You the Head Coach and Your Team Wins the Coin Toss...............

[JESSEFEFFER]

Take the Ball or defer? Here are the scenarios:

 

Deferring is the choice of most, I believe. Why? I suspect most coaches value their first offensive possession of the second half. After having seen the way their opponents are playing them, they believe that there can be something gained during halftime to use at the start of the second half. If your team manages to close the first half with a score, your team has the chance to put two scores on the board before your opponent's offense sees the field again.

 

Choosing the ball at the start of the game seems like a weak thing to do, especially when you're the 2009 nBuffalo Bills. What advantage did that offense ever have that could dictate play to the defense? Not so surprising that Dick Jauron usually deferred if the Bills won the toss. I think this because ...............

 

It drove my brother nuts if they did this because by deferring he would give up the ability to insure that the Bills would have the wind advantage in the 4th quarter. Face it, most home games do have abnormal wind conditions. Even when swirling, the prevailing direction is toward the tunnel end. Given that most games are close and are decided in the 4th quarter and there are usually more plays run in the 4th anyhow, doesn't it make sense to have the wind in your favor for the two minute drill? Or when trying to make that game deciding kick?

 

How many times did they give away this advantage? How many times did it bite them in the butt? I think the 2010 Bills could win some home games by just running the ball into the wind in the 3rd quarter and burning clock and playing the 4th with the prevailing wind.

 

Don't tell him, but I think I have come to my brother's way of thinking.

Edited August 23, 2010 by JESSEFEFFER

[The Dean]

Depends.

[Bob in STL]

Take the Ball or defer? Here are the scenarios:

 

Deferring is the choice of most, I believe. Why? I suspect most coaches value their first offensive possession of the second half. After having seen the way their opponents are playing them, they believe that there can be something gained during halftime to use at the start of the second half. If your team manages to close the first half with a score, your team has the chance to put two scores on the board before your opponent's offense sees the field again.

 

Choosing the ball at the start of the game seems like a weak thing to do, especially when you're the 2009 nBuffalo Bills. What advantage did that offense ever have that could dictate play to the defense? Not so surprising that Dick Jauron usually deferred if the Bills won the toss. I think this because ...............

 

It drove my brother nuts if they did this because by deferring he would give up the ability to insure that the Bills would have the wind advantage in the 4th quarter. Face it, most home games do have abnormal wind conditions. Even when swirling, the prevailing direction is toward the tunnel end. Given that most games are close and are decided in the 4th quarter and there are usually more plays run in the 4th anyhow, doesn't it make sense to have the wind in your favor for the two minute drill? Or when trying to make that game deciding kick?

 

How many times did they give away this advantage? How many times did it bite them in the butt? I think the 2010 Bills could win some home games by just running the ball into the wind in the 3rd quarter and burning clock and playing the 4th with the prevailing wind.

 

Don't tell him, but I think I have come to my brother's way of thinking.

 

 

Jauron definitely had games when he deferred when he should have taken the wind in the 4th Q. He never learned how to play a home game.

 

I would be surprised if it is true that most teams defer. Very interesting to know.

[Phil Hansen Forever]

I agree with the Dean, it would depend on several things...wind direction, whether they were underdogs...etc

[Glass To The Arson]

I chose to take the ball but after reading your info... I think I actually would defer

[Bills fan in TX]

I think you have to take the wind into account. I could remember when I had season tickets in the end zone and all of the scoring was at the one end of the field. Jauron couldn't think outside the box. Also, they Bills should always call tails. Why? because tails never fails!

[Meathead]

when it comes to this issue i always remember this old saying i just made up:

 

take the wind or break the wind

 

no really your brother is right. as older brothers always are. take the wind when you can

[Aplusfool]

I would defer as well. There is a possibility of getting an extra offensive series this way. You could end the 1st half and begin the 2nd half with the ball.

I know sometimes the wind may be to your advantage, but outdoors both teams will get an equal share and even that is nullified when playing indoors.

[Homer]

Depends on if the strongest component is O or D or if you have a strong return game.

[iinii]

Jauron definitely had games when he deferred when he should have taken the wind in the 4th Q. He never learned how to play a home game.

 

I would be surprised if it is true that most teams defer. Very interesting to know.

The prevailing wisdom these days is defer. Opportunity to adjust after half is a factor but the stadium is usually more quiet than at any other time in the game. So your offense has its greatest ability to run their offense. Similarly at the start of the game the stadium is rocking and defenses have an easier time.

[PromoTheRobot]

Usually I want the ball to start the 2nd half. But if wind is a factor then you decide accordingly. I know this flies against the wisdom of one of the great football minds of our time, one Mr. Jerry Sullivan, but my thinking is possession is more important in the 2nd half.

 

PTR

[sharper802]

The question for me is what is difference between the college and Pro game. It is heresy not to defer in college. Therefore why not defer in the NFL. I guess turnovers and wind are a bigger part of the game. To me I would always defer unless there is a gale force wind. The next logical question is do you want the wind in the first quarter like Parcells did in the playoff runs with the Giants or do u want it in the 4th quarter to set up the game winning FG. Again I say defer and give me the ball right after the half and spring a new gadget play on the opponents defense they haven't seen before.

[DC Tom]

It depends. If you're a good team that can metaphorically kick the opponent in the face, always take the ball. Always. Don't overthink it, it's not rocket surgery, just take possession and kick 'em in the face.

 

If you suck, however...well, then, it doesn't really matter.

[Matt in KC]

I would defer as well. There is a possibility of getting an extra offensive series this way. You could end the 1st half and begin the 2nd half with the ball.

I know sometimes the wind may be to your advantage, but outdoors both teams will get an equal share and even that is nullified when playing indoors.

You're the second person to bring this up, and I don't think you're thinking it through well. Each team who starts a half with the ball will either have the same number of offensive series as their opponent (if the opponent ends the half with the ball) or one more offensive series (if the team ends the half with the ball).

 

There's nothing particularly helpful I can see about having this chance at an advantage for the second half instead of the first. Actually, I think it's better to score early as it shifts the crowd in your favor and puts the pressure on your opponent. Let them play catch up!

 

Similarly, I don't think wind makes that much difference if it's constant. Would you rather the other team needs to catch up to you at the end or it's easier for you to catch up (and more likely you need to)? Now if the weather, including sunshine, is shifting and there's a period where it likely will be easier to advance, that's where it makes sense to take that advantage (kick away) rather than receive the ball and a chance at an extra possession in that half.

 

Anyway, typing this out, I don't know if some people may be confusing deferring (postponing the right to choose possession/direction to the second half) with choosing direction initially instead of receiving the ball.

[Bart]

Take the Ball or defer? Here are the scenarios:

 

Deferring is the choice of most, I believe. Why? I suspect most coaches value their first offensive possession of the second half. After having seen the way their opponents are playing them, they believe that there can be something gained during halftime to use at the start of the second half. If your team manages to close the first half with a score, your team has the chance to put two scores on the board before your opponent's offense sees the field again.

 

Choosing the ball at the start of the game seems like a weak thing to do, especially when you're the 2009 nBuffalo Bills. What advantage did that offense ever have that could dictate play to the defense? Not so surprising that Dick Jauron usually deferred if the Bills won the toss. I think this because ...............

 

It drove my brother nuts if they did this because by deferring he would give up the ability to insure that the Bills would have the wind advantage in the 4th quarter. Face it, most home games do have abnormal wind conditions. Even when swirling, the prevailing direction is toward the tunnel end. Given that most games are close and are decided in the 4th quarter and there are usually more plays run in the 4th anyhow, doesn't it make sense to have the wind in your favor for the two minute drill? Or when trying to make that game deciding kick?

 

How many times did they give away this advantage? How many times did it bite them in the butt? I think the 2010 Bills could win some home games by just running the ball into the wind in the 3rd quarter and burning clock and playing the 4th with the prevailing wind.

 

Don't tell him, but I think I have come to my brother's way of thinking.

 

 

Take the ball every time. You need to score to win games and if your offense is worth anything you have score points.

[justnzane]

If you have a team that relies on passing heavily, deferring is the right option. But with Buffalo's variabilty in weather, I'd be inclined to take the ball just on the high probability that the weather will have changed considerably by the end of the 3rd quarter.

[Jim in Anchorage]

Take it. It's hard to win a coin toss in this league.

[keepthefaith]

Take the ball every time. You need to score to win games and if your offense is worth anything you have score points.

 

Bravo. I'd take the ball with rare exception.

[reddogblitz]

I'm old school. I take the Matt Hasselback approach: "We want the ball and we're gonna score."

 

Take the ball and ram it down their throat. Deferring only says one thing "we really don't think our offense is very good so we're going to need to try to catch up in the second half." Be a man and take the ball. For the most part you gotta have the ball to score. If you take it first and put in a 7 or 8 minute drive, the other team gets the ball behind with only 53 minutes to catch up. If you do like the bills did so often last year, kick off and give up and 7 or 8 minute drive, you've dug your self into a hole.

 

Take the ball.

[eball]

This is a good topic for discussion, but not for a poll, really. Clearly, there is no "correct" answer and many factors play into making the decision -- strength of your/your opponent's offense/defense, home vs. road, weather conditions, etc.

 

I think if your team is very strong offensively (i.e., Indy, New Orleans, NE*), there's a persuasive argument to take the ball, regardless. The only other "easy" call is during horrible weather conditions, when I think you play for the advantage in the 4th quarter.

Edited August 23, 2010 by eball