I think if the Chiefs had won on the first possession in OT the entire Internet would have blown up. =))
While you have a valid point that the sample size is too small, it is not the case that “still tied” is the same as “lose”.
If there is 0:01 left in the game, and one team is in field position where its kicker makes about half of field goal tries, there may be a ~50% chance of the offense team to win, a very small chance of the defense team to win (by turnover run back for a touchdown), and ~50% minus defense win chance for the game to be still tied. Which team would you rather be?
Here, let me fix this for you:
Now to be fair, let’s present the Rest of the World, not Patriot fan’s, POV.
(The Raider Nation is everywhere!)
The OT college rules with each team starting at the 25 yard line seems more fair, if not more practical.
“While you have a valid point that the sample size is too small, it is not the case that “still tied” is the same as “lose”.”
It is the same if you are asking whether winning the overtime coin toss significantly increases your chance of winning the game vs not winning it - which is what is being asked in the first calculation.
Of course the ~50% chance of making a field goal might have a big influence on the outcome of a game because it directly affects the score of the game. Neither team can score during the coin toss, so it cannot directly affect the outcome of the game.
Is it more fair? In a study of 156 college overtime games from 2008-2013:
61.5% of the teams who play defensive first (that is, get the ball on offense second), win.
Seems like a pretty solid advantage to go second.
In another study of 328 games from 1996-2007:
55% of the teams that play defense first, win.
Also - 99% of the time (99%!) the coach will opt to play defense first after winning the coin toss. Clearly the coaches feel there is a major advantage to going on offense second.
This actually seems less fair than the way the NFL does it.
Perhaps a more fair way if first-score-wins is used (which is presumed in order to reduce injury risks) would be to have team A choose a starting field position, then have the team B choose whether to be on offense or defense from that starting field position. Yes, a coin flip is still needed to determine who is team A and who is team B, but then team A will choose a starting field position that it believes is fair whether it starts on offense or defense, and team B will choose whichever it believes is not to its disadvantage. Sort of like having one person divide something followed by having the other person choose who gets which part.
@sushiritto—I am NOT a raiders fan–Patriots fan since the 1960’s—we benefitted greatly from the tuck rule, but I recognize that it was a dumb rule, but as long as it was a rule, calling it was appropriate.
On the subject of overtime, the Saints had the ball first in their OT game, and the Rams defense stopped them, and got the ball. The Chiefs defense could have done the same. If the Chiefs win the toss, march down the field and win, there is no story, no outrage, just jubilation that the Patriots lost.
@MADad I’m a 49ers fan. I “hate” the Raiders. Raiders’ fans believe there was not indisputable proof to overturn the fumble call.
And I agree. KC has one of the worst D’s in the league. They could stopped them.
I’ve watched the reruns of both games several times. There were a lot of missed calls that would have benefited the Rams. A lot. The Saints had the ball twice after the no-call.
Gronk is held EVERY. SINGLE. PLAY.
I cannot understand, when they are throwing PI and holding flags at the most ticky-tack contact on WRs, how the defense gets away with mugging Gronk on every single play. He never gets a call.
^^tbf: every TE is held when he is on the line and not split outside.
Just a head’s up for you fellow Patriots fans -the Chewy website has Patriots leashes on sale for $8.49 and the collar is only $8.99. There are a few other teams as well but not all of them.
This morning on one of the local sports talk radio shows, Greg Papa, the long time play-by-play announcer for the Raiders (fired last year, but hired by the 49ers for next season) was discussing a variety of sports topics with the hosts of the morning show. He made a quick reference to the “Tuck U” game. Still irks the Raiders fans here.
Good luck to the Saints fans trying to forget last weekend’s game any time soon.
Tom Brady project wins science fair.
I’m sure his mother can throw just like Tom.
Tom admitted he likes the balls to be on the underside of inflation. Peyton Manning likes them over the limit.
When deflategate hit, in my AP Chem class I had my students run the calculations using the ideal gas law, and it proved the deflation was caused by temperature drop. That 10 year old threw footballs–are you kidding??? Surely judged by pseudo-scientists–who won last year, healing with crystals?
My S23 made it to the finals for his science fair project proving the opposite a few years ago! :)) We did not throw footballs, we measured the inflation rate of the footballs after being in hot and cold conditions to prove the temperature can change the inflation. It was fun and for once S23 was actually interested in his project.
I personally thought the kid was slightly cocky and using the word hate is sorta extreme for a young kid… Way to go parents! :-S
Well, if we can only find the guy they called “The Deflator,” then maybe we could ask him about it. :))