For the first time since the NFL opened the door to a second overtime possession even if the team that gets the ball first scores a touchdown, a team that got the ball second scored a touchdown, went for two, and converted.
Given that regular-season overtime lasts only 10 minutes, Seattle’s decision to go for two was a near no-brainer.
The decision to take the ball second includes both a desire to know what is needed when the possession begins and an interest in avoiding true sudden-death overtime, which is what happens if both teams score the same number of points on their first drives. It also minimizes the possibility of a tie, since two scoring possessions typically will leave far less time for another score by either team.
On Thursday night, a Seattle kickoff would have happened with 3:13 to play. Although the Rams had gone into an offensive funk for much of the fourth quarter, they’d snapped out of it in a big way on the opening drive of overtime. (And they had gained 581 yards against the Seattle defense.) They still had plenty of time to drive into field-goal range, especially if they had ended up with good field position after the ensuing kickoff.
And so, if the Seahawks had kicked the extra point after making the game 37-36 in overtime, they likely were looking at a loss or a tie. (It still would have been possible to force a punt and have a shot at engineering a game-winning field goal.)
A tie would have clinched a playoff berth for Seattle. But it would have given the Rams the head-to-head tiebreaker, since they’d beaten the Seahawks earlier in the season. The Rams would have been wins against the Falcons and Cardinals away from the NFC West title and the No. 1 seed.
So Seattle’s choices were to play for a tie, risk a loss via sudden death, or take advantage of the best chance to walk off with a win.
“Well, yeah, that’s part of the whole thing, you’re trying to get into the playoffs,” Seahawks coach Mike Macdonald told reporters on Friday. “Then do you secure your spot in the playoffs, or do you risk not getting in the playoffs, but the upside is pretty dang high. We chose to go for it.”
The tentative choice to go for two likely was made as part of the decision to kick to start overtime. The goal was both to know what is needed (if the Rams score) and to avoid sudden death against a team with a dangerous offense. Sudden death is sidestepped, obviously, only if the Seahawks score more on the second drive than the Rams did on the first drive.
So it wasn’t a surprise that the Seahawks went for two. Now that, after 13 games under the new regular-season overtime approach, an overtime scenario has played out that way, it introduces another wrinkle into the overtime chess match.
Under what circumstances should the team that scores a touchdown on the opening drive go for two?
A former NFL head coach, reacting to the discussion of the subject on Friday’s PFT Live, suggested that it would be very rare for the team that gets the ball first to go for two. But with a tie giving the Rams the inside track to the No. 1 seed, last night woud have been a time to consider it, since scoring eight points would have guaranteed a tie at worst.
Also, for the same reason a team takes the ball second in order to know what it needs to do offensively, the Rams would have known what they needed to do defensively — prevent a touchdown and a game-winning PAT.
It’s not known whether Rams coach Sean McVay, who has become very aggressive when it comes to going for it on fourth down, considered trying to open an eight-point lead after the first overtime drive. Last night’s outcome naturally introduces the subject into the broader overtime discussion.
One of these days, someone is going to do it. And, if successful, it’s going to put the opposing offense in an unprecedented situation. It will need to drive the field, score a touchdown, and score on a two-point play likely merely to emerge from the game with the most unsatisfying of all outcomes, at best.
