Cowboys defer?

[Ring6]

That was the wrinkle we had been promised.

 

[Dre11]

Statistically, the difference is almost zero.

Over the past five seasons, home teams have won 56.27 percent of the time. They have won 56.32 percent of the time when kicking off to start the game and 56.22 percent of the time when receiving to start the game.

Thus, road teams have won 43.73 percent of the time -- 43.78 percent when they kick off to start the game and 43.68 percent when they receive to start the game.

So, deferring and kicking off to start the game makes you 0.1 percent more likely to win.

But I still prefer it.

As I've been saying, it doesn't matter. It's just another fad someone started and the masses flocked to it.
Great find.

 

[Dre11]

I prefer kicking off first.

Your defense gets to go out and put some hurt on people right off the bat, and you get the ball to start the 2nd half.

And what if your defense get gashed first because 90% of the time ,the first series ,both teams are feeling out each other.

 

[northerncowboynation]

This is maybe the dumbest topic of fan complaint this side of the great clapping debate.

Ok, what's the topic, oh yeah deferring. I'm both for it and against it. I suggested before the game that deferring would be a great new wrinkle. It was... or it could have been 240 yards by Zekiel. We'll never know

 

[GenoT]

And what if your defense get gashed first because 90% of the time ,the first series ,both teams are feeling out each other.

Then I would’ve chosen poorly, wouldn’t I?

Actually, the idea came from a John Madden quote I read, back in the day. He usually deferred and he had a pretty good career W-L record.

 

[OmerV]

That was the wrinkle we had been promised.

I suppose you missed the deep throws, including one to our RB, the inclusion of the TE in the game plan, and heavier use of the running game?

 

[plymkr]

I still don't really understand the benefit of receiving. Even if you score first the idea of holding that 7 point lead (or 3) for 60 minutes is a little ridiculous. Where as the benefit of scoring to end the half and start the 3rd can create momentum that far outweighs receiving in the 1st. Maybe that scenario doesn't happen too often, but I'd rather play for that than the first score. Just makes very little sense.

I agree, I hate getting the ball to start the game and then go three and out. at best you score a TD but there's a lot of game left for them to answer. Getting the ball in the 3rd quarter and scoring a TD or a FG is a momentum swing and less gametime for them to answer.

 

[Techsass]

I seam to remember JG saying he liked to start the game with his strength. It was a while back & might not have been Jason, but I think it was him.

 

[Dre11]

Then I would’ve chosen poorly, wouldn’t I?

Actually, the idea came from a John Madden quote I read, back in the day. He usually deferred and he had a pretty good career W-L record.

Yes you would.

 

[ClintDagger]

It would be interesting to know the last time they deferred , I like it , change things up a bit.

Hell, when was the last time they won a toss? That’s been part of the problem. Even Sham would talk about it every week like it’s been ages. I know against Detroit was the first one this season.

Edit: Just checked, they had lost 6 in a row before Sunday.