NFL GDT: 2021 AFC Divisional Round: (2) Kansas City Chiefs vs (3) Buffalo Bills

[Yarice]

But they didn't stop their opponent. Don't they deserve to lose by your logic? Why not give a perfectly even playing field?

While I understand OT rules can be frustrating for the team than lose the coin toss, I don't think there is a way to have a perfectly even playing field. There will always be one team that as an advantage on the other, and that team will be decided by the coin toss.

Giving an equal number of possession to both teams can seem like fair, but it is not IMO. It gives the second team the information about what the first team did with their possession, which is non negligeable for many reasons.

 

[StreetHawk]

You kick it high with the intention it lands within the 10, forces a return but doesn't guarantee they get far past the 20 either and you kill a couple of seconds (which is a lifetime after what we saw)

If you squib its too easy for the returner to just down it, waste no clock, and they end up past the 20.

But your main goal on that kickoff had to be to give Mahomes the least amount of time possible. You have to be aware your D is gassed and that Mahomes was simply playing at another level so stopping him was near impossible.

The TB kicker in sunny weather kicked it out of bounds twice vs the Rams. With returns, even with Punts you never really want to kick it right down the middle. You want to be able to corner the returner in one area.

to guard against possibly having the kickoff go out of bounds you then have to kick it up the middle which goes against where you want it to go.

that’s the risk.

Romo couldn’t handle a snap on a 20 yard FG attempt to win the game. So nothing is a gimme when it comes to kicks. Blair Walsh missed a 20 something yarder. Upon relay the holder let the laces facing Walsh.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

While I understand OT rules can be frustrating for the team than lose the coin toss, I don't think there is a way to have a perfectly even playing field. There will always be one team that as an advantage on the other, and that team will be decided by the coin toss.

Giving an equal number of possession to both teams can seem like fair, but it is not IMO. It gives the second team the information about what the first team did with their possession, which is non negligeable for many reasons.

So do like baseball, give the visiting team first possession and go from there.

Dunno.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

The argument that the Bills didn’t deserve fairness or a possession in OT because they couldn’t stop the Chiefs for 13 seconds - which is admittedly egregious - fails to consider that there are numerous other ways to get to OT besides giving up such a drive and a last-play tying field goal.

 

[keonsbitterness]

This what the Bills could have done with 13 seconds left: identify your best tacklers, line up one directly against Kelce, one on Hill (or maybe two because he's so quick), tackle them immediately after the snap and hold them down for the duration of the play. Mahomes will be confused for a few seconds when he notices his two primary targets aren't available. If he still produces a big play from that, bless him. If not, it's only a five yard penalty for holding and will leave the Chiefs with time for only one play.

Though I doubt any coach would ever do that because they'd get crucified for going against the spirit of the game. Wouldn't bother me.

 

[Yarice]

So do like baseball, give the visiting team first possession and go from there.

Dunno.

Don't see how it would be more fair? Instead of giving the advantage to the team that win the coin toss, you give the advantage to the team that plays at home.

Plus, football is not the same as baseball.

In baseball, knowing how many points your opponent made should not change your strategy. It should always be ''let's make the most points possible until we get 3 outs''. In football, if the first team made 0 points, the second team could settle for a field goal without worrying if it would be enough (Clear advantage to the second team here).

In baseball, the defensive team cannot make any points. In football, they can, and once again that gives an advantage to the second team.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

While I understand OT rules can be frustrating for the team than lose the coin toss, I don't think there is a way to have a perfectly even playing field. There will always be one team that as an advantage on the other, and that team will be decided by the coin toss.

Giving an equal number of possession to both teams can seem like fair, but it is not IMO. It gives the second team the information about what the first team did with their possession, which is non negligeable for many reasons.

This is the first post that I find at least brings a fresh perspective. What are these reasons and do they outweigh the advantage of being the first team up a TD?

 

[Yarice]

This is the first post that I find at least brings a fresh perspective. What are these reasons and do they outweigh the advantage of being the first team up a TD?

Thank you! I like to have nice debate when there is respect.

I personnaly see two reasons, but maybe there are more. For those scenario, let's say there is Team A and Team B. Team A starts with the ball.

First scenario. Let's say Team B is in field goal position, on 4th down. Should they kick it, or should they try to make a touchdown? Well, that depends on what Team A did. If Team A scored 0 points, than Team B can choose to kick it. If Team A scored a touchdown, then Team B knows they have to go for it, or they lose. It Team A scored a field goal, then Team B can decide if they want to play risky, and finish the game with a touchdown, or if they prefer to continue with a field goal. If Team A is in the same scenario, they do not have that info, so they have to guess.

Second scenario is in case of defensive points. Probably everybody would agree that in case of defensive points, the game is over, and I do agree with that. But that gives Team B an advantage, because if Team B defense scores points, then Team A defense does not have the opportunity to do the same. (Because anyways, even if we give the ball to Team B offense, they would simply kneel down 4 time).

Do these reasons outweights the good this new system would bring? I personnaly don't know, and I do think they should talk about it in the NFL. My argument was more that there were no perfect solutions that are completly fair. In some game, like in Bills-Chiefs, it would probably be more faire to give each team a possession, because the way the game was going, the probability of a touchdown was pretty high. In some other game, it is maybe more fair like it is right now. But when they are making the rules, they have to choose one system that is applicated to every situations.

PS: Sorry of my argument is not clear, English is not my first language

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Thank you! I like to have nice debate when there is respect.

I personnaly see two reasons, but maybe there are more. For those scenario, let's say there is Team A and Team B. Team A starts with the ball.

First scenario. Let's say Team B is in field goal position, on 4th down. Should they kick it, or should they try to make a touchdown? Well, that depends on what Team A did. If Team A scored 0 points, than Team B can choose to kick it. If Team A scored a touchdown, then Team B knows they have to go for it, or they lose. It Team A scored a field goal, then Team B can decide if they want to play risky, and finish the game with a touchdown, or if they prefer to continue with a field goal. If Team A is in the same scenario, they do not have that info, so they have to guess.

Second scenario is in case of defensive points. Probably everybody would agree that in case of defensive points, the game is over, and I do agree with that. But that gives Team B an advantage, because if Team B defense scores points, then Team A defense does not have the opportunity to do the same. (Because anyways, even if we give the ball to Team B offense, they would simply kneel down 4 time).

Do these reasons outweights the good this new system would bring? I personnaly don't know, and I do think they should talk about it in the NFL. My argument was more that there were no perfect solutions that are completly fair. In some game, like in Bills-Chiefs, it would probably be more faire to give each team a possession, because the way the game was going, the probability of a touchdown was pretty high. In some other game, it is maybe more fair like it is right now. But when they are making the rules, they have to choose one system that is applicated to every situations.

PS: Sorry of my argument is not clear, English is not my first language

No problem. This is a lot more interesting than just 'Win in regulation!' or 'Stop them!'.

First scenario: I wouldn't have problem with Team B winning on a FG here. Either team A started with the ball and got zero points, which makes it fair for Team B to win with 3. If they get 3, well then Team B is put in a much more minor pickle if they have to decide to go for 3 or 6. At any rate, the playing field becomes much more fair. They can still choose to trust their defense and kick 3 and take their chances. They still have a say. This is actual quite nice - you get an advantage for winning the toss, but not one that completely leaves one team's entire unit (losing team's offense) unable to make a play.

Second scenario is much more complex and I think you bring up a fair point. I'd probably be willing to give Team A an opportunity to tie it either way. Especially if you got ball hawks, it seems unfair not to give a chance to your defense to make a play. But like you said, a team kneels 4 time. But is that the tradeoff for starting with the ball? Man, that's a good one. I'm tempted to say you allow no kneels downs? But then that brings its own complexity with field position and time. Ugh.

 

[Prominence Problem]

I haven't heard this today:

Butker left 4 points on the board

 

[Halladay]

I decided to watch Four Falls of Buffalo after this game. That franchise is cursed. Bright future, though the AFC is just so difficult.

 

[Hall of Faber]

There is a better way to award OT first possession in football. Some regulation stat like yds/play.

 

[edd1e]

The idea of sudden death in a sport like football is essentially moronic.

Agreed. Coin flip plays a huge part, which it really shouldn't.

Absolutely amazing game by the way.

 

[John Price]

 

[DangleCity]

But they didn't stop their opponent. Don't they deserve to lose by your logic? Why not give a perfectly even playing field?

I think it's impossible to have a perfectly level playing field. They tweaked the rules to make it as level as possible and still keep it to a form of sudden death, so the teams don't have to play all night

 

[DangleCity]

Agreed. Coin flip plays a huge part, which it really shouldn't.

Absolutely amazing game by the way.

How else would you decide possession then?

 

[Tuggy]

Simple solution

 

[DangleCity]

Simple solution

Omg, would be awesome, but the NFL would never go for it. Didn't they have a ton of injuries with this in the XFL

 

[TheGreenTBer]

Omg, would be awesome, but the NFL would never go for it. Didn't they have a ton of injuries with this in the XFL

Easy solution: make the coaches and/or owners battle for the ball instead of the players. PA would give zero f***s.

 

[edd1e]

How else would you decide possession then?

You don't seem to get the point. Let both attack.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Catching Mahomes saying, "Do it"....pretty good.

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

Did anyone watch football when all you needed was a FG on the first possession to win the game? I don’t recall there being a huge uproar over this. They had that rule for what, 40 years? Leave the game alone.

 

[keonsbitterness]

Did anyone watch football when all you needed was a FG on the first possession to win the game? I don’t recall there being a huge uproar over this. They had that rule for what, 40 years? Leave the game alone.

They've been tinkering with the game and changing rules since the beginning.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Agreed. Coin flip plays a huge part, which it really shouldn't.

Absolutely amazing game by the way.

No, it doesn't.

Before the rule change, when just a FG won the game only ~30% of the time did the team that won the toss end the game without the other team getting the ball. That's even less now with the FG doesnt end it rule

 

[TheAngryHank]

No, it doesn't.

Before the rule change, when just a FG won the game only ~30% of the time did the team that won the toss end the game without the other team getting the ball. That's even less now with the FG doesnt end it rule

And no internet for millions to publicly cry.