I know most teams defer if they win the coin toss. I’m guessing there are analytics to support this. But what would you do if you were the coach and won the coin toss? And why?
Last edited by a moderator:
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Deferring and the coin toss (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
barackdhouse
Footballguy
I haven't dove into the analytics at all on this, though it is my understanding that deferring is considered the preferred method.
I certainly prefer to defer in all cases other than some kind of freak weather scenario*. It just seems like the intuitively smarter thing to do. While there is certainly something to be said for the notion of taking the opening kickoff and marching down the field for a score to start a game, the double whammy opportunity of ending the first half with a scoring drive and then beginning the 3rd quarter with another, is simply too great an opportunity to pass up. Obviously it may not play out that way, but you are giving yourself a chance to really hammer lock your opponent and stomp them down.
Think about a 4 minute drive to end the first half with a TD, and then something like a 7 minute drive for another TD to start the 3rd. Other team's offense doesn't touch the ball for something like over an hour of real actual time and the score goes from say 10-7 to 24-7 and your defense is rested and ready to fly.
That is the upside but the downside is the other team comes out and scores to start the game. So what. I like the extra equity of giving yourself that chance to hold two possessions in a row.
It also gives that extra chance and momentum in case you get down early. I realize in most cases the results are probably just going to be in the middle of the bell curve and you'll find the best teams typically win and none of this means much. But if I'm choosing I'm choosing to defer.
I certainly prefer to defer in all cases other than some kind of freak weather scenario*. It just seems like the intuitively smarter thing to do. While there is certainly something to be said for the notion of taking the opening kickoff and marching down the field for a score to start a game, the double whammy opportunity of ending the first half with a scoring drive and then beginning the 3rd quarter with another, is simply too great an opportunity to pass up. Obviously it may not play out that way, but you are giving yourself a chance to really hammer lock your opponent and stomp them down.
Think about a 4 minute drive to end the first half with a TD, and then something like a 7 minute drive for another TD to start the 3rd. Other team's offense doesn't touch the ball for something like over an hour of real actual time and the score goes from say 10-7 to 24-7 and your defense is rested and ready to fly.
That is the upside but the downside is the other team comes out and scores to start the game. So what. I like the extra equity of giving yourself that chance to hold two possessions in a row.
It also gives that extra chance and momentum in case you get down early. I realize in most cases the results are probably just going to be in the middle of the bell curve and you'll find the best teams typically win and none of this means much. But if I'm choosing I'm choosing to defer.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
The * above is that I think I would defer in a freak weather scenario as well, because then I get to choose which side to defend. Or am I wrong? If you win the toss and defer, does the other side get to pick which side? Guess I've never worked that out before.
Last edited by a moderator:
I have done ZERO deep thinking on this. But I think I want the ball first.
And I know I’m in the minority.
And I know I’m in the minority.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Defer. I’m going to hope my defense can make a stop. That’s a huge swing in a given game. If I can score first, then get the ball first in the 2nd half, I feel like I have a much better chance to win.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
I agree - if it’s clear but expected to get windy/rainy as the game goes on, I could see wanting the ball in offense with better weather conditions. In that sort of scenario I’d want the ball.
styleride85
Footballguy
Defer. Your odds of a TD on your opening drive is low, and that's obviously the only reason to take the ball.
I think the crowd plays a huge factor in it. The home crowd is going to be LOUD at the start of the game, and a little less loud right after halftime (as they hustle to return to their seats). I'd rather be on defense when it's loud.
I think the crowd plays a huge factor in it. The home crowd is going to be LOUD at the start of the game, and a little less loud right after halftime (as they hustle to return to their seats). I'd rather be on defense when it's loud.
bostonfred
Footballguy
Getting the ball first gives you a chance to get out to an early lead and it may give you the chance to get one more first half possession than your opponent. But the odds of you scoring on the first drive are slightly lower than any other drive because the first drive has the worst starting field position.
Deferring gives you the ability to score on back to back possessions. I looked at a couple sites and it looks like that happens in about 10 to 15 percent of games overall, and obviously more often for good teams.
It might be situational. A home team might get some advantage from keeping the game close early or getting out to an early lead. A big play passing team probably benefits more from the threat of back to back scores when they're trailing than a ground and pound team, but the ground and pound team can absolutely demoralize you with a long drive to end the half and getting the ball back to start the third quarter.
About the only thing I'd really consider though is weather. If I get the ball first I will either get the same or more first half possessions. If it's cold and expected to get colder, or snowing and expected to accumulate, or rain and winds are expected in the second half, i want the ball more often in good conditions and you can have it more often in bad ones.
Deferring gives you the ability to score on back to back possessions. I looked at a couple sites and it looks like that happens in about 10 to 15 percent of games overall, and obviously more often for good teams.
It might be situational. A home team might get some advantage from keeping the game close early or getting out to an early lead. A big play passing team probably benefits more from the threat of back to back scores when they're trailing than a ground and pound team, but the ground and pound team can absolutely demoralize you with a long drive to end the half and getting the ball back to start the third quarter.
About the only thing I'd really consider though is weather. If I get the ball first I will either get the same or more first half possessions. If it's cold and expected to get colder, or snowing and expected to accumulate, or rain and winds are expected in the second half, i want the ball more often in good conditions and you can have it more often in bad ones.
one analysis with opinion
https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/analysis/opening-kickoff-receive-or-defer/
or what bostonfred said
https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/analysis/opening-kickoff-receive-or-defer/
or what bostonfred said
Last edited by a moderator:
DropKick
Footballguy
In the early 70s, the Dolphins would grind out 10-11 minute scoring drives to book-end the half. I remember the announcers saying something like, "the offense comes back on the field with 4:45 left in the 3rd quarter and haven't been on the field since 5 minutes into the second quarter.
Last edited by a moderator:
DropKick
Footballguy
My decision might depend on the relative strengths of each team's offensive and defensive units.
In general, I would defer. On the surface, it appears equivalent - each team gets to start a half with the ball. I want the chance for an extra possession at the end of the game, when you know what you need to do to win, be it either conservative or aggressive game play.
In general, I would defer. On the surface, it appears equivalent - each team gets to start a half with the ball. I want the chance for an extra possession at the end of the game, when you know what you need to do to win, be it either conservative or aggressive game play.
Deamon
Footballguy
Uruk-Hai
Footballguy
I've heard John Harbaugh say that he does it, in part, because of the possibility of consecutive scoring opportunities wrapped around the half (as mentioned above). I'm too lazy to do the work, but I'd like to see how many deferring teams actually got those bookend possessions, scored on both of those drives, and the game results.
He also, and Billick before him, has talked about the morale aspect of having your defense stop the opening drive by the opponent. That makes sense to me for teams like Pittsburgh, NE, and Baltimore who have typically had good defenses this century. I wonder, though, if I had an awful defense that I wouldn't want to come out on offense first.
He also, and Billick before him, has talked about the morale aspect of having your defense stop the opening drive by the opponent. That makes sense to me for teams like Pittsburgh, NE, and Baltimore who have typically had good defenses this century. I wonder, though, if I had an awful defense that I wouldn't want to come out on offense first.
Deamon
Footballguy
I agree to defer, but I'm quite surprised it's 23-0-0 in the vote. Not sure what percentages of toss winners defer, but I'd guess it's fairly close? Maybe 65-70% Defer?
EDT: Just looked it up and a bit surprising. In 2008 (when this rule was implemented), 32% defered. Now it is about 92% that defer.
EDT: Just looked it up and a bit surprising. In 2008 (when this rule was implemented), 32% defered. Now it is about 92% that defer.
Last edited by a moderator:
Uruk-Hai
Footballguy
I'd guess it's higher than that, but I have no evidence to base it on. Plus, I follow Baltimore and they always defer so that may skew my perception.
Deamon
Footballguy
Found this:
2001-07 1% (if you deferred before 2008, other team got the ball both halves)
2008-10 32%
2011-12 49%
2013-14 65%
2015-17 83%
2018: 92%
-OZ-
Footballguy
currently 24-0, so just a little bit of a minority
I’m probably deferring in 90% of the scenarios. Especially with a strong run game and defense. (Or if the opponent has the strong run game and defense). So this weekend, that’s pretty much every game, Bucs/rams arguably could take the ball first but they’ll probably defer too.
Deamon
Footballguy
I mean if you're on the road it seems automatic to want to defer. You would rather the ball when everyone is rushing back from the concessions/bathrooms instead of when they're loud and fired up on the opening drive.currently 24-0, so just a little bit of a minority
I’m probably deferring in 90% of the scenarios. Especially with a strong run game and defense. (Or if the opponent has the strong run game and defense). So this weekend, that’s pretty much every game, Bucs/rams arguably could take the ball first but they’ll probably defer too.
At home though, would be nice to throw your defense out there first when your home crowd is riled up.
Deamon
Footballguy
I mean I think Bill probably did lead the way on that one and it is a copycat league.Yeah. I was thinking it was about 90+ percent that deferred.
Sheep.
SeniorVBDStudent
Footballguy
didnt read the replies but I think the opportunity to score twice (end of half / start of half) is a strong momentum play in a team sport affected heavily by psychological / momentum factors.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I strongly prefer deferring.
From an aesthetic/momentum perspective, I like having the opportunity to put up back-to-back scores.
From a more analytical standpoint, I might get an extra possession after having had the opportunity to adjust to whatever my opponent was doing. Of course, they're adjusting to me too, but if I think I'm a better halftime-adjuster than the other guy, I should want to defer. And if I don't think I'm a better halftime-adjuster than the other guy, what am I even doing here?
From an aesthetic/momentum perspective, I like having the opportunity to put up back-to-back scores.
From a more analytical standpoint, I might get an extra possession after having had the opportunity to adjust to whatever my opponent was doing. Of course, they're adjusting to me too, but if I think I'm a better halftime-adjuster than the other guy, I should want to defer. And if I don't think I'm a better halftime-adjuster than the other guy, what am I even doing here?
Grahamburn
Footballguy
I think it depends. If your defense is brutal and you’re at home I’d want the ball. Especially if the offense is capable.
I always wondered why the Bucs would defer in the Jameis years. They’d inevitably give up a TD. Jameis would then go all Jameis trying to play hero ball because they’re behind, turn it over, give up another TD, and my Sunday would be ruined.
GBY, Tom Brady.
I always wondered why the Bucs would defer in the Jameis years. They’d inevitably give up a TD. Jameis would then go all Jameis trying to play hero ball because they’re behind, turn it over, give up another TD, and my Sunday would be ruined.
GBY, Tom Brady.
jm192
Footballguy
I think there's a higher likelihood my team scores on their 1st possession of the 2nd half than the 1st possession of the game.
Maybe it's the offense needs a bit to find it's rhythm. Maybe it's figuring out what does and doesn't work vs this particular defense.
I worry I'll get the ball 1st to open the game and have to punt. And at that point, you certainly want the ball to start the 2nd half.
Maybe it's the offense needs a bit to find it's rhythm. Maybe it's figuring out what does and doesn't work vs this particular defense.
I worry I'll get the ball 1st to open the game and have to punt. And at that point, you certainly want the ball to start the 2nd half.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Looks like we finally found something we can all agree on.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
jabarony
Footballguy
100%. Amazing. I'm not sure you'd even get that on an "Is oxygen essential?" poll.
I would essentially always defer. My reasoning is that it's better to have more control later in the game when you know more specifically what it is going to take to win the game.
For the same reason, if I'm down 15 points with 5 minutes and 3 timeouts, and I score a touchdown, I am going for the 2-pt conversion NOW, not later. That way, if I don't get it, I know that I still need 2 scores. If I take the extra point first, I have no idea if I need 1 score or 2, because I don't know if a hypothetical 2-pt conversion would be successful or not.
For the same reason, if I'm down 15 points with 5 minutes and 3 timeouts, and I score a touchdown, I am going for the 2-pt conversion NOW, not later. That way, if I don't get it, I know that I still need 2 scores. If I take the extra point first, I have no idea if I need 1 score or 2, because I don't know if a hypothetical 2-pt conversion would be successful or not.
FunkyPlutos
Footballguy
First of all, I think they should abandon the coin toss and let the visiting team choose...
Secondly, if I were a coach, I would look at it from a perspective of who my opponent is...If it's a team that isn't good from "playing from behind" then I take the ball. I hadn't thought about the crowd factor like someone mentioned (crowd louder at the beginning so play defense) - I like this philosophy!
I've never really liked the "2-fer" argument. If I have the ball at the end of the first half, that just means that we had the same number of possessions during the first half...and I'm not sure that momentum of the game really carries through halftime.
Secondly, if I were a coach, I would look at it from a perspective of who my opponent is...If it's a team that isn't good from "playing from behind" then I take the ball. I hadn't thought about the crowd factor like someone mentioned (crowd louder at the beginning so play defense) - I like this philosophy!
I've never really liked the "2-fer" argument. If I have the ball at the end of the first half, that just means that we had the same number of possessions during the first half...and I'm not sure that momentum of the game really carries through halftime.
apalmer
Footballguy
I don't get the assumption that by deferring you get some great chance for back to back possessions around halftime. If the people saying it's tougher to score on the first possession are correct, why isn't it just as tough to score if you get the ball to start the second half? I'll take the ball to start so that I can get an extra possession at the end of the half and grab the momentum by scoring before halftime. Possessions at the end of the game tend to get compressed as teams concentrate on stopping the clock, so getting the ball to start the second half isn't as important possession-count-wise.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Not sure it's the best solution but it might be the simplest. Go to a baseball type system where the road team is "up first" (getting the opening kickoff) and the home team gets "last bats" (getting the 2nd half kickoff). If that slightly increases home field advantage, good.
Also saves the ref from having to carry around spare change.
Also saves the ref from having to carry around spare change.
Catbird
Footballguy
A significant factor, to me, is that on half-opening kickoffs (first half or second), only about 40& of receiving teams score points on that drive (data by SportsInfoSolutions.com: pay site). So, choosing to receive is actually choosing most likely not to score and instead give the ball back on a punt or turnover. Do you want an opportunity that will more likely end up giving the ball away than scoring? That makes me think I would rather kick off in both halves,. Since I can't, I would rather avoid the likelihood of that failure right off. The main hesitation from there is that according to that same source, on average all NFL possessions have about a 40% chance of ending with a score. Now what? never want the ball?
Dacomish
Footballguy
I coached on and off for 20 years in School and Amateur adult levels and always chose to defer. I wanted my Defence on the field first, set the tone and start ruining the offensive tempo early. Plus the chance to score before the half and have the ball in the 3rd quarter was always a bonus.
Edit - Also to add at least 3-4 times (including in a championship game) the opposing captain said "We want to be on defence!" and not defer, so we got the ball to open both halves.....
Edit - Also to add at least 3-4 times (including in a championship game) the opposing captain said "We want to be on defence!" and not defer, so we got the ball to open both halves.....
Last edited by a moderator:
Deamon
Footballguy
I remember something similar happened a year or two ago. Maybe it was the Cowboys. The other team was going to get the ball for both halves but the NFL stepped in and didn't allow that.
Similar threads
