And it back-fired!Originally Posted by PawDawg
|
|
|
|
|
And it back-fired!
Hawaii. 2010? Dont remember the exact year. What a shitshow of a game.
That was the one with the like 30 minute review to determine if they had 4 or 5 downs right?
I think that was the first red out in 2009 under Dooley
Right, and then they got it wrong after all that.
It was Hawaii 2011. The same one with the 22 min review.
Oh -- and the cash drop from the commish to refs at the start of halftime
I don't agree that "Because you always want the ball to start the 2nd half" is a legitimate reason to take that ENORMOUS risk that early in the game. In fact, on the surface it's a borderline stupid act. That why I thought I would ask if there was a legitimate reason for taking such enormous risk on the very first play of the game. Your answer tells me there's not.
Are you just not listening? Have not read my reasons for concern? Did you NOT see the scoreboard after the first 10 seconds?
Geez pal, get a clue. I'm questioning the call because it makes NO DAMN SENSE to give a high powered offense the ball first --and potentially more often-- in a game, especially to a team that has one of the nations best kick return units, like USM's. I don't like seeing my team have to dig themselves out of a 14-0 hole to start a big time conference game. THAT'S WHY!
This ain't the NFL. Because of the draft, everybody has pretty equal talent in the NFL.
I'm just curious if any of the 18% of teams who didn't defer to the 2nd half actually go by the name of "New England Patriots"? LOL!!
But there's no guarantee that you're going to have the ball last at the end of the 1st half. And if you don't, that means the other team got more possessions than you did in the first half.
To defer or not. I think it depends on a team's strength. If you have a high-powered offense...take the ball. If you have a great defense...kick off to start the game. Here's why: field position. Most of the time, and by that I mean like 90%+, the receiving team will start that first drop from the 25 or further back. A strong defense can force a 3 and out, and after a typical punt, that team, who kicked off, will start its first drive outside of the 35. Often near its own 40. So! a team with a strong defense, and an average offense benefits from that initial exchange by up to 15 yards of field position.
Of course we could play this out...let's say they fail to get a first down, and punt on 4th and 2 from their own 43. Chances are good that punt will be downed, or fair-catched down around the 15 or even the 10. Now that strong defense has the opposing team backed-up. Second punt gives that team field position somewhere close to the 50. And, so on...
So, the moral of the story is to play to your team's strengths, and try to protect against your weaknesses. Winning the toss gives you that option.
I am just going to state one thing: Holtz coached this game like he coaches Bowl games. THAT is why we won and I am not sure why he doesn't coach every game with the same mind-set.
Nope. The Pats almost always defer. I tried to find the stats in college, but haven’t found them yet.
You don’t have to agree that my reasoning is legitimate. It’s a free country and you’re free to be wrong. 😂
Really? So all of the previous and constant criticizing, complaining and condemning thru the first six games was actually carefully crafted and intended to be a prophesy of what could be. How dumb of me. I foolishly thought it was a "chicken little" critique of the past, and I completely missed the prediction of a successful future. Please forgive me.
Every single team I know of defers when they win that coin toss. Not making a comment on if it’s a good or bad strategy, I’m just saying they all do it. Everyone of our opponents do it including Grambling.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
