Texas A&M Football
Sponsored by

Super Bowl OT clock

10,643 Views | 56 Replies | Last: 3 mo ago by BMX Bandit
Jack Cheese
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What the hell was Andy Reid thinking?!? Commentators missed it, but watch the clock on the last 2 plays.

Kelce gets 1st down inside the 10 with about 40 seconds to go. Chiefs leave 2 TOs on the board while the clock runs down to :06 before the last play. Luckily for KC the play went for a TD.

They could have run at least 4 plays given that they had 2 time outs. But they put it all on one play. Absolutely CRIMINAL clock mismanagement. I'm utterly shocked that no one seemed to catch this.

Edit: thanks for the explanation! I thought I was losing my mind. The new rules are pretty foreign to me.
Frisco
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It was a new game, it would have gone to a 2nd quarter
LB12Diamond
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
They would have just set the clock 15:00 more minutes.

Game clock not really needed unless the thinking was giving both teams a break after 15:00 minutes of play.
StinkyPinky
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Goes into a second OT period if its either tied or the second team hasn't completed their initial possession.
TAMU74
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Overtime rules are confusing and seem to be constantly changing.
According to Tony Romo if the clock and run out they would've just started another quarter.
The game would not have ended at that point.
If that were the case Andy Reid would've kicked the field goal for at least the tie.
The Super Bowl could not end in a tie so another quarter would've been guaranteed.
gtaggie_08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Technically, the Chiefs had never completed their first possession. So they would have rolled into the second OT with the ball still. If SF had forced a FG, game continues
AggieMD95
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Jack Cheese said:

What the hell was Andy Reid thinking?!? Commentators missed it, but watch the clock on the last 2 plays.

Kelce gets 1st down inside the 10 with about 40 seconds to go. Chiefs leave 2 TOs on the board while the clock runs down to :06 before the last play. Luckily for KC the play went for a TD.

They could have run at least 4 plays given that they had 2 time outs. But they put it all on one play. Absolutely CRIMINAL clock mismanagement. I'm utterly shocked that no one seemed to catch this.


My son and I were amazed.

Terrible clock management for the win tonight

But apparently not bc of dumb super bowl OT rules
Jack Cheese
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
LB12Diamond said:

They would have just set the clock 15:00 more minutes.

Game clock not really needed unless the thinking was giving both teams a break after 15:00 minutes of play.

Wild. Okay. Thanks. I thought I was losing my mind.
tomtomdrumdrum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
lol
Aston04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Talked about on the NFL forum..

But the tv production was really bad...NFL changes rules for playoffs overtime... And yet they don't explain what's going on in detail..

Surely it should have occured to either announcer to point out the clock didn't matter as the clock wound down under a minute..crazy.
LB12Diamond
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Romo was to busy going off on one of his tangents and talking through almost every play.
spherical
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
He literally said "for everyone screaming about the clock right now…."
revvie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
After hearing what the overtime rules where each team is guaranteed a possession, SF who won the toss should have elected to kickoff since you know what your opponent does with their possession. The same strategy as NCAA OT. I guess because they were worried what would happen on subsequent possessions.
Aston04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
spherical said:

He literally said "for everyone screaming about the clock right now…."
while they were showing a replay of the previous play and not showing what's the hell is going on, while people are freaking out bc they hadn't explained it prior?

Yeah that's good execution.
Aston04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
revvie said:

After hearing what the overtime rules where each team is guaranteed a possession, SF who won the toss should have elected to kickoff since you know what your opponent does with their possession. The same strategy as NCAA OT. I guess because they were worried what would happen on subsequent possessions.


No. But the f'd up that explanation too.

It was not about "rest" for the defense. The advantage of getting the ball first with those rules is if it's still tied after each team gets the ball, then Sf can score and win. Possibility of 2 possessions over only 1 for the other team trumps advantage of knowing what you need to get going second.

But again cbs should have explained this ***** Totally unprepared for playoffs ot.
Divining Rod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not sure what broadcast some of y'all were watching. Are y'all in Mumbai or something???


Anyway, they DID talk about- both in the pre-overtime coin flip by the ref and the announcers, and then about 2 or 3 more times as the first period was winding down.

English as a first language may have been the stumbling block.
Divining Rod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
great point from Aston 04 on why SF took ball first. I didnt think about the D tired argument, but the point about getting the first sudden death possession after a tied "first possession" by each team is indeed the point that trumps.
LB12Diamond
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well
Romo talking like Twitchy from hoodwinked after drinking coffee for most of the game makes it easy to tune him out.

He has several annoying habits. Besides using to many adjactives, him continuing to talk throughout many of the plays during live action is the worst. Can you at least just talk after the play or during replays. Nope, just goes on and on.
TAMUallen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Romo was off a lot for the biggest game of the year. He doesn't have it
J-Licious
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aston04 said:

revvie said:

After hearing what the overtime rules where each team is guaranteed a possession, SF who won the toss should have elected to kickoff since you know what your opponent does with their possession. The same strategy as NCAA OT. I guess because they were worried what would happen on subsequent possessions.


No. But the f'd up that explanation too.

It was about "rest" for the defense. The advantage of getting the ball first with those rules is if it's still tied after each team gets the ball, then Sf can score and win. Possibility of 2 possessions over only 1 for the other team trumps advantage of knowing what you need to get going second.

But again cbs should have explained this ***** Totally unprepared for playoffs ot.


You go def first. You get a stop you win with fg. They score, you have 4th down certainty. You both score tds, you go for 2.
Stat Monitor Repairman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Romo sounds like he partied last night.

Aside from not explaining the most critical moment of the game he did alright and was entertaining.
revvie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
From Kyle Shanahan

Jack Cheese
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Divining Rod said:

great point from Aston 04 on why SF took ball first. I didnt think about the D tired argument, but the point about getting the first sudden death possession after a tied "first possession" by each team is indeed the point that trumps.

Since you were such a jerk on your previous post, I'll point out that Romo "literally" said that a reason for taking the ball first is to give a tired defense a rest. "Maybe English as a first language" is something you should work on.

I was the one who stated this thread. What probably happens is (stay with me here...) people talk a lot while watching the Super Bowl - especially during an exciting, close one, so they miss stuff that is explained by the commentators.
He is Ass My Dude
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack Cheese said:

Divining Rod said:

great point from Aston 04 on why SF took ball first. I didnt think about the D tired argument, but the point about getting the first sudden death possession after a tied "first possession" by each team is indeed the point that trumps.

Since you were such a jerk on your previous post, I'll point out that Romo "literally" said that a reason for taking the ball first is to give a tired defense a rest. "Maybe English as a first language" is something you should work on.

I was the one who stated this thread. What probably happens is (stay with me here...) people talk a lot while watching the Super Bowl - especially during an exciting, close one, so they miss stuff that is explained by the commentators.


I heard him say it but didn't know what the hell he was talking about because the rule is so odd.

They definitely could have handled it better.
LincolnBorglum79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The only purpose of the clock running in playoffs overtime is to limit timeouts to 3 per team for each 2 quarter period. I assume the second quarter has a 2 minute warning and is like a third "half". Like the ref said it's like a new game. We may never know unless a game goes that long.
MooreTrucker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aston04 said:

revvie said:

After hearing what the overtime rules where each team is guaranteed a possession, SF who won the toss should have elected to kickoff since you know what your opponent does with their possession. The same strategy as NCAA OT. I guess because they were worried what would happen on subsequent possessions.


No. But the f'd up that explanation too.

It was not about "rest" for the defense. The advantage of getting the ball first with those rules is if it's still tied after each team gets the ball, then Sf can score and win. Possibility of 2 possessions over only 1 for the other team trumps advantage of knowing what you need to get going second.

But again cbs should have explained this ***** Totally unprepared for playoffs ot.
It wasn't just CBS. Maurice Jones Drew on the NFL Network postgame show made comments that showed that he didn't understand the new rules either.
MooreTrucker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieMD95 said:

Jack Cheese said:

What the hell was Andy Reid thinking?!? Commentators missed it, but watch the clock on the last 2 plays.

Kelce gets 1st down inside the 10 with about 40 seconds to go. Chiefs leave 2 TOs on the board while the clock runs down to :06 before the last play. Luckily for KC the play went for a TD.

They could have run at least 4 plays given that they had 2 time outs. But they put it all on one play. Absolutely CRIMINAL clock mismanagement. I'm utterly shocked that no one seemed to catch this.


My son and I were amazed.

Terrible clock management for the win tonight

But apparently not bc of dumb super bowl OT rules
It's people not understanding, and the networks not explaining it well, not "terrible click management".

Mahomes said that in almost every team meeting since the playoffs started, they had a session explaining this new rule (thanks, Buffalo) to the point that he was sick of hearing about it every day. But it paid off in this game.
W
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
revvie said:

From Kyle Shanahan


but Andy Reid said he was prepared to negate that advantage by going for 2 if KC scored a TD

the 49ers should have thought about kicking off / choosing defense...like the college game
BMX Bandit
How long do you want to ignore this user?
the TV did a terrible job of explaining it. I only knew because my son explained the change to everyone before OT started.
W
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
J-Licious said:



You go def first. You get a stop you win with fg. They score, you have 4th down certainty. You both score tds, you go for 2.
Bingo
MooreTrucker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
BMX Bandit said:

the TV did a terrible job of explaining it. I only knew because my son explained the change to everyone before OT started.
I tried to explain it to our group, but even the article I found didn't explain it very well. And in the end it's pretty simple, and the ref said it. It's a new game. With quarters, just with the possibility of sudden death mixed in.
Iraq2xVeteran
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
As a 49ers fan, I found his post-game explanation for receiving the ball to start overtime a bit odd, Kyle Shanahan has often talked about his strategy of deferring possession when winning the coin toss in regulation. Evidently, that logic does not extend to playoff overtime.

In regular-season overtime, this would make sense. Score a touchdown on the first possession, and the game is over. But in the Super Bowl? Score a touchdown, and the other team still gets a possession. Opting to receive the ball first certainly appears to have a bigger advantage during the regular season. Instead, Shanahan explained his logic by saying the 49ers wanted to have the ball third in overtime. If both teams matched each other touchdown for touchdown or field goal for field goal, Shanahan wanted the 49ers to have the first crack at a sudden death score.

"It's just something we talked about with, you know none of us had a ton of experience with it, but we went through all the analytics and talked to those guys and we decided it would be better we wanted the ball third," Shanahan said. "If both teams matched and scored, we wanted to be the ones to have a chance to go win. We got that field goal so we knew we had to hold them to at least a field goal and if we did then we thought it was in our hands after that."

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/kyle-shanahan-explanation-coin-flip-post-game-overtime-49ers/2bde25ca3f47d31c95b2391b
MooreTrucker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Instead, Shanahan explained his logic by saying the 49ers wanted to have the ball third in overtime. If both teams matched each other touchdown for touchdown or field goal for field goal, Shanahan wanted the 49ers to have the first crack at a sudden death score.
This makes perfect sense to me, but as someone said this morning, it requires utmost confidence that you're going to score a TD and/or be able to hold the other team to a FG or less.
Aston04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
W said:

revvie said:

From Kyle Shanahan


but Andy Reid said he was prepared to negate that advantage by going for 2 if KC scored a TD

the 49ers should have thought about kicking off / choosing defense...like the college game
Except the game could still have been tied after 1 possession each... following a punt OR missed fg by each team... or a fg by each team...

I think if you ran statistical analysis it would say to get the ball first. But I agree it's not a total no-brainer--- which actually makes it a good OT format.

Just tv needed to outline what's going on to the audience in depth--- for something that's literally never happened before in a NFL game almost happened (go from quarter 1 of OT to quarter 2 of OT)..
safety guy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MooreTrucker said:

Aston04 said:

revvie said:

After hearing what the overtime rules where each team is guaranteed a possession, SF who won the toss should have elected to kickoff since you know what your opponent does with their possession. The same strategy as NCAA OT. I guess because they were worried what would happen on subsequent possessions.


No. But the f'd up that explanation too.

It was not about "rest" for the defense. The advantage of getting the ball first with those rules is if it's still tied after each team gets the ball, then Sf can score and win. Possibility of 2 possessions over only 1 for the other team trumps advantage of knowing what you need to get going second.

But again cbs should have explained this ***** Totally unprepared for playoffs ot.
It wasn't just CBS. Maurice Jones Drew on the NFL Network postgame show made comments that showed that he didn't understand the new rules either.


Yeah the MJD comments were embarrassing. He asked Andy Reid about it and Reid kinda blew it off. Then he asked Mahomes the same question. You would think someone in the production truck would explain this to him to keep him from sounding foolish. It's one thing for fans not to understand the rules but the folks on the NFL Network set SHOULD know the rules.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.