Super Bowl 58 became just the second in NFL history to go to overtime, and it provided fans with a thrilling conclusion.
The 49ers got the ball first after winning the coin toss. They put together a 13-play drive that nearly resulted in a touchdown, but Chris Jones pressured Brock Purdy into a throwaway on third down in the red zone. As a result, the drive culminated in a chip-shot Jake Moody field goal that gave the 49ers the lead.
The Chiefs were then given a chance to respond, and they did. Kansas City mounted a 13-play drive of its own that ended with Mecole Hardman catching a 3-yard touchdown pass from quarterback Patrick Mahomes. The score gave Kansas City a 25-22 win after each team possessed the ball in overtime.
Naturally, many San Francisco fans were left to digest the painful loss. That led many to question whether Shanahan's decision to take the ball after winning the overtime coin toss was the right one.
Here's a breakdown of the 49ers' coin-toss decision and how it compares to the decision Andy Reid would have made had the Chiefs won the overtime coin-flip.
MORE: Kyle Shanahan gives odd post-game explanation for receiving the ball to start OT
49ers overtime decision
Shanahan and the 49ers decided to receive at the beginning of the overtime period in Super Bowl 58. That decision has been scrutinized after San Francisco's loss, but was it a bad one?
Here's what to know about the pros and cons of Shanahan's coin-toss decision and why it was ultimately a justifiable choice.
Pros of accepting ball on coin toss
First chance to score. While a touchdown doesn't automatically clinch a win in postseason overtime anymore, the chance to score first is still important. An offensive score puts pressure on the opposing team to make big plays as they try to matriculate the ball down the field.
Sure, they know what they need to do to earn a victory, or at least tie the game. But the opponent will also be in position such that one critical mistake — be it a sack, drop or penalty — can put them behind the 8-ball as they look to mount a comeback.
Furthermore, taking the ball first gives your defense a chance to rest, which is important in overtime games. Defenses often wear down during the fourth quarter, so getting them a quick breather to recharge before overtime can be a game-changer.
Chance to get the ball third — if tied after two possessions. Of course, the other benefit is that the team that starts overtime with the ball will be the first to possess it in any potential sudden-death scenario unless they fail to score.
Should neither team score, or each score the same amount on the first two possessions of overtime, the team that received the ball would get it back. From there, they would need only a field goal to win the contest.
That appealed to Shanahan, who believed the 49ers would either score a touchdown or get the stop necessary to set them up to get the ball third.
"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 of the 49ers' coin-toss decision. "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."
Things didn't play out that way, as the 49ers scored merely a field goal while the Chiefs drove the length of the field for a touchdown. But had San Francisco's defense held up at the end and forced Kansas City to kick a field goal, Shanahan's plan would have set up Brock Purdy for a potential game-winning drive.
It's mathematically the right choice. So, if you're looking for points, there are benefits to starting with the ball. That's reflected in the math surrounding the decision as well.
The team that receives the ball to start overtime has between 50.19% and 50.29% chance to win the game under the new rules, according to simulations run by ESPN's Brian Burke. The total value depends on whether the team getting the ball second goes for a two-point conversion after a touchdown, but it remains above a 50 percent chance of winning.
Detractors will say that advantage is minuscule and that it's little better than a coin-flip chance of winning. Still, it is a mathematical advantage, and that's part of the reason that Shanahan and his staff decided that was the right move.
MORE: 49ers players didn't know NFL playoff overtime rules before Super Bowl
Cons of not deferring ball on coin toss
Opponent knows what they need to win. The biggest argument against taking the ball to start overtime is that no matter what happens, your opponent knows exactly what they need to do to win the game. That means that if the receiving team scores, the team that kicked off knows that they are in four-down territory until they get in scoring position.
That extra down can make a big difference for teams, as we saw in Super Bowl 58 when Patrick Mahomes took a fourth-and-1 read-option run to the outside to pick up a first down.
Mahomes takes it himself with the game on the line!
— NFL (@NFL) February 12, 2024
📺: #SBLVIII on CBS
📱: Stream on #NFLPlus https://t.co/dClcEDViWl pic.twitter.com/14yPowM96W
Granted, that play was hard to stop, but it's worth wondering whether the Chiefs would have gone for it in that scenario if they didn't know that they needed to score at least a field goal.
Meanwhile, if the receiving team doesn't score, then the kicking team can settle for a game-winning field goal if they so desire on their next possession. As such, it's hard to guarantee that the receiving team will get a chance to see the ball third if they don't at least score a touchdown.
Failure to score can diminish chances of winning. As mentioned, if the team that receives the ball doesn't score, it becomes much easier for their opponent to win the game. They would enter the final drive knowing that they just needed a field goal to win, so that would allow them to call a safer game plan the closer they get to field-goal range.
That fact puts extra pressure on the receiving team to score on its first possession. If it can't, that often provides the team's opponent with a momentum boost.
BENDER: Where does Patrick Mahomes rank among greatest QBs of all time?
Chiefs overtime strategy
OK, so Reid didn't technically make any coin toss decision, but Chris Jones revealed that the Chiefs would have taken the ball second if they won. So, either way, the 49ers were going to start the overtime period with the ball.
The Chiefs won Super Bowl 58 in part because they got the ball second. But is it a foolproof strategy? Let's break it down.
Pros
Know what you need on offense. The biggest pro to getting the ball second is that you know what you need on offense to win the game, as Reid explained after winning Super Bowl 58.
“Mike Frazier, our analytics chief, he does all the work on it,” Reid said referencing the Chiefs' potential choice. “It can go either way, but the one thing it does, is it gives you the opportunity to see what you’ve got to do. They came down and scored three points, you’ve either got to score three or get a touchdown.”
Indeed, if the opponent gets a touchdown, you have to match them. If they get a field goal, you need a minimum of three points to stay alive. And if your opponent doesn't score? Well, then you just need to get points — be it a touchdown or field goal — to emerge with a victory.
The Chiefs took full advantage of this knowledge at the end of their win over the 49ers. San Francisco scored just a field goal on their first possession and Andy Reid dialed up a great drive that saw Kansas City go the length of the field to get a game-winning score.
And Reid pulled out all the stops in the red-zone — including the famed "Corn Dog" play — knowing that there was no reason to save them. The Chiefs just needed to score to win.
Have all four downs available. This is the other major plus about going second. If your opponent scores, you are in four-down territory the whole way down the field. There's no doubting or second-guessing decisions about whether to go for it. If you aren't in scoring range, you simply have to try to get the first down.
The Chiefs faced one fourth-down during their game-winning drive. It was a fourth-and-1, so it's possible that Kansas City would have gone for it even if they had gotten the ball first.
Knowing that fourth down was available also allowed the Chiefs to take some checkdowns on second- and third-down that they wouldn't normally have taken. So, getting the ball second fundamentally changed the Kansas City offense and took pressure off Mahomes in early-down scenarios, especially when there were mistakes like Marquez Valdes-Scantling's backtracking reception.
Can go for two to try to win. Effectively, the team that gets the ball second is in control of its own destiny. And unless the team that scores first in overtime attempts and converts a two-point conversion, then the second team will get a chance to end the game on their terms.
The Chiefs planned on doing that in Super Bowl 58, as Chris Jones explained after Kansas City's win.
"We talked through this for two weeks," Jones told The Ringer of the Chiefs' overtime strategy. "How we was going to give the ball to the opponent; if they scored, we was going for two at the end of the game. We rehearsed it."
Would going for two over a potential game-tying point after be a risk? Surely. But as we've seen often in recent seasons, teams are more willing to do that, especially if they aren't guaranteed to get the ball again on offense after tying the game.
Again, the team that gets the ball first can go for two if they get a touchdown to prevent this possibility. Still, the advantage lies with the second team, as they would, once again, know exactly what they need to do to win.
DeCOURCY: Patrick Mahomes proves again a Purdy good quarterback isn't enough to win Super Bowl
Cons
Little room for error on offense. If the team that has the ball first scores, then the team that gets it second has little room for error. Sacks and penalties will make it that much harder for the team to stage the comeback while a turnover would end the game.
So, in that manner, the team getting the ball second faces more of a do-or-die scenario than the team with the ball first. In other words, the kicking team isn't guaranteed an opportunity to recover from any potential mistake.
Even so, that looks like the only major con of getting the ball second. Sure, there will be a lot of pressure if a comeback is needed, but getting the ball second puts the team in control of its own destiny.
And as long as NFL teams can be guaranteed a chance to win, that's a risk that they'll be willing to accept.
