild and scored to tie the game and the crowd is going wild, I'd take the ball first. Our if my defense needs a breather take the ball. Otherwise I like ball second, If you have a great 2 point play that you feel good about I think differing is a solid strategy.

[klos63]

1 hour ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

So the question becomes quite simply if you take the Ball and Allen leads us to a TD - are you kicking the XP or going for 2.  Because if you take the ball and are assuming both teams are going to score - I can assure you Reid would be going for 2 on his terms to keep the ball from Allen on the sudden death round.

 

 

good question.  Do you think McD would have gone for 2 if we got the ball back and scored in OT?  Probably.

 

Would certainly make for exciting finishes, as if we need anything more exciting than last years game.

[Maybe Someday]

1 hour ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

So you think a coach that just watched a team drive down the field to score on your defense and then you matched - you now know that it will go to sudden death and you may never touch the ball and you think the majority of coaches go for the tie.

 

No way - this is not the 70’s - we saw it play out a bunch during the season - many teams even in the regular season went for 2 and the win.  In addition- several teams passed on tying FGs to try and score TDs to win games.

 

I think there would be a rare coach that might try to tie, but I think the majority go for the win.

 

 

Assuming your defense hasn’t been depleted by injury and they’ve made some stops in the game already, yes. You trust your players to make plays. If you don’t you lose the game and the locker room. 
 

How many of those teams that went for 2 and the win in the regular season converted?  How many were playoff teams? Could be wrong but I don’t recall any. The teams that tried on a regular basis did so because they knew they weren’t good enough and had nothing to lose. 

 

[What a Tuel]

2 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

None of those are guaranteed to happen.

 

You could go first and fumble the kickoff and lose before your offense ever gets out and that is a viable outcome.

 

The point being - if you take the ball first because you want the ball first in Sudden Death - you are already looking past the first 2 drives and are assuming you will still be tied - so you can then get the ball to win.

 

The reality is whoever gets the ball first can do any number of things from punting, getting stopped on downs, turnovers, safety, field goals, TDs, and TDs with 2 point conversion.

 

The 2nd team has the exact same ability to do all same things, but with an advantage - they know exactly what they need to do to win.  That does not mean they can do it, but they know exactly what must be done.

 

Essentially after team 1 goes and does whatever they are going to do - it almost immediately becomes sudden death because if you kicked a field goal - the other team knows a TD wins.  You score a TD and kick the XP - they know to avoid the third possession- go for two - I will win or lose right then.

 

Why would I want another team to dictate what I am doing - I don’t want them to dictate - I want to know what I have to do to win the game.  Team 2 could could just as easily stop team 1 - the difference is the 4th downs.

 

Team one faces a 4th and 4 at the 30 yard line on the opening drive - do they kick the FG or do they go for it.  Most likely they are kicking the FG to get the score.

 

Team 2 faces the same decision 4th and 4 at the 30 yard line after holding the other team to a FG - what decision do you make?  Because they know team 1 then can win with any score - I think teams are more likely to go for it and win or lose that way.

 

Think of the Bills going for the win in Tennessee rather than tying the game.  It might not always work, but if I am a coach - I want that option of playing a drive to win at the end.

 

 

 

By scoring first you set the tone. Maybe a bit of desperation and panic in the other team. Maybe they make a mistake trying to force something. Meanwhile if you take the ball first, you are on your terms, not desperation mode.

 

Kick a field goal? Ok stop them from getting a TD.

Score a TD? Ok stop them from getting a TD. 

 

You are playing on your terms.

[Thurman#1]

It'd defend on the game situation somewhat. 

 

Is your offense moving well right now? Is your defense exhausted? Is the wind much better in one direction than the other?

 

But all things equal, I'd defer. IMO the computer simulations will show this to be the best tack and it'll be what we see.