"When to Defer"

[jpp7558]

I'm not sure if this had been posted or not, but from today's NY Times NFL column 'N.F.L Fast Forward':

 

When to Defer?

 

The latest strategy wrinkle for coaches to obsess over is whether to defer when they win the coin toss. College coaches have long had the choice — and they defer the decision whether to kick off or receive until the second half 90 percent of the time, by some estimates — but the rule came to the N.F.L. this spring and has sent coaches scurrying for research to inform their decisions. Before the rule change, N.F.L. coaches almost always elected to receive the ball if they won the toss. Buffalo Bills Coach Dick Jauron won the toss three of the first four weeks, and has deferred twice, electing to receive the kickoff only in the season opener at home. Jauron’s rationale made sense: he wasn’t sure if fans were up to speed on deferring and he wanted to whip up the crowd early.

 

The reasons for deferring are myriad. If the weather is bad early in a game, but is expected to clear later, a team might defer to get the ball when conditions are better. Or if a team wants to set a tone early with a stellar defense, they could defer. But coaches mostly defer because they have a better lay of the land by the second half.

 

“Generally, I think that deferring is probably the thing to do because you’ll have a better idea of what’s going on as you start the second half,” Jauron said last week in Buffalo.

 

The Bills gave the rest of the league a clinic Sunday in why more coaches should consider it.

 

The Bills deferred, allowing their stellar defense to stop the woeful Rams on their first possession. The Bills were trailing when they received the kickoff to open the second half. The Bills drove for a touchdown on that opening drive of the second half, closing the Rams’ lead to one point. It also worked for the Bears, who deferred to put their powerful defense on the field first against the Eagles on Sunday night. They stopped the Eagles on three downs on the opening drive.

 

N.F.L. coaches might need more convincing. In the 12 games played Sunday, just four teams that won the opening kickoff opted to defer.

[Fan in San Diego]

I'm not sure if this had been posted or not, but from today's NY Times NFL column 'N.F.L Fast Forward':

 

When to Defer?

 

The latest strategy wrinkle for coaches to obsess over is whether to defer when they win the coin toss. College coaches have long had the choice — and they defer the decision whether to kick off or receive until the second half 90 percent of the time, by some estimates — but the rule came to the N.F.L. this spring and has sent coaches scurrying for research to inform their decisions. Before the rule change, N.F.L. coaches almost always elected to receive the ball if they won the toss. Buffalo Bills Coach Dick Jauron won the toss three of the first four weeks, and has deferred twice, electing to receive the kickoff only in the season opener at home. Jauron’s rationale made sense: he wasn’t sure if fans were up to speed on deferring and he wanted to whip up the crowd early.

 

The reasons for deferring are myriad. If the weather is bad early in a game, but is expected to clear later, a team might defer to get the ball when conditions are better. Or if a team wants to set a tone early with a stellar defense, they could defer. But coaches mostly defer because they have a better lay of the land by the second half.

 

“Generally, I think that deferring is probably the thing to do because you’ll have a better idea of what’s going on as you start the second half,” Jauron said last week in Buffalo.

 

The Bills gave the rest of the league a clinic Sunday in why more coaches should consider it.

 

The Bills deferred, allowing their stellar defense to stop the woeful Rams on their first possession. The Bills were trailing when they received the kickoff to open the second half. The Bills drove for a touchdown on that opening drive of the second half, closing the Rams’ lead to one point. It also worked for the Bears, who deferred to put their powerful defense on the field first against the Eagles on Sunday night. They stopped the Eagles on three downs on the opening drive.

 

N.F.L. coaches might need more convincing. In the 12 games played Sunday, just four teams that won the opening kickoff opted to defer.

 

Thanks for the info. I was wondering what the logic behind defering was.

[Zona]

I personally think it is a great idea to defer to look at the weather as well. How many Nov. and Dec. games at the Ralph has the wind been a factor? LOTS! if we defer, we can make sure we have the wind in the fourth quarter for the crucial kick, or to make them have to try and throw into the wind, etc....

 

Our defense is good enough that picking a side may be the best choice in bad weather games....

[IDBillzFan]

Thanks for the info. I was wondering what the logic behind defering was.

This is strictly an opinion, but it has always seemed to me that as a game is about to start, the defensive players always seem out-of-their-skull batshiiit looney to hit someone, so if you get the chance, get them on the field first and let the adrenaline run wild. Also, I think Jauron is right on; get a feel for the game so you can apply your second half adjustments right out of the gate. In many respects, scoring a TD on the opening drive of the second half can turn a game.

[nucci]

I personally think it is a great idea to defer to look at the weather as well. How many Nov. and Dec. games at the Ralph has the wind been a factor? LOTS! if we defer, we can make sure we have the wind in the fourth quarter for the crucial kick, or to make them have to try and throw into the wind, etc....

 

Our defense is good enough that picking a side may be the best choice in bad weather games....

I think you are incorrect. If you defer you have the choice to kick or receive in the 2nd half. If you choose to receive, the other team gets to choose which end to defend so they would get the wind advantage.

[Zona]

I think you are incorrect. If you defer you have the choice to kick or receive in the 2nd half. If you choose to receive, the other team gets to choose which end to defend so they would get the wind advantage.

 

i may be incorrect. But I think you may also chose to defend a side....

[nucci]

i may be incorrect. But I think you may also chose to defend a side....

Yes, you can choose to defend one end but you have to kick.

[Captain Caveman]

Yes, you can choose to defend one end but you have to kick.

 

Yeah, you can choose one or the other, but not both.

[Sen. John Blutarsky]

Yeah, you can choose one or the other, but not both.

Correct, you could theoretically receive the first AND second half kickoffs if, when the other team chooses, they take the wind rather than the ball you could have both. At RWS it's not inconceivable to have wind that bad. IMO you;d want the wind in the 1st and 4th Q.

[Steely Dan]

If the coach defers to the second half how is possession in the first half figured?

[Sen. John Blutarsky]

If the coach defers to the second half how is possession in the first half figured?

You are deferring the choice. Once you defer the choice the other team then gets to choose whether they want the ball or the wind in the 1st half. You get the choice in the 2nd half. It used to be that if you won the toss you had to choose int he first half and the other team automatically got the second half choice.

[PromoTheRobot]

I ALWAYS prefer getting the ball in the 2nd half. How many times would we be behind, or the other team scores at the end of the 1st half, only to get the ball back to start the second? F*** that! Let our D start the game. Let our O start the second half. That's when you want the ball more anyway, IMO.

 

PTR

[eball]

Correct, you could theoretically receive the first AND second half kickoffs if, when the other team chooses, they take the wind rather than the ball you could have both. At RWS it's not inconceivable to have wind that bad. IMO you;d want the wind in the 1st and 4th Q.

I respectfully submit that any coach who chooses the wind rather than the ball in the first half -- after the opposing coach defers -- is a buffoon.

 

You simply don't give the other team one or two extra possessions in a game, and I don't care if you're playing in a hurricane.

 

The bigger point, however, is that we see an example of Jauron receiving props for a specific in-game strategy that seems to be ahead of the rest of the coaches in the league -- despite it being rather simplistic, IMO.

[nucci]

I ALWAYS prefer getting the ball in the 2nd half. How many times would we be behind, or the other team scores at the end of the 1st half, only to get the ball back to start the second? F*** that! Let our D start the game. Let our O start the second half. That's when you want the ball more anyway, IMO.

 

PTR

I think most teams feel this way. Before you would want to lose the toss but now it's more important to win.

[Chandler#81]

Correct, you could theoretically receive the first AND second half kickoffs if, when the other team chooses, they take the wind rather than the ball you could have both. At RWS it's not inconceivable to have wind that bad. IMO you;d want the wind in the 1st and 4th Q.

 

Gotta agree. IIRC, -and it's been a long time- when we were great in the late '80-90's, facing the wind in the late Autumn was always a predicament.

 

2 questions: If the opposition wins the toss and defers, do you have a choice of which end you want to defend first, or just choose kick or receive?

 

If you win the toss and defer, can you choose which end you defend in the third quarter or just choose to kick or receive?

 

<edit> Not sure if I asked these right, but I mean how can you assure yourself of having the wind at your back in the fourth?

[Haven Moses]

Deferring didn't work out so well in the Oakland game.

 

Personally, I want the ball. I would only defer if there is a 30 mph wind that I would want in the 4th quarter.

[SamsBuffetTable]

deferring has the potential to give you and extra possession making it a much better option.

[The Avenger]

Not sure what deferring really does for you other than let you evalute weather conditions and possibly choose to defend a goal rather than receive in the second half.

 

In my mind, weather would have to be a HUGE factor to make a team choose what goal to defend in the second half because by doing so your opponent would receive the kickoffs to start the game as well as the start of the second half. I'm not saying there may not be a reaon to do that, but it seems like that would be rare. That said, I do agree with deferring if it gives even the slightest flexibility in allowing you to make the best decision to start the second half.

[Steely Dan]

I respectfully submit that any coach who chooses the wind rather than the ball in the first half -- after the opposing coach defers -- is a buffoon.

 

You simply don't give the other team one or two extra possessions in a game, and I don't care if you're playing in a hurricane.

 

The bigger point, however, is that we see an example of Jauron receiving props for a specific in-game strategy that seems to be ahead of the rest of the coaches in the league -- despite it being rather simplistic, IMO.

 

If that had been posted in the first week before the game how many idiots here would be all over him for being stupid and that he didn't know what he was doing?

 

 

deferring has the potential to give you and extra possession making it a much better option.

 

That's not accurate. It's the back and forth of the defenses and offenses that decide possessions.

[eball]

That's not accurate. It's the back and forth of the defenses and offenses that decide possessions.

While technically you're correct, I think what folks are referring to when they mention an "extra" possession is a situation in which the team that defers also has the last possession of the first half. By beginning the 2nd half with the ball that team has, in effect, two consecutive possessions (or an "extra" one). The team that receives to start the game doesn't have the same opportunity.