Tandler's RR - Is the coin toss choice really an edge?

[isle-hawg]

http://www.realredskins.com/rich-tan...y-an-edge.html

By Rich Tandler

Is the coin toss choice really an edge?

Yesterday we looked at comments that Mike Shanahan made regarding the decision he has made to defer every time the Redskins have won the toss this year. He said that research says that teams that defer win 60 percent of the time.

While I’m not going to dispute the 60 percent number, there may be some confusion as to cause and effect there. For example, Bill Belichick likes to defer to the second half if the Patriots win the toss. I suspect that the Patriots’ impressive winning percentage has a lot more to do with Tom Brady and very little to do with when the Patriots kick off and receive.

We have way too small a sample size to draw any conclusions about the efficacy of the decision to defer but here’s a game by game look at the coin toss and what happened on the opening and second-half kickoffs in each of the Redskins games this year.

@ NO: Saints on the toss, received. Went three and out gaining no yards. Redskins took second half kickoff and drove 77 yards in six plays to a touchdown.

click on the link to continue reading

[skinfan2k]

The reason why I believe this is huge a big deal with coaches like Mike and belichick is that it is the only point in the game where a team could technically get the ball back 2 times in a row without the other team having any possession. Simply put it, if you are down 14 before the 2 min warning, you can tie the game before the other team gets the ball back. If you are tied and you score before half time and get the ball back, you can have the opportunity to be up 14 pts without the opponent touching the ball.

Thats pretty much why these coaches always defer the toss.

[RandyHolt]

I think you put pressure on your defense when he defers. If they give up a score, its pressure on our offense as well.

I think at home, with our dynamic offense, i want him to roll the dice and let III dictate the start of the game. Try and put pressure on them, keep their O off the field.

Until our defense gets better, I am not sold on his % theory.

[Luca Brasi]

Coin flip is sacred!!!

[armstrong001]

The reason why I believe this is huge a big deal with coaches like Mike and belichick is that it is the only point in the game where a team could technically get the ball back 2 times in a row without the other team having any possession. Simply put it, if you are down 14 before the 2 min warning, you can tie the game before the other team gets the ball back. If you are tied and you score before half time and get the ball back, you can have the opportunity to be up 14 pts without the opponent touching the ball.

Thats pretty much why these coaches always defer the toss.

Not true. Any time you score then recover an onside kick, you have two possessions in a row.

[skinfan2k]

Not true. Any time you score then recover an onside kick, you have two possessions in a row.

but that is not 100% guaranteed. The only time where a team can get 2 possessions without risking it or taking a chance to receive the ball again, is having the last and first possessions in each half.

[isle-hawg]

I would always defer, seems to me there are more jitters to start the games - and I think it puts undue pressure on the D if the O receives to start the game and not score. Then not only does the other team's O gets the ball with a chance to take the lead they also get the ball to start the 2nd half.

In baseball it is considered an advantage to bat at the bottom of the inning. I understand the differences in the games but I think the same concept applies for the NFL in that it is better to start the 2nd half with the ball vice 1st.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I love when we kick off. I'd rather let the opponent take his shot during the "feeling out" process and take mine after I have a half of data to build into my adjustments. It's anecdotal and just my opinion but I think it's a huge advantage.

[RandyHolt]

When you see RGIII sitting on the bench, the first quarter halfway over before he gets onto the field, let's rethink it. Its one reason I have hated the bend dont break over the years. Cold offense! The D always seemed to give up a FG at minimum. The offense, stone cold. The fans have to be really LOUD to help it work. At Fedex, the stadium is half empty as the D goes out.

Haven't we been the team in years past saying we need to keep the opponents stud QB off the field, as if its a key to victory?

Deferring to me says we think we have a superior defense. We have a superior offense. It's a game of momentum. While Shanny think he can pull off two possessions in a row he should focus on scoring points. It starts with getting RGIII onto the field, and playing to win.

III changes everything. Grossman, um, yeah lets keep him on the bench as long as possible.

[skinfan2k]

having a great offense, then you should always defer. By the time your offense warms up, you have two possessions in a row!

[AzSkinsFan63]

Here's the reason you defer....when the second half starts...

If your behind (hopefully not) you get the ball with a chance to get closer.

If your leading it's an opportunity to extend your lead.

You should always defer. The only time is if you have a terrible terrible defense..then it becomes a little questionable...IMHO

That's my 2 cents anyway.

[RandyHolt]

Terrible defense we have, is what we keep hearing.

Perhaps its also important, to run hurry up later in the 2nd quarter, as needed, to ensure that we have the best chance of being last to get possession to close out the half. We have all seen Brady hurry down the field, only to slow play down and milk the clock, to close out the half or game. We seem to run our offense at one tempo. We never run hurry up unless out of necessity.

Why not try to get the ball to start the half, AND close out the half?

I would wager teams that successfully and proactively milk the clock to prevent a team from getting the ball back at the end of the first half have a better than 60% win percentage.

[balki1867]

I was watching my video of SB XXVI a few months ago and John Madden made a comment that he thought it was better to defer (was there previously no option to defer?) because the first offense out always has nerves since they go right from the pre-game festivities to the kickoff. The other QB, meanwhile, gets to throw the ball around on the sideline for a bit after the game starts. He's basically in his mid-game cadence and that extra time somehow favors the offense.

Of course one could argue the exact opposite point for a team coming out after halftime, but I thought it was an interesting take.

[Skin'Em84]

I always want to defer, since I think it's better to get the ball at the start of the second half. If you are down in the first, you can open up with the offense to close the gap. If you are up, you start the second half with the ball to put your foot on the gas and really open up the gap.

[sens11]

Here's the reason you defer....when the second half starts...

If your behind (hopefully not) you get the ball with a chance to get closer.

If your leading it's an opportunity to extend your lead.

You should always defer. The only time is if you have a terrible terrible defense..then it becomes a little questionable...IMHO

That's my 2 cents anyway.

Other then the bad defense comment I completely agree.

IMO that if you are on the road; you got to defer so that you get the ball at the start of the second half while a lot of fans are still at the concession line and is a little less noisy.