Coin toss at SF

[fansince68]

Yep, and you know what I mean about momentum, and the crowd, in a game like this. I’d really rather start on defense, get after Purdy, and get them thinking….rather than Anger in the game with 14:20 left in 1Q after they stuffed Elliott and made Dak nervous.

It's really weird how our coaches cant read our tendencies . They seem clueless because we do the opposite of the norm and successful teams. Even KC chooses to defer and receive the KO after half time.

 

[Kingofholland]

Garrett did the same crap we seem to be doing lately with taking the ball when winning the toss. It’s making me wonder if it’s not an organizational thing (Jerry’s orders), but that’s for another time.

If we lose the toss, SF is deferring like most well coached teams do. Nothing can be done there.

We do play differently with a lead on both sides of the ball, so I figure that rather than our staff being full morons, and/or not a Jerry order….we don’t defer when winning the toss because they want to try to jump out to a lead. Only plausible explanation.

BUT…in this game….IF they can help it…you cannot let that SF defense with much help from the crowd, dictate the tone from the beginning.

Especially when you insist on handing Elliott the ball early. It has three and out written all over it and I hope the philosophy changes for this game.

I mean, an incompletion and an Elliott one yard gain are pretty much guaranteed to be the first two plays. Let’s not just hand them momentum….as well as the ball to start the second half.

I don't believe there's a strong winning percentage differential to receive or kick first. With that said if your offense starts slow, deferring to try to build some momentum on defense may make sense. On the opposite end giving up a td on the first drive can be deflating.

I think for us I much rather defer considering our offensive starts.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Garrett did the same crap we seem to be doing lately with taking the ball when winning the toss. It’s making me wonder if it’s not an organizational thing (Jerry’s orders), but that’s for another time.

If we lose the toss, SF is deferring like most well coached teams do. Nothing can be done there.

We do play differently with a lead on both sides of the ball, so I figure that rather than our staff being full morons, and/or not a Jerry order….we don’t defer when winning the toss because they want to try to jump out to a lead. Only plausible explanation.

BUT…in this game….IF they can help it…you cannot let that SF defense with much help from the crowd, dictate the tone from the beginning.

Especially when you insist on handing Elliott the ball early. It has three and out written all over it and I hope the philosophy changes for this game.

I mean, an incompletion and an Elliott one yard gain are pretty much guaranteed to be the first two plays. Let’s not just hand them momentum….as well as the ball to start the second half.

We seem to always suck our first few drives. Give the other team the ball at let us have a extra possession when we’re warmed up.

 

[Adiba1977]

It doesn't matter. Really.

Matters. Defer

 

[Chuck 54]

Garrett did the same crap we seem to be doing lately with taking the ball when winning the toss. It’s making me wonder if it’s not an organizational thing (Jerry’s orders), but that’s for another time.

If we lose the toss, SF is deferring like most well coached teams do. Nothing can be done there.

We do play differently with a lead on both sides of the ball, so I figure that rather than our staff being full morons, and/or not a Jerry order….we don’t defer when winning the toss because they want to try to jump out to a lead. Only plausible explanation.

BUT…in this game….IF they can help it…you cannot let that SF defense with much help from the crowd, dictate the tone from the beginning.

Especially when you insist on handing Elliott the ball early. It has three and out written all over it and I hope the philosophy changes for this game.

I mean, an incompletion and an Elliott one yard gain are pretty much guaranteed to be the first two plays. Let’s not just hand them momentum….as well as the ball to start the second half.

Until this year, our offense has always been better than our defenses and where all our stars were. It made sense to take the ball first and try to put points on the board first. If you defense doesn’t seem to give up points at the beginning of the game and after halftime, if it’s even average, I’m definitely deferring. But we’ve had garbage defense for Romo and Dak. In past years, no way I want to give Rodgers or Brady the ball first, fall behind, and put more pressure on the offense.

 

[CWR]

Garrett did the same crap we seem to be doing lately with taking the ball when winning the toss. It’s making me wonder if it’s not an organizational thing (Jerry’s orders), but that’s for another time.

If we lose the toss, SF is deferring like most well coached teams do. Nothing can be done there.

We do play differently with a lead on both sides of the ball, so I figure that rather than our staff being full morons, and/or not a Jerry order….we don’t defer when winning the toss because they want to try to jump out to a lead. Only plausible explanation.

BUT…in this game….IF they can help it…you cannot let that SF defense with much help from the crowd, dictate the tone from the beginning.

Especially when you insist on handing Elliott the ball early. It has three and out written all over it and I hope the philosophy changes for this game.

I mean, an incompletion and an Elliott one yard gain are pretty much guaranteed to be the first two plays. Let’s not just hand them momentum….as well as the ball to start the second half.

I like differing because we don't seem to click right out of the gates. This way in the 2nd half you've worked out kinks and made adjustments. I think its a better opportunity to make the most of the possession.