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

[nick in* england]

Where are your strengths vs theirs? What tone do you want to set for the game? Where do you think you will be at halftime?

 

It's not a blanket decision a coach can make...

[BuffaloWings]

Dick Jauron ALWAYS deferred, but don't let that influence your vote.

 

It depends on a ton of things...weather, opponent, etc.

 

Jauron made a huge mistake against the Saints last year (not that it would have affected the outcome of the game) by deferring. He basically gave the ball to the most proficient offense in the league for the first possession, thinking his staunch defense could stop them...yet the Saints rolled into the end zone for a quick 7-0 lead. It's that type of situation where I'd take the ball.

 

I like wanting the ball at the start of the 2nd half and choosing what end zone to defend, but there are times when you can't do that.

[Buffalonian-at-Heart]

Seems to me that Trent seems to look better on opening drives of games and progressively gets worse throughout the game. It feels like the defenses settle in and take control of Trent's tendencies. I'd take the ball more times than not.

[Wilson from Gamehendge]

I never want to be trailing in a game, by any margin of points. So, I want the ball first, because my team is going to score first...and I am confident enough in my team that we will score, get the lead and not look back.

 

Rex Ryan style B word!

[Beerball]

Too many variables, but...I wanted to kick the TV several times during the Jauron years when we had outstanding return teams & deferred all the time.

[Orton's Arm]

I think you defer, and here's why. Your opponent is going to have a certain number of possessions over the course of the game. (On average, that number shouldn't be affected by whether you defer or take the ball.) By deferring, you get an early start on getting those possessions out of the way. Taking the ball means your defense gets to rest at the beginning of the game, at a time when it isn't tired and hasn't done anything yet. Deferring means that instead, your defense gets to rest just after halftime. By then your defense is probably tired, and could use the extra rest.

 

As far as morale goes--you don't want your team becoming mentally dependent on the idea of scoring first. Yours should be the kind of team that doesn't mind battling back from moderate point deficits. It's a 60 minute game, and your players should be coached to display relentlessness over the course of the full 60 minutes. This kind of mental approach requires patience, confidence, and the desire to inflict punishment on the other team at every opportunity. It's the mental approach the Titans had, back when the Titans were good.

Edited August 24, 2010 by Edwards' Arm

[Acantha]

There's always a lot of people saying "you have have the ball to score...you should always want the ball," etc, etc...

 

Doesn't that count for the second half too? If you absolutely want to have the ball so that you can score, doesn't that same theory apply throughout the game?

 

I say unless there's some extraordinary circumstances, defer. It's not like your offense isn't going to get the ball in the first half, and it gives you options later in the game. Are you down big and NEED the ball? Did a storm come in and it makes way more sense to dictate direction? Did their kicker get injured in the second quarter and now OchoCinco is kicking off?

 

I just think having that decision later in the game when there are more variables you can account for makes more sense. And as far as the psychological aspect...I think saying, "Here, take the ball. You aren't going anywhere anyway!" is just as effective, if not more so, than, "We're taking the ball and we're going to score."

 

EDIT: Reading the thread mabye I'm misunderstanding the rule. Doesn't defer mean that you get to choose whatever you want in the second half? You can choose to either get the ball or direction?

Edited August 24, 2010 by Faustus

[Matt in KC]

There's always a lot of people saying "you have have the ball to score...you should always want the ball," etc, etc...

 

Doesn't that count for the second half too? If you absolutely want to have the ball so that you can score, doesn't that same theory apply throughout the game?

 

I say unless there's some extraordinary circumstances, defer. It's not like your offense isn't going to get the ball in the first half, and it gives you options later in the game. Are you down big and NEED the ball? Did a storm come in and it makes way more sense to dictate direction? Did their kicker get injured in the second quarter and now OchoCinco is kicking off?

 

I just think having that decision later in the game when there are more variables you can account for makes more sense. And as far as the psychological aspect...I think saying, "Here, take the ball. You aren't going anywhere anyway!" is just as effective, if not more so, than, "We're taking the ball and we're going to score."

 

EDIT: Reading the thread mabye I'm misunderstanding the rule. Doesn't defer mean that you get to choose whatever you want in the second half? You can choose to either get the ball or direction?

Yes, two different things are being discussed, with some posters not making the distinction.

• Do you defer (choose to make your choice in the second half if you win the coin toss)?
  
• Do you take possession or the direction you want when it's your half to choose?
  

For the second one, I'd say take possession unless there's a moment-in-time influence on the game like the wind picking up. I'd say deferring is fine, but I'd usually choose possession immediately unless there's a reason not to.

[K-9]

Like others have said, it depends on some factors like weather, etc.

 

In the absence of any mitigating factors, my preference is to take the ball at home and defer on the road.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[vincec]

In general, I say put your most experienced unit on the field first, especially in big games. They can best handle the situation and avoid making mistakes due to all the adrenaline flowing at the start of the game. If it's the Bills... I guess that's the defense.

[K Gun Special]

Do some of you actually watch this game called football?????

 

If you win the toss you can elect to recieve or you can defer.

 

If you defer, you kick AND pick the goal to defend----ie you get the wind.

 

Hence, most coaches elect to defer, bc you get the wind AND the ball after the half, when you have the advantage of adjustments.

[vincec]

Do some of you actually watch this game called football?????

 

If you win the toss you can elect to recieve or you can defer.

 

If you defer, you kick AND pick the goal to defend----ie you get the wind.

 

Hence, most coaches elect to defer, bc you get the wind AND the ball after the half, when you have the advantage of adjustments.

I don't think this is true. Your choice is to either a) kick or receive or b) chose which goal your team will defend. If you defer your choice until the second half then you can chose one of these two options for the second half, but NOT both. Your opponent had the choice in the first half, and almost certainly chose to receive because if he chose to take the wind, you would choose to receive and then will choose to receive in the second half and they would have to kick at the start of BOTH halves. At the start of the second half, you will almost certainly chose to receive for the same reason. As a result, your opponent will get to chose the side of the field to defend. Here is the rule: http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/cointoss

Edited August 24, 2010 by vincec

[Haven Moses]

I take the ball every damn time.

[Red]

This poll is way to general to mean anything. There are so many variables here, that it is just too basic. Weather, location, team status, etc all come into play. Making a ton of assumptions, I chose to take the ball in the 1st half.

 

Clearly, as an overall philosophy we know what Jauron liked to do. It was a defensive mind-set of a defensive coordinator-type of guy. And I think that it was so predictable as to create a pattern in the Bills minds of what the game would be like.

 

There were games where they needed to come out of the gate and attack. That, IMO, is what football is really about. Sure, there are defenders, etc, but football is about explosion, power, and speed. Aggressiveness.

 

So, to answer this poll in the situation of it being the Bills 1st home game of the season, CJ in the backfield, Lee on the outside, and Parrish ready to go, I take the ball and A-T-T-A-C-K the field. Get confidence going offensively, set the pace of the scoring, so that the defense can then pin their ears back and go after the other teams offense- the way it was in the Super Bowl years.

 

Now, if it's a terribly rainy, wet, or frozen snow kind of day in Buffalo, I may elect to defer to the second half so that I can control the ball (and the clock). But when I am the new coach of a team that has had horrible offenses the past decade, I'm attacking most of the time.

[BobbyC81]

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.

 

 

I agree with you. Take the ball. If you're playing on the road and you can go down and score on the 1st drive, you take the crowd out of it some. Conversely, if you're at home you can really have the advantage by scoring 1st as you're crowd is in to it and the opponent is down before having had the ball.

[dpberr]

Defer?

 

There's no deferring in football. You don't let the other team get a shot at punching you in the face first. Ever.

[Simon]

Defer?

 

There's no deferring in football. You don't let the other team get a shot at punching you in the face first. Ever.

 

That's why you defer 'til the second half and then open the game by putting your badass geeked-up defense on the field first so they can punch somebody in the face. And I'll take the extra offensive possession in the second half, when most games are decided.

[JESSEFEFFER]

This is the basis of the poll, if you can accept it.

 

1) Most games in the NFL are close.

 

2) Most close games are decided in the 4th quarter.

 

3) Given the clock rules, there are typically more plays run in the 4th quarter.

 

4) Wind is a factor in most Bills home games.

 

5) By deferring until the 2nd half you let your opponent choose which goal they will defend, assuming you take the ball to start the half.

 

6) Whether you are ahead or behind it is better to have the wind in your favor and against your opponent, because of the effect it has on both the kicking and passing game.

 

7) My little brother gets extremely pissed when the Bills are playing the 4th quarter against the wind because even though they won the toss, the HC gave away the option to dictate how the 4th quarter would be played by deferring.

 

8) By taking the ball at the start of the game, the only way the opponent can dictate the 4th quarter would be by kicking off at the start of both halves, effectively creating at least one, maybe two, extra possessions for the team that won the toss.

Edited August 25, 2010 by JESSEFEFFER

[vincec]

This is the basis of the poll, if you can accept it.

 

1) Most games in the NFL are close.

 

2) Most close games are decided in the 4th quarter.

 

3) Given the clock rules, there are typically more plays run in the 4th quarter.

 

4) Wind is a factor in most Bills home games.

 

5) By deferring until the 2nd half you let your opponent choose which goal they will defend, assuming you take the ball to start the half.

 

6) Whether you are ahead or behind it is better to have the wind in your favor and against your opponent, because of the effect it has on both the kicking and passing game.

 

7) My little brother gets extremely pissed when the Bills are playing the 4th quarter against the wind because even though they won the toss, the HC gave away the option to dictate how the 4th quarter would be played by deferring.

 

8) By taking the ball at the start of the game, the only way the opponent can dictate the 4th quarter would be by kicking off at the start of both halves, effectively creating at least one, maybe two, extra possessions for the team that won the toss.

This makes sense to me. Why is it that college coaches defer the toss 90% of the time then?

[MDH]

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.

 

This. Unless there is a significant wind I'd always play the odds and hope for an extra offensive possession each game by deferring. Having a 50% chance of getting back to back drives is like having a 50% chance of getting an extra turnover per game.