eveningnewsteam
Well-Known Member
Probably the most well known era of random NFL players because of that game
Win the toss
- Thread starter longtimer
- Start date
Probably the most well known era of random NFL players because of that game
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
I was talking OG Tecmo Bowl, not Super. The Redskins D on OG Tecmo Bowl was no joke.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
I see, I guess it wasn't clear because you quoted a gif from TSB. No way was Marshall as good as LT though!
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Lol.
The "extra possession" thing is a load of shit. You get that possession no matter what; it's just a matter of which half you get it in. So there's zero advantage to the number of total possessions.
If you win a coin toss you are winning the right to decide when your one and only guaranteed possession is. Do you want it right away when the game is still a blank slate, or do you want it after half of the game has been played and you have felt out the other team's scheme, evaluated your own failures/successes, etc.??? I know I'd rather make decisions with a whole 1st and 2nd quarter's worth of information.
You want to score first??? See below. Listed in that spreadsheet is every Iowa conference and bowl game, in order, from 2015-2018. You can see that in 40 games, only 8 have resulted in an offensive score on the first drive. And only 3 times in those 40 games did Iowa score. Feel free to check my work.
Both teams are getting one guaranteed possession per game. Being able to use it when you might need to stop an opponent's momentum or keep your own going is huge.
Let's just cherry pick a date range. Even funnier, when Greg Davis arrived KF changed his philosophy and started to defer when winning toss and much within the date range you quote. Early on in KF's tenure, he mostly took the ball first. This changed for a few years prior to Brian again becoming the OC. Why don't you do the same table from the 2002 to 2005 team? I'd bet it would look completely different.
Anybody can cherry pick seasons to fit their argument. They damn near scored on every first drive with that 2002 team.
My entire point is not even about scoring on the first drive. I would venture to say most teams prob don't score on their first drives, regardless if starting the game or after. It's that you have control over being able to control the field position/Line of scrimmage and maybe TOP. Can't you at least agree those are valid points?
Explain why most NFL teams take the ball first instead of deferring?
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Lol.
The "extra possession" thing is a load of shit. You get that possession no matter what; it's just a matter of which half you get it in. So there's zero advantage to the number of total possessions.
If you win a coin toss you are winning the right to decide when your one and only guaranteed possession is. Do you want it right away when the game is still a blank slate, or do you want it after half of the game has been played and you have felt out the other team's scheme, evaluated your own failures/successes, etc.??? I know I'd rather make decisions with a whole 1st and 2nd quarter's worth of information.
You want to score first??? See below. Listed in that spreadsheet is every Iowa conference and bowl game, in order, from 2015-2018. You can see that in 40 games, only 8 have resulted in an offensive score on the first drive. And only 3 times in those 40 games did Iowa score. Feel free to check my work.
Both teams are getting one guaranteed possession per game. Being able to use it when you might need to stop an opponent's momentum or keep your own going is huge.
Go back to my post and quote where I made the point about an advantage is scoring from taking the ball first. It is not one of my 5 points. I referenced that 2002 team but was not the main reason(s) I point out for taking the ball first.
You're table is not even really measuring anything. It's just a bunch of drivel.
Last edited:
Fryowa
Administrator
Lol, Jesus Christ. I "cherry picked" that date range because it was as much work as I was willing to do. I looked all that shit up manually, if you feel the need to expand it go ahead.
But...just for kicks I looked (the box scores I've found only go back to 2003), and in 2003-2005 its almost exactly the same percentage of scores to non-scores on the opening drive, actually a little less.
But, I must be cherry picking, right?
Fryowa
Administrator
Well, it's statistically accurate, and a 4th grader could see the trend and draw conclusions about what percentage of opening drives result in a score, so I guess there's that...
And even if it's drivel it's more "drivel" than you've offered to defend your point
Fryowa
Administrator
Your reason for taking the ball first was to somehow magically invent an extra possession due to electing to take the kickoff. We'll call it the "phantom" possession.
I just thought it was an obvious enough mistake that it spoke for itself. I mean, you graduated from high school, I'd think you'd understand that by taking a possession in the first half you give one up in the second half, but....
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
It's not about SCORING!
Fryowa
Administrator
Really???
From 2015 through the end of last season 83% of NFL teams that won the toss deferred. Last year by itself was slightly higher than that. Is that cherry picking???
You're not helping your cause.
Fryowa
Administrator
Look at post 48, dummy. I responded to your point about getting an extra possession.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
Fryowa
Administrator
1) You assure yourself one extra offensive possession. This is so dumb I don't know where to start.
2) Great if you have an experienced QB who doesn't turn the ball over which plays into point #3. Wouldn't it be great to have an experienced QB who doesn't turn the ball over start out with the ball in the second half? Especially if they just scored and can double up, or stop a team from doubling up?
3) You get first chance to control Field Position and the line of scrimmage. Especially with having a good punter to flip the field. Have trust in your team to move the chains. By taking the ball in the second half you get the exact same thing, arguably at a much more critical time of the game.
4) You get first chance to get a chance to control the Time of Possession. TOP and line of scrimmage are huge for a team like Iowa. Again, this is ridiculous because the same thing applies in the 2nd half. If there's a big advantage to TOP then show me with stats.
You're seriously pretending that you get some magical extra "something" by taking the ball first. I don't know if you understand it yet, Poindexter, but anything you gain in the first half you lose in the 2nd and vice versa
It's better to kick, imo, especially if you're a team that's not going to use the last possession of the 1st half (everyone uses the last possession of the 2nd half, if behind). The best argument for receiving is if you think there's a chance the opponent's defense will get better as the game goes on. In that case, better off trying to get more possessions in the 1st half.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Point #1 Possible yes. I see that argument. My point is that the team that takes the ball has the first chance to control field position.
Point #2 No reason to be an ass or dickhead just because someone doesn't agree with your game philosophy. I don't expect simpletons to really grasp my reasoning or argument.
Fryowa
Administrator
"Dude, this ain't junior high football..."
"Take the f'ing ball"
"Krist, this is Div 1 P5 football."
I ain't mad, just going along with your tone, dude.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
Welp I guess that ends this thread
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Sorry man, I wasn't aiming at you but just trying to kick up he post in a funny way. Like OK4P or the way you often post.
