ADVERTISEMENT

Michigan place kicker Moody

He hit 2 FGs over 50 and if they make that XP it changes everything. KC doesn't kick the FG to tie it at 16 and they probably win in regulation. Weird attack on a kicker here.
I have no love for Michigan, but the OP is way off base. The missed PAT changed the trajectory of the game, but certainly didn’t decide it. Without his two long FGs, Niners aren’t in the game.
 
I have no love for Michigan, but the OP is way off base. The missed PAT changed the trajectory of the game, but certainly didn’t decide it. Without his two long FGs, Niners aren’t in the game.
Not to mention the punt TO that bounced off the foot of a 49er. Special teams play cost the 49ers last nights game.
 
I thought that was the right move at first instinct, though hasn’t been much analysis of it yet since it’s the first time it applied.
well, since 9ers got a FG, the Chiefs knew they needed a FG to tie and a TD to win. So the decision to go for it on 4th down was easy, no-brainer. The 9ers were fighting the unknown. Had they deferred, and KC scored a TD, 9ers would have gone for it on 4th down instead of kicking a FG. Just like college OT, you NEVER go on offense first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jopsujose and scbob
…and electing to take first possession in overtime after winning the toss. Crazy.
I heard a talking head suggest today that the Niners wanted the 3rd possession in OT. The reasoning was that if they matched scores on their respective first (Niners)/second (Chiefs) possession, the 3rd would be sudden death. Plausible, yes; but, man that is really overthinking it if true.
 
I heard a talking head suggest today that the Niners wanted the 3rd possession in OT. The reasoning was that if they matched scores on their respective first (Niners)/second (Chiefs) possession, the 3rd would be sudden death. Plausible, yes; but, man that is really overthinking it if true.
Agreed. I OT, there is no tomorrow. I know it wasn't sudden death, but they screwed themselves when it came down to 4th and 4 and had no choice but to kick a FG. They really let the Chiefs win that game.
 
well, since 9ers got a FG, the Chiefs knew they needed a FG to tie and a TD to win. So the decision to go for it on 4th down was easy, no-brainer. The 9ers were fighting the unknown. Had they deferred, and KC scored a TD, 9ers would have gone for it on 4th down instead of kicking a FG. Just like college OT, you NEVER go on offense first.
But the format is very different than college, with it continuing on…they trade FGs or Punts, and SF is then in the drivers seat again with the ball.
 
But the format is very different than college, with it continuing on…they trade FGs or Punts, and SF is then in the drivers seat again with the ball.
I simply cannot disagree with you more. First, college is the same thing. If you trade FGs, play goes on. But you simply cannot count on getting another possession. By deferring, the staff gets to make decisions based on the outcome of the opposing team's first drive.

  1. The opposing team doesn't score, you play to get the ball inside the 40 yard line for a FG and can be aggressive because a turnover doesn't kill you
  2. the opposing team scores a TD, you have to go for it on 4th down every single time. FGs and Punts are not an option. So even if you are 3rd and 10, you don't have to get all ten yards. You play the game with every series being a 4 down series.
  3. the opposing team scores a FG. You play to get into FG range, in order to tie. Once in, you get aggressive to score a TD and win the game. You don't lose by kicking a FG so there is no pressure once inside the 40 yard line.

Romo said that the 9ers Defense was on the field a lot late in regulation and this may have been why they received. But the team had been on the sideline for about 15 minutes, so they were pretty well rested considering it was OT. I don't think you will ever see a team take the ball to start overtime again as long as this format remains in place.

According to this, the 49ers didn't know the rules change while the Chiefs not only put in a plan for OT, they planed to go for 2 if the 9ers scored a TD and the Chiefs scored a TD (go for the win instead of kicking the PAT to tie and extend OT).
 
I heard a talking head suggest today that the Niners wanted the 3rd possession in OT. The reasoning was that if they matched scores on their respective first (Niners)/second (Chiefs) possession, the 3rd would be sudden death. Plausible, yes; but, man that is really overthinking it if true.

It isn't overthinking. It is the conventional logic that all teams use.

Third possession is what everyone wants.
 
It isn't overthinking. It is the conventional logic that all teams use.

Third possession is what everyone wants.
Why? There should never be a third possession. If SF scores a TD then KC goes for 2. The only way for a possible 3rd possession is if both teams score a TD and convert the 2. You can't kick a FG in the new format and think you'll get another shot.
 
Why? There should never be a third possession. If SF scores a TD then KC goes for 2. The only way for a possible 3rd possession is if both teams score a TD and convert the 2. You can't kick a FG in the new format and think you'll get another shot.
that's right. Ostensibly, the 49ers had to run their first offensive series blind. Conversely, the Chiefs knew exactly what they needed to do and it gave them a lot more options.

To reiterate, no matter what the 9ers did in their first possession in OT, the Chiefs had the chance to win the game when they got the ball.
 
I simply cannot disagree with you more. First, college is the same thing. If you trade FGs, play goes on.
College is very different because if you trade scores, then both teams again get to possess the ball. With the NFL rules, that team getting the ball first would have a huge advantage if the teams matched results on the first possessions. Play goes on after you trade FGs, but you'd be in a very preferable position.
 
College is very different because if you trade scores, then both teams again get to possess the ball. With the NFL rules, that team getting the ball first would have a huge advantage if the teams matched results on the first possessions. Play goes on after you trade FGs, but you'd be in a very preferable position.
Yeah...but you can't play for the future in OT in the Super Bowl.

First, the Chiefs (unknown at the time) would have gone for two if the 9ers scored a TD. The reasoning is that by that point, both teams had played more than 5 quarters of football and the offense has the advantage over defense in terms of having to expend energy. The defense would just be completely worn out.

Second, the 9ers, by taking the ball, gave the Chiefs complete clarity on how to run their offense. They first would know that they had to go for it on fourth down until they got into FG range. Once in FG range, they could go for the sudden-death win with a TD and still kick a FG to tie it. bottom line is that the Chiefs had four downs to get a first down while the 49ers had three.

Had it been reversed and outcomes the same, the 49ers could have gone for it on fourth and four deep in Chiefs territory knowing that a FG would result in a loss.
 
I thought that was the right move at first instinct, though hasn’t been much analysis of it yet since it’s the first time it applied.
Romo said it was to give the SF defense more time to rest. I still disagree with the decision. What if KC got the ball first and they scored a TD? SF would have known to go for the TD on 4th down.
 
Romo said it was to give the SF defense more time to rest. I still disagree with the decision. What if KC got the ball first and they scored a TD? SF would have known to go for the TD on 4th down.
right, and again, the defense rested while the Chiefs kicked off after tying the game. When their offense took the field and ran a play to end the game. After the teams gathered on the sideline. After the teams flipped coins. And during the opening kickoff of OT. Plus the endless commercials during those events. Short of their mom's giving them oranges, I am not sure how much more rest they needed.
 
Why? There should never be a third possession. If SF scores a TD then KC goes for 2. The only way for a possible 3rd possession is if both teams score a TD and convert the 2. You can't kick a FG in the new format and think you'll get another shot.
The rules provide that if the game is tied after each team gets a possession, the next score wins. Absolutely no obligation for KC to go for 2 had Niners scored a TD and kicked the extra point.
 
The rules provide that if the game is tied after each team gets a possession, the next score wins. Absolutely no obligation for KC to go for 2 had Niners scored a TD and kicked the extra point.
right. The change is, and different than regular season, both teams get an opportunity. So in the regular season, if the first team scored a TD, the game is over. If they kick a FG, the second team has a chance to match or win with a TD. In the Super Bowl, no matter what, the second team gets a chance.

Back to the regular season...if you think you can score a TD, you take the ball as a TD will end the game. But in the Super Bowl, the other team can match your TD. In fact, like in college, the second team now has clarity in that they know that they need to score a FG or TD to win or extend the game. That gave the Chiefs the ability to play every series as a four-down series and not a three-down series with a kick at the end.

Apparently, the 49ers never talked about a strategy for OT. The chiefs not only plotted a coin flip, but also decided if they scored a TD to match the first team, they'd go for two as the defense would be exhausted.
 
Isn't he the same guy who missed the kick in college playoff game, thus losing the game to TCU.
Don't remember if he blew a kick vs TCU- but I've always appreciated how good he was at UM- ESPECIALLY because as a Walk On he beat out "Private Jet Video Commitment Boy/Harbaugh Sleepover Playmate" Quinn Nordin.

After Quinn missed a PAT in Beaver Stadium to raucous booing and cat calls (of which I was one- I rarely have ever booed a college player) the door opened up and Moody never took a seat.

Lotsa things coulda made the difference for SF- but converting that PAT seems like it should've been the easiest. Better team earned the win- as much as I was rooting against them. The Chiefs made more plays.....
 
Don't remember if he blew a kick vs TCU- but I've always appreciated how good he was at UM- ESPECIALLY because as a Walk On he beat out "Private Jet Video Commitment Boy/Harbaugh Sleepover Playmate" Quinn Nordin.

After Quinn missed a PAT in Beaver Stadium to raucous booing and cat calls (of which I was one- I rarely have ever booed a college player) the door opened up and Moody never took a seat.

Lotsa things coulda made the difference for SF- but converting that PAT seems like it should've been the easiest. Better team earned the win- as much as I was rooting against them. The Chiefs made more plays.....
He is then one who missed the TCU FG to win it.
So, he misses a shot at the NCAA National Championship AND the Super Bowl.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUCYCLING
The rules provide that if the game is tied after each team gets a possession, the next score wins. Absolutely no obligation for KC to go for 2 had Niners scored a TD and kicked the extra point.
Reid said he planned to go for two. No coach is going to play for the tie and hope the defense holds on with Mahomes at QB
 
Romo said it was to give the SF defense more time to rest. I still disagree with the decision. What if KC got the ball first and they scored a TD? SF would have known to go for the TD on 4th down.
Rule #1 - anything Romo says is stupid - man that Dude never shut's up but I have a Romo filters and he becomes background noise after 5 minutes - Olsen was/is 1000 times better than Romo.
 
Rule #1 - anything Romo says is stupid - man that Dude never shut's up but I have a Romo filters and he becomes background noise after 5 minutes - Olsen was/is 1000 times better than Romo.
Romo isn't that bad. I feel like everyone hates every color analyst other than Blackledge here. See Herbie being bashed constantly. Romo is better at this than he was a QB.
 
Yeah I don't understand that. It's basically not understanding the new rules.
Which is exactly what the fullback others on the 49ers said. I think the 49ers have more talent and probably should have won, but Andy and his coaches are better.

 
The rules provide that if the game is tied after each team gets a possession, the next score wins. Absolutely no obligation for KC to go for 2 had Niners scored a TD and kicked the extra point.
Mahomes said that they were going for two to end it one way or the other. No obligation to, but the Chiefs were going to be aggressive if the situation presented itself.
 
Mahomes said that they were going for two to end it one way or the other. No obligation to, but the Chiefs were going to be aggressive if the situation presented itself.
And it makes sense to go for two by the Chiefs there if it happened, otherwise with kickers being good for 50-60 yards it doesn't take a big drive for the 49ers to end it on that third possession of OT with a FG. You (Chiefs) go for two to prevent the 2:1 possession ratio not in your favor. You take the ball first (49ers) for the 2:1 possession possibility in your favor.

Whether the 49ers players or coaches or both we're prepared or not, I think both teams' strategies are the correct ones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obliviax and GSPMax
And it makes sense to go for two by the Chiefs there if it happened, otherwise with kickers being good for 50-60 yards it doesn't take a big drive for the 49ers to end it on that third possession of OT with a FG. You (Chiefs) go for two to prevent the 2:1 possession ratio not in your favor. You take the ball first (49ers) for the 2:1 possession possibility in your favor.

Whether the 49ers players or coaches or both we're prepared or not, I think both teams' strategies are the correct ones.
its pretty clear that the Chiefs better game planned for OT and I completely agree with their strategy.

I'd like to see a stat to see who is better off in the NFL: to be up by 1 or 2 kicking off with less than two minutes left and the other team having all their timeouts or to be receiving the kickoff losing by 1 or 2 with less than two minutes left.
 
its pretty clear that the Chiefs better game planned for OT and I completely agree with their strategy.

I'd like to see a stat to see who is better off in the NFL: to be up by 1 or 2 kicking off with less than two minutes left and the other team having all their timeouts or to be receiving the kickoff losing by 1 or 2 with less than two minutes left.
Well, Buffalo knows that Mahomes needs less than 17 seconds. 😂
 
  • Haha
Reactions: LandoComando
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT