Did Denver make a strategic mistake by electing to receive in OT? I think so

[condon84]

LOL....No.

Had Denver elected to kick-off and Ben proceded to hit Wallace on a similar game winning TD pass, imagine the criticism Fox would get?

 

[TruthSeeker]

It's a tough decision because I can see the problem with having your offense go out quick. I was worried about this when Denver elected to recieve but I think theirs is the right move. Throughout the 4th quarter it was hard to imagine them stopping Ben.

With their special teams, even if they go 3 and out I think they could have made Pitt go a long way. Because you can end it instantly with a TD, you should always recieve first IMO. Only exception is if the game is an absolute defensive struggle, but that never happens anymore in the new NFL.

This makes an interesting discussion though

It is indeed an interesting question that, IMO, doesn't have a clear answer.

As has already been noted, you need to make the decision based on the situation, not in a vacuum. But I'm not sure what it really means to note that the Steelers had outplayed the Broncos in the 2nd half. Does that really tilt the decision one way or the other?

Under the previous OT rules, the team that won the coin flip won the game 52% of the time (vs. 43.4% for the team losing the coin flip with 4.6% ending in a tie). Overtime coin toss percentages It should be noted, however, that it was essentially 50-50 until the NFL moved the kickoffs back to the 30 in 1994 at which point it became more of a 60-40 split. With the kickoff moved back up, it would probably be closer to a 50-50 split (although I think it would still favor the winner of the coin toss given the improvement in kicking field goals in the past 20 years).

Based on this, I think it may actually be slightly with the percentages to choose defense. But to offset that, you have to consider the psychological impact of giving the other team the ball knowing that they may win on their first possession.

At any rate, glad Denver took the ball and won.

 

[Deus Irae]

I believe Marty Morningweg pretty much ended this debate for all time.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I believe Marty Morningweg pretty much ended this debate for all time.

You mean Marty "Moron-weg"?

I think people are putting too much stock into the probability of outcomes and not enough into the severity of each outcome. You can't give the other team the ball if it means that you potentially will lose the game. It is different than the college rules and that changes the strategy. We don't have any numbers on this that you can use to calculate the outcomes because it is brand new. All the rest are projections.

 

[TruthSeeker]

You mean Marty "Moron-weg"?

I think people are putting too much stock into the probability of outcomes and not enough into the severity of each outcome. You can't give the other team the ball if it means that you potentially will lose the game. It is different than the college rules and that changes the strategy. We don't have any numbers on this that you can use to calculate the outcomes because it is brand new. All the rest are projections.

Severity of outcome? You either win or you lose. You should do what gives you the overall best chance of winning. If that means kicking off, you should kick off.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Severity of outcome? You either win or you lose. You should do what gives you the overall best chance of winning. If that means kicking off, you should kick off.

In college you always get a possession. The severity of outcome I am talking about is losing the game without ever getting the ball.

 

[pwes]

Absolutley not. I think there is less pressure to recieve

If you defer the ball and the opposing team scores a FG then you are forced to get a TD or at least match the FG. If you don't score at all then the game is over. So if thier defense stops you its done, even with the 3 points they put up. Why in the world would you even want to put yourself into that type of position?

When recieving you can score at least a FG and if the defense can hold the other team to a FG as well then it greatly increases your chances with the next posession to score another FG. Frankly being able to have the ball twice as opposed to once has greater odds of winning. With a great Defense or great Offense it is still better to recieve to limit the posessions of the other team and their chance to win.

I think some people are really overthinking this new rule. I think the first coach that defers is going to regret it and it may never happen again under these OT rules.

 

[PatriotSeven]

I'm not really sure why this is a debate. The only reason teams even defer sometimes at the beginning of the game is because they are guaranteed to get the ball first in the second half, with the same amount of game left to play, which makes sense considering your defense will be more tired.

It's sudden death with a twist. But it's still primarily sudden death. Think Russian Roulette. Even if you throw in a blank in the gun along with a live bullet, you still want to be the first to pull the trigger. Your chances of death are always greater when the other guy is holding the gun even if the first time he may shoot you with a blank. Your chances of survival are always greater if you're holding the gun.

Not to mention, the simple nature of football that offense beats defense, else the game wouldn't work.

 

[TPL]

I'm not really sure why this is a debate. The only reason teams even defer sometimes at the beginning of the game is because they are guaranteed to get the ball first in the second half, with the same amount of game left to play, which makes sense considering your defense will be more tired.

It's sudden death with a twist. But it's still primarily sudden death. Think Russian Roulette. Even if you throw in a blank in the gun along with a live bullet, you still want to be the first to pull the trigger. Your chances of death are always greater when the other guy is holding the gun even if the first time he may shoot you with a blank. Your chances of survival are always greater if you're holding the gun.

Not to mention, the simple nature of football that offense beats defense, else the game wouldn't work.

Exactly.
Possibly the Steelers should even have attempted an onside kick to gain possession?
If you recover an onside kick you only need to kick a field goal to win?
If you fail to recover an onside kick you should still get a possession if the other team fails to score a touchdown?

 

[sly24]

I didn't even know this was debatable.. ALWAYS receive the ball in OT..

 

[BelichickFan]

I believe Marty Morningweg pretty much ended this debate for all time.

I know you all know this but the rules have changed. There's all kinds of factors now, needing a TD on the first drive, FG to win on the second, tie and continue on both getting a FG, etc, etc.

I'm not nearly smart enough to figure it all out but the old school thinking isn't clear anymore. If you have an offense like the Patriots I'd take the ball. With a bad offense and the risk of punting from your own 25 and giving the other team the ball at their own 40 only needing a FG, it's a tough call.

 

[PatriotSeven]

Exactly.
Possibly the Steelers should even have attempted an onside kick to gain possession?
If you recover an onside kick you only need to kick a field goal to win?
If you fail to recover an onside kick you should still get a possession if the other team fails to score a touchdown?

That's a good question actually. Anyone know?

 

[BelichickFan]

Exactly.
Possibly the Steelers should even have attempted an onside kick to gain possession?
If you recover an onside kick you only need to kick a field goal to win?
If you fail to recover an onside kick you should still get a possession if the other team fails to score a touchdown?

A problem with that is a failed on side kick puts the receiving team 10-15 yards from FG range. If they kick a FG the other team still needs a FG to tie or TD to win. Not a horrible situation but you really enhance the likelihood to NEED a FG to tie as opposed to kicking one to win.

 

[jcdavey]

denver made the right call, and didn't play scared

credit to them

 

[PatriotSeven]

A problem with that is a failed on side kick puts the receiving team 10-15 yards from FG range. If they kick a FG the other team still needs a FG to tie or TD to win. Not a horrible situation but you really enhance the likelihood to NEED a FG to tie as opposed to kicking one to win.

Yeah but even if they failed to kick it, would a FG be enough to get the win and sudden death, considering your team started on defense and recovered the kick? Would you still need a TD if you recover an on-side kick?

 

[Halifax_Pats_Fan]

....don't make me insert Herm again....

 

[BelichickFan]

The bottom line is from a probability standpoint is it VERY complicated and not at all clear that you should receive if you have a weak offense and strong defense. As we have neither the decision should be easy for us

 

[neuronet]

Even announcers mentioned both coaches they talked to said it was a no-brainer to take the ball with the new rules. Waiting to know what you need to do is moot if they score a TD.

 

[BelichickFan]

Even announcers mentioned both coaches they talked to said it was a no-brainer to take the ball with the new rules. Waiting to know what you need to do is moot if they score a TD.

If not about knowing what you need but whether the probability of a TD on the first drive is more likely than a punt and FG for the other team. Anyone who thinks it's a no brainer for certain teams isn't thinking it through.

 

[TPL]

That's a good question actually. Anyone know?

NFL.com news: Postseason overtime rules

Opportunity to possess: The opportunity to possess occurs only during kicking plays. A kickoff is an opportunity to possess for the receiving team. If the kicking team legally recovers the kick, the receiving team is considered to have had its opportunity. A punt or a field goal that crosses the line of scrimmage and is muffed by the receiving team is considered to be an opportunity to possess for the receivers. Normal touching rules by the kicking team apply.