Stop Deferring the Ball!!!

MelroseHawkins

MelroseHawkins

Well-Known Member
It happened again Saturday. I don't get why the change this year all of a sudden. Kirk, please go back to taking the ball when winning the coin toss. Done it for years with success. This is one area where you don't need to follow the Smith's in college football.
 
I actually like this strategy. It means we get the ball back first in the 2nd half which is a positive going into half-time. It also means we have an opportunity to have 1 more possession in the 2nd half than our opponent (if we need it). That's an advantage. We don't always use the last possession of the 1st half.
 
Last edited:
MelroseHawkins said:
It happened again Saturday. I don't get why the change this year all of a sudden. Kirk, please go back to taking the ball when winning the coin toss. Done it for years with success. This is one area where you don't need to follow the Smith's in college football.
Click to expand...

I guess you like putting our offense on the field first because it will put the opponent to sleep?

You don't gain anything by being the first to punt.
 
hwk23 said:
I actually like this strategy. It means we get the ball back first in the 2nd half which is a positive going into half-time. It also means we have an opportunity to have 1 more possession in the 2nd half than our opponent (if we need it). That's an advantage. We don't always use the last possession of the 1st half.
Click to expand...
^^^This.^^^

Deferring is a no-brainer.
 
hwk23 said:
I actually like this strategy. It means we get the ball back first in the 2nd half which is a positive going into half-time. It also means we have an opportunity to have 1 more possession in the 2nd half than our opponent (if we need it). That's an advantage. We don't always use the last possession of the 1st half.
Click to expand...


We don't always use the last possession of the second half. Sometimes we like to play around and give the opposition multiple last possessions rather than killing the clock out and putting an opponent to bed with something other than predictably lacking late game clock management.
 
hwk23 said:
I actually like this strategy. It means we get the ball back first in the 2nd half which is a positive going into half-time. It also means we have an opportunity to have 1 more possession in the 2nd half than our opponent (if we need it). That's an advantage. We don't always use the last possession of the 1st half.
Click to expand...

I've followed this strategy (informally) for several years. What I've seen (non-scientific) is that the team that wins the toss and defers, more times than not, seems to also get the last possession of the first half. Again, that isn't scientific, but it is something I've noticed. I am in favor of deferring.
 
83Hawk said:
^^^This.^^^

Deferring is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

Why don't the NFL teams defer all the time then?

KF's Iowa teams always took the ball with terrific success every year until now and look how this season is going. I say give the team one more ensured offensive possession and the chance at controlling the field position or jumping on a team. This is the ONLY year that Fernetz hasn't taken the ball and routinely deferred. Why change now?
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Why don't the NFL teams defer all the time then?

KF's Iowa teams always took the ball with terrific success every year until now and look how this season is going. I say give the team one more ensured offensive possession and the chance at controlling the field position or jumping on a team. This is the ONLY year that Fernetz hasn't taken the ball and routinely deferred. Why change now?
Click to expand...

I thought we did this sometimes the last couple years. I could be wrong. Anyway, I think it's a good thing for KF to change things up every now and then. I happen to like deferring to.
 
Deferring is a sign of no confidence in the offense to score to start the game. At least that's the takeaway I've gotten.
 
I don't think there's a "correct" answer. Lots of factors. Which of your units is stronger? Is there a wind factor? Crowd noise (diff at one end)?

It doesn't make sense to me that this choice would impact who has the ball last / gets an extra possession though- too many other factors impact that.

The way KF prefers consistency, I would guess he may have chosen to take the ball first because since most teams defer, you'd start almost every game on offense.
 
NFL stats:
it became an option in 2009 , that year 7.8% chose to defer, last year 76.4% chose to defer. The team that deferred won 54.9% of the time, 4 of the last 5 Super Bowl winners chose to defer. The opportunity to get back to back possessions and back to back scores can be a game changer for sure.
 
hwk23 said:
I thought we did this sometimes the last couple years. I could be wrong. Anyway, I think it's a good thing for KF to change things up every now and then. I happen to like deferring to.
Click to expand...

There are certain times that it is wise to defer, usually due to inclement weather or wind. This is one where you will get both sides where probably best to disagree as both can have advantages. It's more a difference in philosophy between individuals which is fine.

If I were a head coach, I would have my reasons for taking the ball which seem sensible to me. I also realize another coach may have reasons to defer and I respect that.

To me, the advantages of taking the ball first (for most teams) outweighs the disadvantages and deferring to get the ball first the 2nd half. But, that's just me.
 
homes said:
Deferring is a sign of no confidence in the offense to score to start the game. At least that's the takeaway I've gotten.
Click to expand...


Agree. To me, it's not even totally about scoring, it's about maybe having the chance to move the chains and the first chance at controlling the field position and time of possession.

Look at the 2002 team, they literally took the ball first every game, whether taking the ball or having it deferred to them, and I don't know how many game they started with getting a TD on the first drive. It was mentioned by announcers, I know that. They scored a lot on that first drive, but, that was with different players so hard to gauge.
 
damnfinn said:
NFL stats:
it became an option in 2009 , that year 7.8% chose to defer, last year 76.4% chose to defer. The team that deferred won 54.9% of the time, 4 of the last 5 Super Bowl winners chose to defer. The opportunity to get back to back possessions and back to back scores can be a game changer for sure.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the numbers. Didn't realize that. I don't really get the bolded above??
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Thanks for the numbers. Didn't realize that. I don't really get the bolded above??
Click to expand...

If you happen to have the ball at the end of the 2nd quarter and score, and had deferred to start the game, you get the ball right back again at the start of the 3rd quarter.
 
homes said:
Deferring is a sign of no confidence in the offense to score to start the game. At least that's the takeaway I've gotten.
Click to expand...

I'd say this, along with the obvious lack of confidence in the offense....is a very clear sign of no confidence in the offense.

This sounded so much funnier in my head. Sorry all.
 
I recall many times where Iowa had the ball late 2nd quarter, chose to kill the clock. (whole other thread). The only thing that died was the drive. They punted away and the other team scored to end the half - then received the ball to start 3rd quarter.

To KF's credit there is now more urgency at the end of the half than before - before Brian joined the staff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top