Game Theory Question (Illinois vs. Penn State OT)
Was watching the nine-inning affair between PSU and Illinois when a game theory question occurred to me...
I watched how with each subsequent 2-point-conversion-only "inning", the team with the choice always elected to play defense first.
On one level, I guess that makes sense; you can perhaps be a bit more open with playcalling if, having held in the "top half" of the inning, you know you won't lose by failing to convert.
But on the other hand, doesn't it make a lot of sense for the choosing team to use its choice on the end of the field? To me, the advantage of "knowing what you need" largely goes away in the third OT, and perhaps having the rowdy fans there (or not there) would be worth more?
Turned out well for Illinois in the end, obvs. But have others considered what might become best practice in these scenarios in the future?
October 25th, 2021 at 2:44 PM ^
You are definitely correct. Live this bothered me. "Knowing what you need" is pointless with 2-pt conversions because you want to convert it every single time no matter what the other team did. That benefit only exists in the first two overtimes because it informs whether to go for it on 4th downs. Illinois and PSU both definitely should have been using their selections on field side rather than going second.
October 25th, 2021 at 2:55 PM ^
There is the potential for a "pick 2" still though. If the other team has already scored, you do whatever you can to keep the play alive. If you're a QB being sacked backwards, you throw the ball blindly over your head, lateral, etc. If you're first, you probably take that sack and hope your defense holds up.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:47 PM ^
Hometown noise seems to me more significant than the possibility of a return-TD on a 2pt conversion turnover.
October 25th, 2021 at 4:35 PM ^
Does field side really matter though? No. Negligible. And by choosing to go second, they defaulted to choosing sides anyway (just in this case, the loser of the coin flip "won" the ability to pick a side).
October 25th, 2021 at 5:39 PM ^
If one side has the student section, it probably does matter, in fact.
October 25th, 2021 at 2:47 PM ^
I was more shocked when Illinois went second and just needed to get the 3 yards they didn’t pound the rock. That’s why I’d like to go second. It’s easier to call a run play in that situation. If you go first, it seems like you’d want to get a pass into the end zone IMO.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:01 PM ^
Why? You need to score either way. Why would you change your play call?
October 25th, 2021 at 2:49 PM ^
I dislike this rule because it means the outcome of the entire 100+ play game hinges on a single play, rather than on a series of plays no matter how many overtimes have been played. It certainly is dramatic and perhaps would draw more viewers but seems like an undeserved outcome could easily result.
Defense going first gives the offense more time to figure out a preferred single play; I guess that makes sense.
October 25th, 2021 at 2:51 PM ^
Agree. Hate the format.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:06 PM ^
It seems like starting with the ball farther back would be less likely to lead to interminable OTs. Too often, OTs end up tied when one team does nothing and kicks a 42 yard FG and the other is faced with 4th and goal at the 3 and, being risk averse, also kicks the FG. If you start on the 40 or 45, it eliminates the "default to FG" option for an offense that does nothing.
*That said, this solution may not apply to the teams that are the subject of this thread.
October 25th, 2021 at 9:28 PM ^
Perhaps NCAA Basketball will now see the error in its ways and instead of having those harrowing OT's in the tournament, the outcome will be decided with alternating free throws instead.
/s
October 25th, 2021 at 2:52 PM ^
Good point, actually a bit worse than even soccer shoot outs, there you get at least 5 attempts to score.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:12 PM ^
I hate the format as well. They could've met in the middle like spotting the ball at the 10 goal to go and giving them four plays to score a TD.
That game turned into a circus and my bet is we'll see more of it going forward.
October 25th, 2021 at 4:11 PM ^
It’s strictly a player safety issue. That game went 9 overtime but that only meant those players had to play 7 additional snaps. A single overtime possession could be over 7 snaps, 5 and 6 ot games, while not common is certainly starting to get dangerous.
There might be better options (including just allowing ties after 3 overtimes) but the reasons they picked this option isn’t because anyone thought it was the best way to decide a game.
October 25th, 2021 at 5:14 PM ^
My serious thought on OT is that they should keep the 1996-2020 format but make teams go for two right away, starting with the first OT. (Honestly don't know why they never did this.). That should add enough variance to prevent an A&M/LSU situation, if we indeed plan on overreacting to that one game.
My more fun proposal: keep the OT the same (both teams from the 25), but after scoring a touchdown, teams can kick an extra point for 1 point *or* try a play from the yard line of their choice. If they convert, they get the number of points equal to the yard line (e.g. 5 points from the 5, 10 points from the 10, etc.). Imagine the field day for game theory nerds.
October 25th, 2021 at 4:43 PM ^
I thought the format was silly. However, I loved it only because Penn St lost to Bert and Illinois.
October 25th, 2021 at 4:48 PM ^
Counter argument: you’ve had 100+ plays, multiple drives, and two overtimes to differentiate yourselves and you couldn’t so we are going to force the issue.
October 25th, 2021 at 5:31 PM ^
After that 9 OT affair it's obvious how silly this new format is. I say
First 2 OTs - normal
3rd OT - have to go for 2
and if you're still tied after that just call it a tie and go home. Those last 6 OTs really told us nothing about who the better team was and in fact Illinois - who had 30 yards passing in regulation - started passing every play. It was dumb
October 25th, 2021 at 6:31 PM ^
I like this rule because it acknowledges that the entire 100+ play normal game is incapable of producing a result. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
October 25th, 2021 at 2:49 PM ^
You weren't really watching superior tacticians during that game. I'm sure they chose D just out of rote habit than any deep thought.
As you mention, starting in the 3rd OT, there is no benefit to being on defense because you can't play conservative knowing you don't need a TD and I doubt you'd willingly play it safe knowing you'll always have the next OT as a fall back. They should just alternate possessions and stay on the same side of the field for two sets of OTs. Pretty stupid to run 2 plays and have to go back to the other side of the field
October 25th, 2021 at 2:58 PM ^
In a game where nobody can score, I think you still want to go 2nd. Better chance of the team going 1st not scoring, and then the defense being nervous if they mess up the game is over.
If it was a Big12 game, I'd say go 1st. More likely you score and put pressure on the other team's offense to not mess up.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:03 PM ^
The going back and forth up and down the field was idiotic.
October 25th, 2021 at 5:24 PM ^
How about one team on offense at one end of the field and the other team on offense at the other end. Normal play clock rules. Alternating plays on each end of the field until there is a winner.
Would that give Penn State an unfair advantage in that Franklin could only be involved in the decision making on one end of the field?
[not a serious proposal; just a chance to take a shot at Franklin]
October 25th, 2021 at 2:51 PM ^
I somewhat disagree with this take but it isn't a hill I would die on.
Let's say you are the first team to have the 2pt try, if your QB is under pressure, it might be smart to take a sack or throw the ball out of bounds. But if you know you need to score, you have to toss that ball up in the air, or try a riskier play.
What is of most interest to me is how would Michigan approach this situation? Would love to see a package where they get a "goal-line look" but then spread out and get mismatches for Corum for instance.
October 25th, 2021 at 2:51 PM ^
It is certainly a lot less relevant than in standard overtime periods, where you actually change your down-and-distance calculus depending upon what the team in the first period does. I suspect there is something to the pressure issue, though. And, theoretically, there is a bit of a risk difference. You want to avoid a pick-six type throw (pick-two, really, but you understand what I mean) if you go first or if you know the other team didn't score, but your QB will know they need to make a play no matter the risk* if you're two points down. So there's a slight advantage in game situation. Still, it's a lot less significant. Good question.
*Unless that QB is Joe Milton
October 25th, 2021 at 4:45 PM ^
Cold-blooded!
*But true
October 25th, 2021 at 2:57 PM ^
I think you're right that playing D first doesn't matter, and also that makes this OT format a good thing. I think playing to home field advantage maybe helps a bit but is probably moot so it's not a terrible decision to pick something else.
There's been some hate for the new OT but I think it's more fair than the first two OTs, since there isn't the variability of FGs/XPs. In those first two OTs, playing defense first is a huge advantage in just getting information for offensive decision making on say, 4th down. The first two OTs may be more fun, but if you're still knotted up after 2 OTs (or even after 60 mins) then you truly have two evenly matched teams. 2P attempts is a fair way to break the tie.
FWIW, I am not a huge soccer fan but ties are so much more frequent at the end of regulation in that game that PKs do seem very fluky. OT games in football are rare enough that I think this format is fine, and 2P conversions still are a real football play with both teams evenly matched to determine the outcome.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:28 PM ^
Field goals and extra points are a normal part of football. I would say that taking them out of the game is more unfair.
October 26th, 2021 at 1:13 AM ^
PKs dont happen in regular season games or in group play of tournaments.
October 25th, 2021 at 2:59 PM ^
Sometimes we ponder things that don't really move any needle. I find such musings to be a complete and utter waste of time. Like posting on sports blog boards.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:02 PM ^
I don't think it matters all that much so avoiding crowd noise could be a factor. You are always calling your best play in every situation.
I picture us throwing corner fades to 5'8" receivers over and over...
October 25th, 2021 at 4:11 PM ^
...and the fans loving it because they believe their coaches are being imaginative and employing the element of surprise.
I like the basics of the NFL OT. It pretty much keeps all the elements of the game in play.
October 25th, 2021 at 5:13 PM ^
Your picture is a moment of clarity...that would be the exact play call. I can't recall hitting any of these all year, yet its sadly a still a go-to.
October 25th, 2021 at 6:00 PM ^
I like to torture myself with the 2016 OSU game in OT when we scored the TD. Speight wanted to go for two. What would we run?
I'm pretty we come out of the TO in pepcat formation. Unfortunately.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:05 PM ^
Yeah going first once you reach 3OT is irrelevant. If you go first on defense, your offense knows what is needed. If you go first on offense, your defense knows what is needed. There is no advantage to either.
The only advantage I can think of is that if you go defense first you have more time to draw up some new play on the sideline.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:10 PM ^
I don't know why they would eliminate the special teams portion of the game. Seems like much of the game strategy is lost.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:14 PM ^
Nine-innings. Thus we could say that Illinois won on a walk-off in the bottom of the 9th. :)
October 25th, 2021 at 3:17 PM ^
Was wondering if you also saw the very poor football execution?
October 25th, 2021 at 3:22 PM ^
I agree and thought the same thing. Especially when it was Illinois' choice and they clearly had a preference for an end of the stadium.
I'm guessing the analytics guys haven't thought about this yet, so neither did the coaches.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:22 PM ^
I thought you were going to ask if the game now makes PSU the primary rival to Illinois.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:44 PM ^
Speaking about the OT system in general, I like it.
At SOME point, you have to get the game over with- there are two major changes I'd make to it:
First- Don't make the teams switch ends. Whichever end you get, that's where you will be the rest of the game. They spent way too long walking back and forth.
Second- Do the conversion thing after three overtimes, not two.
October 25th, 2021 at 3:56 PM ^
I wasn't a fan of it as it seemed gimmicky. If you're going to keep the rule in place then I'd like to see a coin toss to begin the 3rd OT. The choices would be the usual (offense/defense/end of field). However, I'd make it so that whatever the end of field was chosen was the way it would stay for the remainder of the game. I think we can agree that there isn't a huge difference of offense vs. defense in this scenario as chronicled in many of your answers but if I was the visiting team who won the coin toss I'd seriously consider what end of the field I'd want to play in for the entirety OT period
October 25th, 2021 at 4:17 PM ^
Best practice for Illinois...
If you run for 300+ yard during the game, run it up the gut in at least 5 of those OT's. Probably a 50% chance you get it each time.
Terrible coaching by Bert. Thankfully, Frames is even worse.
October 25th, 2021 at 4:30 PM ^
Has anyone seen W-L stats on teams who get the ball first in OT vs going second?
October 25th, 2021 at 4:34 PM ^
Also seems like getting the ball first, your offense would play more relaxed and confident, whereas going last might tend to make offenses play with more pressure on them and prone to make mistakes.
October 25th, 2021 at 5:27 PM ^
It would be cool if you could choose to kick the PAT.
October 25th, 2021 at 5:29 PM ^
Anyone on the board know if a team can drop kick for 2 during a 2-point conversion?
October 25th, 2021 at 7:51 PM ^
A drop kick is either a field goal or extra point.
October 25th, 2021 at 6:32 PM ^
After 2 OTs have a kicker shoot out. It is called FOOTball. Set the ball at the 45 yard line (55 yard FG) on a tee. Flip a coin to determine who goes first. It ends when one makes it and the other misses.