Coin Toss what do we do?

[DogFace]

Starting on D gives you the only chance in a football game you have of two straight possessions.

Scoring before the half then receiving after half. This doesn’t happen all the time, but when it does your chances of winning go up.

There’s a reason 90% of the time NFL coaches defer.

https://www.sportscasting.com/why-do-nfl-teams-defer-after-winning-the-coin-toss/

Interestingly in that article they mention the Cowboys elect to receive more than anyone and Patriots the least. (2018 article I believe)

 

[CCBoy]

The Packers will call heads or tails and the game moves from there!

 

[DogFace]

Except that it makes no difference whatsoever in terms of who wins the game.

In the 9 seasons prior to the rule change, teams winning the coin toss won 49.0% of their games. After the rule change, they won 51.5%, and the win percentage among teams that chose to defer was 52.0%, compared to 50.8% for teams choosing to receive.

https://www.waldrn.com/how-the-nfls-2008-rule-change-affected-coin-toss-strategy/

Define whatsoever. We’ve been over this and I found some more data. Receiving the ball two straight times can be very important if it works out that way. Which it does sometimes. And losing that opportunity isn’t a good strategy for winning.

Increasing your chances by any % is a winning strategy.

 

[cowboyed]

Do we want to put our offense out there first, or our defense?? Please give your thoughts....

After the coin toss what do we do? Curl up in a fetal position and suck our thumbs.

 

[csirl]

Don't have the stats and they may prove me wrong. But my impression is that a high % of opening drives end up in punts from inside the teams own half. Players often take a few plays to settle into a game/get the timing perfect and this impacts the offense more than the defense. So the opposition will likely get the ball with good field position.

3rd quarter is different - teams are settled in. Better to start this quarter in control of the ball and you want to avoid an early score by the opposition changing momentum.

 

[csirl]

BtW when I played football, one season we lost the coin toss in all 10 regular seasom games! What are the odds!

 

[DuceizBak]

With teams with middling subpar defenses, I always opt to go for offense first.
It also seems like every team on the first drive has the most success against us.

 

[Creeper]

All due respect to Landry, but that doesn't match with what we've seen on the field this year. Opponents on their opening drives this year:

4 Touchdowns
5 Field Goals
5 drives ending in punts (-7, -2, 4, 31, 41 yards)
1 drive ending in a fumble after 54 yards
1 drive ending in a blocked FG after 48 yards
1 drive ending in a turnover on downs after 42 yards

That works out to:
2.52 points per drive, which would be a top-5 offense.
47 yards per drive, which would lead the league by a mile. (Opening drives have longer fields than average, because half of them always follow kickoffs which are usually touchbacks.)

Overall, our defense has been at its worst at the beginning of games. Note that it didn't matter if we kicked or received: the defensive performance on the opponents' opening drives was basically identical.

Again, it really really doesn't matter if you choose to receive or defer. Unless there are factors like the sun that make you prefer one side of the field early or late.

I can't argue the numbers. But have you ever seen a Dallas Cowboys unit come out really fired up to start a game? The usually come out kind of uninspired to start. I am not saying it's bad. The early game fire tends to wear off quickly once the game starts. The Cowboys play more like a snowball rolling down hill. If they keep rolling they eventually steamroll their opponents. But if they are slowed down, or stopped, they struggle to gain momentum.

 

[JD_KaPow]

In the 9 seasons prior to the rule change, teams winning the coin toss won 49.0% of their games. After the rule change, they won 51.5%, and the win percentage among teams that chose to defer was 52.0%, compared to 50.8% for teams choosing to receive.

https://www.waldrn.com/how-the-nfls-2008-rule-change-affected-coin-toss-strategy/

Define whatsoever. We’ve been over this and I found some more data. Receiving the ball two straight times can be very important if it works out that way. Which it does sometimes. And losing that opportunity isn’t a good strategy for winning.

Increasing your chances by any % is a winning strategy.

Those results aren't remotely statistically significant and are heavily skewed by the fact that the Patriots were for a while the only team that would defer regularly, and were one of the winningest teams over that time.

Before the rule change, kicking and receiving were randomly distributed and made absolutely no difference in who won; I've posted that data before. That's the clean experiment.

 

[DogFace]

Those results aren't remotely statistically significant and are heavily skewed by the fact that the Patriots were for a while the only team that would defer regularly, and were one of the winningest teams over that time.

Before the rule change, kicking and receiving were randomly distributed and made absolutely no difference in who won; I've posted that data before. That's the clean experiment.

Yea. You said that last time, but I’ll take a 1% increase along with the possibility of scoring off two straight possessions.

I feel with the emotions involved in sports, football in particular, momentum is a very real thing.
Scoring twice with no change of possession gives positive momentum. Imo. Getting scored on twice is a “blow to the gut”.

This is my experience anyway. Most coaches agree with me. Like 80%? What did it say?
Anyway. It’s very important and the data is on my side (slightly) as well as NFL and college coaches.

 

[JD_KaPow]

I can't argue the numbers. But have you ever seen a Dallas Cowboys unit come out really fired up to start a game? The usually come out kind of uninspired to start. I am not saying it's bad. The early game fire tends to wear off quickly once the game starts. The Cowboys play more like a snowball rolling down hill. If they keep rolling they eventually steamroll their opponents. But if they are slowed down, or stopped, they struggle to gain momentum.

I do know that the Cowboys defense has been terrible at the start of games this year, giving up tons of yards and over 2.5 points per opening drive.

Here's another thing I know:

Every time the Cowboys lost the coin toss this year, the other team deferred, so the Cowboys received in the first half. They went 6-1 in those games.
When the Cowboys won the toss and elected to receive, they went 2-1.
When the Cowboys won the toss and deferred, they went 4-3.

Overall, when the Cowboys received to begin the game, they went 8-2. When they kicked to begin the game, they went 4-3.

Is that statistically significant? No, of course not. But they've done much better this year when receiving than kicking to start the game.

 

[VaqueroTD]

I do know that the Cowboys defense has been terrible at the start of games this year, giving up tons of yards and over 2.5 points per opening drive.

Here's another thing I know:

Every time the Cowboys lost the coin toss this year, the other team deferred, so the Cowboys received in the first half. They went 6-1 in those games.
When the Cowboys won the toss and elected to receive, they went 2-1.
When the Cowboys won the toss and deferred, they went 4-3.

Overall, when the Cowboys received to begin the game, they went 8-2. When they kicked to begin the game, they went 4-3.

Is that statistically significant? No, of course not. But they've done much better this year when receiving than kicking to start the game.

Dare to think outside the box.

Or, play to your strengths, dummy.

 

[DogFace]

I do know that the Cowboys defense has been terrible at the start of games this year, giving up tons of yards and over 2.5 points per opening drive.

Here's another thing I know:

Every time the Cowboys lost the coin toss this year, the other team deferred, so the Cowboys received in the first half. They went 6-1 in those games.
When the Cowboys won the toss and elected to receive, they went 2-1.
When the Cowboys won the toss and deferred, they went 4-3.

Overall, when the Cowboys received to begin the game, they went 8-2. When they kicked to begin the game, they went 4-3.

Is that statistically significant? No, of course not. But they've done much better this year when receiving than kicking to start the game.

There’s more to the game than stats and analytics.

If you’re having a bad game it’s good to get the ball to start the half. If you’re having a good game it is too. Maybe less good though.

 

[Momanpr100]

Always defer.

It doesn't work like that. Every coach doesn't defer every single time. This defense plays better with a lead. So if we can go up 7-0 in the 1st quarter we need to do that.

 

[JD_KaPow]

There’s more to the game than stats and analytics.

If you’re having a bad game it’s good to get the ball to start the half

Is there more to the game than winning and losing? Those are the only "stats and analytics" I'm talking about here.

 

[KingintheNorth]

There was a study a few years back that I had referenced in grad school. I'll try to find it.


Basically, most championship teams (NFL, D1) defer. You control the controllable. Saban, Belichick talked about it and said that years ago, the wind would affect their decisions but that the last several years they shifted to the "always defer" model. They said that no matter what happened in the first half...fluke plays, injuries, bad game plan, etc.... you knew you had the halftime to adjust and come out with the ball. Belichick actively tries to control the last 4 minutes of the half so that the opposing offense must go 30 to 40 minutes (of actual time) without touching the ball. In my coaching, I have experienced the same. Control all the things you can control. Try like heck to adjust to the things you can't control and make good decisions. Weather the (1st half) storm and win the 2nd half. It doesn't mean you concede the first half; it's literally one possession they get first. I just really valued knowing we get the ball in the 2nd.

The study pointed out that only one highly successful winning team consistently took the ball first. The Kurt Warner-Marshall Faulk led Rams, aka the Greatest Show on Turf.

The problem with McCarthy IMO, is that not just with the coin toss decision, he's so inconsistent and wishy washy. In football, you must have an overall philosophy on strategy that you believe in. When it's proven right, you build on it. when it's proven wrong, you adjust. When you don't have that base football strategy, when things go wrong, you're screwed, because you have no real idea how to fix it. That's Mike McCarthy. It's also Kellen Moore. When their initial plan doesn't work (49ers game for example), they have no remedy to right the ship.

 

[Redline360]

While I would normally support defense first I honestly think this is a bad idea with this team.


Our defense is built on pressuring the quarterback and forcing turnovers. IMO regardless of the opponent we need to score first and early to set the tone. If we get out to an early 10-0 14-0 lead I don't think any team is going to beat us. They will become pass happy playing into the heart and strength of the defense.

Plus while Dak had a phenomenal season I hate to say it based upon his history I have almost no faith in him to come through when needed in a tight game

 

[VaqueroTD]

There was a study a few years back that I had referenced in grad school. I'll try to find it.


The study pointed out that only one highly successful winning team consistently took the ball first. The Kurt Warner-Marshall Faulk led Rams, aka the Greatest Show on Turf.

I was listening to an argument on this on Hanging With the Boys. (Keep in mind this was mid-season when there were still options out there to tweak the team.) Nate Newton was more for beefing up the defense, improve running game, or anything that allowed them to play more physical and his comment was that you can play "offense first strike" but you have to be almost perfect to run it. And the first team that came to my mind when he said that was the Greatest Show on Turf Rams.

 

[CWR]

Do we want to put our offense out there first, or our defense?? Please give your thoughts....

Defense. It sounds good to go on offense and drive the ball, keeping them off the field, but everyone is gonna be a little tight to start. I'd take advantage of it and put them on the field, then get the ball at the half when we are already running full speed.

 

[CWR]

While I would normally support defense first I honestly think this is a bad idea with this team.


Our defense is built on pressuring the quarterback and forcing turnovers. IMO regardless of the opponent we need to score first and early to set the tone. If we get out to an early 10-0 14-0 lead I don't think any team is going to beat us. They will become pass happy playing into the heart and strength of the defense.

Plus while Dak had a phenomenal season I hate to say it based upon his history I have almost no faith in him to come through when needed in a tight game

I understand that as well but still think jitters will be a factor at the onset.