The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I read an article today that said that Rex Ryan is gonna change up his practice of deferring the ball to the other team and putting his defense on the field first when he wins the coin toss.  The reason is that his team has not had a lot of success offensively especially in the first quarter and thinks maybe giving his offense the ball first might be a way for them to get out of the gates quicker.

I think that sounds like sound reasoning and maybe Sparano should also try the change.  Sparano always defers as well and there's no offense in the NFL that could use a jump start more than Miami's.  Perhaps getting the ball first and trying to get a lead even if it's only a FG could help.  Not only that but Miami's D has not exactly been shown to be trustworthy enough to get off the field quickly.

In the 12 games Miami has played, Miami kicked off 9 times and the opponent has scored 4 TD's and 2 FG's on those opening drives (1 TD was on the return itself).  In addition, in the game against the Vikings, they were in FG range, but chose to go for it on 4th down and didn't make it.  Only twice did Miami not allow the opponent into scoring range on their first possession and both of those times were when the opposing team fumbled the ball away.  Not once has the Miami defense forced a punt on the opponents first possession in those 9 kickoffs to start the game.

Conversely Miami has received the ball first in 3 games and punted twice and had 1 FG blocked, so maybe it doesn't matter what they do, but I say it wouldn't hurt to try to change things up.

BB defers.  His reasoning sound rational to me.  (but maybe I am biased, okay I am definitely biased)

The quietest the stadium is all game is the start of the third quarter.  Too many people are still at the concessions and bathrooms to make it loud enough to interfere with a defense.  So when you are on the road that is a great time to have the offense on the field.  And at home you gain no homefield advantage from the crowd.  OTOH, the start of the first quarter is often be the loudest of the game (unless the game is close in the fourth).  So you have great homefield adv on defense and it can be quite difficult on offence until the crowd calms down. 

Also by getting your defense an extend break at half time (assuming an extended opening drive at the start of the half) you can keep them fresher for the 4th.  You gain nothing by giving them an extra rest at the start of the 1st quarter. 

********

Of all the coaching blunders of MNF game.  Rex decides to blame the coin toss decision as the primary reason for the loss.  Says more about RR than it does about the coin.

When you are 10-2 and have the best offense in the league, there's no reason to change anything.  When you are 6-6, your defense gives up points nearly every time you kick off to start the game and your offense isn't that good when leading or tied let alone when behind, there's a ton of reasons to change things up.

I don't think Ryan was blaming the loss on the coin flip, just recognizing a problem and reacting to it.  That's what good coaches do.  The dumb ones stand pat because that's what they do.  Don Shula changed his philosophy constantly depending on the makeup of the team.  I think there's too much trying to make the team fit your philosophy today rather than molding your philsophy to fit your team.

If you are 6-6 and in the 6 games you started off with the ball you scored a TD on the opening drive (because the other team deferred and won the game and in the 6 games you started on defense each time you gave up a TD on the opening drive lost the game ...then absolutely never defer. 

OTOH, if the 3 times you started with the ball you failed to score any points on your opening drive. And in 1/3 of the times in which you started on defense you were able to stop the other team from scoring and in over half the times keep them out of the end zone....then the only reason to change is you really enjoy the Seinfeld episode where George gets hired by the Yankees.   

Yes, Shula made changes, (every great coach does)  But he didn't become successful by randomly making changes but for having a fundamentally sound reason for those changes.  Ryan doesn't have a sound reason other than the "George Costanza approach." 

Sometimes changing a 50/50 decision (like whether or not to kick or receive) might appear to your players that you're changing strategy and instill confidence in them.

Sorry, but this reason ALONE is reason enough for me.  1/3 of the time stopping them from scoring is terrible.  Especially when you consider that at least 1 of those 3 times it wasn't so much you stopping them from scoring as them stopping themselves.  Minnesota could have attempted about a 40 yard field goal and instead tried to convert a 4th down play because they didn't think your defense was up to the task.  Had they kicked the FG it would have been 7 out of 9 games that your offense first touched the ball when they were already behind in the game.  That's too much pressure to put on an already suspect offense.

Why?

Your defense has had full success 1/3 of the time and full or partial success 5/9th of the time.  Your offense has had a 100% fail rate.  While both units suck at the start of the game.  You suck less starting on defense.   

Depends on your definition of success/failure.  My definition of success is based on getting into scoring range, not necessarily scoring.  That would make the percentage 33% for the offense, the special teams is to blame for not scoring on the blocked FG.  Miami also had a kickoff returned for a TD which isn't a fail for the defense, unfortunately Pittsburgh fumbled the opening kickoff against the Dolphins which doesn't count as a success either which makes the defense's success rate really 1/7 or a whopping 14.3% success rate.  The offense has been more than twice as effective as the defense.

You do what you want, but I'm not putting the defense out on the field first unless I absolutely have to.

So opening the game with a FG try (not a converted FG, just a try) is considered a successful first possession for you?

...except that when the offense got on the field after that opening kickoff, they marched a whopping one yard down the field and immediately handed the ball to the special teams unit.

The job of the offense is to score points, not hand the ball off to another unit to score points.  Your method of evaluation would consider it a defensive failure when special teams allows a big return and the D holds them to a FG, yet an offensive success if we get a big return and the offense does literally nothing, followed by a FG.  That's simply absurd.

Belichick's logic is completely sound.  Crowd noise, unlike "momentum" or "heart" or whatever other voodoo BS that the talking heads love to chatter over, is an actual, measurable factor.  It has a specific effect on the offense.

For the offense, yes.  For the special teams, no.

Huh?  I'm talking about the Cleveland game.  Miami got the ball on their own 15 yard line and drove to the Cleveland 8 yard line before the FG was blocked.

No it wouldn't.  The defense didn't allow them into scoring range, they were already in scoring range when the defense took the field.  That's a special teams failure.

Yes that would be absurd, but again wrong.  Just the opposite.  The offense must move the ball into scoring range, not be handed the ball in scoring range and do nothing with it.  You are confusing the act of kicking a FG with an offensive possession.  The act of kicking a FG is a special teams play. 

This system has nothing whatsoever to do with scoring at all.  Simply moving into scoring position.
And this is only for purposes of determining the success or failure of the offense or defense and only then on the first possession of the game.  It says absolutely nothing about the success of the team as whole.  As you pointed out, points are the only things that matter to the team as a whole, but you can't blame the offense for getting the ball down to the 8 yard line if the FG unit misses the FG.  Blame the special teams for that.

^^^ it a TEAM sport.  not an offense/defense sport.  100% of the time that the TEAM got the ball first they failed to achieve the TEAM'S goal of putting points on the board.  Over half the time that the TEAM kicked first the TEAM managed to prevent the other team from getting into the endzone.   

Pappy, it seems like we could simply replace your system of evaluation with "yards gained" and "yards allowed," since you seem to want a system that gives credit/detriment based on where the ball is both when you come on and when you leave the field.  In such a comparison, the offense would lose by a landslide: we are 19th in the league in yards gained on offense but 4th in the league in yards allowed on defense.

At the end of the day, what metric could be more clear?  Our defense is more likely to stop them from moving the ball than our offense is to move the ball.  Add in all of Belichick's objective facts and I think deferring is clearly the smart decision.

Unfortunately Spider, you have failed to grasp the fact that this whole conversation is about the opening kickoff and nothing else.  I'm merely suggesting that we have given the defense ample opportunities to start the game and they have failed on all but 1 of 7 attempts to stop the opposing offense.  We have only given the offense 3 attempts and they actually came up with 1 good drive in those 3 attempts.  What is so terrible about giving the offense a couple more cracks at it?

What's more is that Thigpen was leading the Dolphins on 1 of those 3 attempts.  Henne is actually 1 for 2 on opening drives.  And how did he do on that other drive?  He got to New England's 38 yard line whereby Sparano called for a punt which got a net gain of 27 yards.  Perhaps if Sparano had some balls he would have went for it on 4th and 8 from New Englands 38.  I bet BB would have.

Man this is a tough crowd.

Well I'm not quite sure how to explain to the ref that Miami's TEAM will start the game when we win the flip.  When you figure that out, let me know. :)

Yes, I'm being ridiculous now.  As ridiculous as your response was.

The chances of scoring or not scoring on the opening drive are as dependant on the kick off unit as the defense and on the kick receiving unit as the offense. 

The TEAM has had better success in opening drives where the first Dolphins unit was the kick off unit then when the first Dolphin unit was the kick receiving unit. 

Hope that clears it up for you. 

No it doesn't.  I can see you're still not convinced, so let's dig a little deeper.  Let's look at Miami's first drive in those games where Miami deferred.

Here's a shocker.  Henne has actually scored points (not just got in FG range, but scored points) on 6 of 7 first drives in games where we kicked off first. 3 TD's and 3 FG's.  A full 85.7 % success rate on his first drive.  Had we not already been down a FG or TD in those games, it may have made a difference.

Oh yeah that leaves 2 games.  In the 8th game the Titans fumbled the ball and Miami recovered and kicked a FG and in the 9th game the Steelers fumbled the Dolphins opening kickoff and Miami kicked a FG in that game as well, but I didn't think it's fair to credit Henne with a FG drive seeing as they got the ball already in FG range.

Hope that clears it up for you.

^^^^ So 7 out of 9 when the Dolphins start the 3nd Quarter by receiving the ball they score on that drive.  And 0 out 3 times in which they start the 1st quarter by receiving the ball they don't.  And so you want the offense to have the ball less at the start of the second half when they have 77.8% success rate, and more often at the start of the 1st half when they have a 0% success rate.  Seems like it would be better for the offense to have the ball more at the start of the second half when they actually do something with it.

Do you have the success rate for the Dolphins during the 2nd half for the other three games?

No, I was talking about the first time Miami touched the ball in a game and it's actually 8 of 9 when they kick-off first.  However you have to remember that in 6 of those 9 games, Miami was already down either a FG or TD so in effect Miami was already playing catch up.

Miami is 4 out of 9 to start the 3rd quarter when we received the ball first.  2 TD's and 2 FG's.  0 for 3 in the in the 3rd quarter when they have kicked off to start the 3rd quarter for a total of 4 out of 12 first posessions in the 2nd half.

Miami punted twice on their 1st posession of the 2nd half when they kicked off first and against your Patriots they gave up a TD return on the kickoff and then got a punt blocked for another TD.  I guess in general you could say that bad things happen to the Dolphins anytime they kick off.  That being the case, I would choose to RECEIVE to start the game and pray like hell my special teams can make a tackle to start the 3rd quarter.

So if I understand you correctly, Pappy, the offense does better on their first drive when they DON'T get the ball first than when they do.  This is an argument in your favor...?

I presume you have no interest whatsoever in addressing the factual points that Belichick mentioned (extra rest for the defense after the half instead of before the game, less crowd noise).  Saying, "your team is 10-2 so do what works, but when your team is 6-6 you need to shake things up," is not a response.  If anything, all that it says is that Sparano should be copying more of Belichick's tactics, not less.

That's correct and yes I do believe it's an argument in my favor because we would be taking a lead as opposed to playing catch-up.  It has less to do with trusting the offense and more to do with not trusting the defense who have been absolutely HORRIBLE.  I'd rather put my offense on the field and give us a chance to take a lead than put my defense on the field and pretty much guarantee we will be playing from behind the first time my offense steps on the field.

If my defense is still gassed after 20 minutes in the locker room at half time or if my offense has problems with crowd noise just after halftime you got bigger problems than a coin flip is gonna fix.

Honestly I don't think it's a decision that is gonna win or lose you the game.  All I'm suggesting is that it wouldn't hurt to try to change things up a bit.  Sparano decided to bench Henne and put in Pennington in the hopes that it would give his offense "a spark".  In my opinion that was FAR more disruptive than choosing to receive instead of kickoff, but I guess since BB says it's the right thing to do than far be it for me to question it.

One correction: the problem is not the noise at the start of the 3rd.  It is the noise at the very start of the game. 

But many games are won or lost on the basis of wearing out an opposing teams defense.  Anything that give you a slight edge or hurts the other team is important.  Even wearing white as a home team in the September sun in So. Fla.  or having the home teams bench in the shade and the opposing teams in the sun. 

You seem to prefer to receive because you feel the Dolphins can't recover from an 0-7 deficit because it changes the dynamics of the game. 

If a 7 point deficit with 50 mins left on the game clock is an insurmountable obstacle, then you have significantly bigger problems than a coin flip is gonna fix.

Also one other thing he mentioned (I just remembered) is if you defer you almost always have the wind at your back for the 1st and 4th quarters.  Which can be better than 2nd and 3rd cause the 1st gets you off to a good start and the 4th can be when the game is won or lost.       

But not all edges are created equal.  I believe getting a lead in a game AND making the opponent play catch-up are more important than giving my defense a couple extra minutes of rest after they just had 20 minutes of rest and giving my offense the ball with a little less crowd noise.

By the way crowd noise is only an issue for your offense when you are playing away.  Miami is 5-1 this year when playing away.  Hasn't seemed to have hurt them too much this year, I think I'll risk it.

You are right not all edges are equal. 

No good or even mediocre NFL team has ever lost a game cause they panicked down by 7 points in the first quarter.  Maybe a couple of utterly crappy ones have.  Plenty of good, great or even elite teams have lost a game in the 4th because their defense was worn out and didn’t get enough rest during the game. 


Crowd noise is an issue both places. 

At home by deferring you force the other team to be on offense at the very start of the game, in which the crowd is at its craziest and loudest.  It also lets the home crowd start out loud setting a tone for the entire game.  Particularly if you make a 3 and out. And you deny the other teams offense the opportunity to play in the library like atmosphere of the start of the 3rd quarter. 

Away – the crowd must start the game quiet.  (the other team is on offense).  It is harder for them to now get them back into a frenzy, particularly if you made a big stop on defense.  A three and out can take the home field advantage away for all or most of the game. 

Very well.  We agree to disagree.

Perhaps you, BB and Sparano are right.  Miami HAS lost all 3 games in which they received the kick to start the game and are 6-3 in games in which they did not.  Personally I don't think that is what caused Miami to lose,  but maybe I'm underestimating the importance of deferring.  Perhaps it's this fact alone that cost us the game.  Once our coaches and players saw that we would have to receive they knew then and there, there was no way to win the game.  I sure hope we don't lose any more coin flips. :)

Here I was thinking that Thigpen looking like a deer in the headlights in Chicago, the special teams giving up 14 points to start the 2nd half against New England and Henne's 3 INT's, one that was returned to the 2 yard line allowing Cleveland to kneel down for 2 plays before kicking the game winning FG with no time left on the clock had something to do with it.  Silly me.

^^^ It is a small edge.  A very small one.  A good team should beat a weaker team regardless of who starts with the ball.  The kind of edge that might affect one game every few years league wide. But in a 16 game season a small edge that means you win one game you would have otherwise tied or tie one game you would have otherwise lost, can be the difference between the playoffs or not.

As for the Dolphins needing to win the remaining coin tosses.  The coin has a better chance at landing on its side than the Dolphins have of making the playoffs.

^^ Oh I'm not hoping that we don't lose a coin toss so that we'll have a chance at the playoffs, I just want to see Miami beat a couple of playoff teams in meaningless games so that their fans will quit being so cocky.  >:D

The logic 99.9% of NFL coaches use is you want your BEST unit on the field first. So if you win the toss, put your best unit on the field first. The Jets defense has been god awful this year. They aren't even good really. It's all hype and reputation off of last year when they were great.

I think it took Rex 3 months but he finally sees this now and while he won't admit his defense stinks, he will at least put his offense on the field first since the offense is a better unit than the defense.

99.9%?  You do realize with only 32 of them, each one represents more than 3%.  I have laid out BB's earlier and that is not his approach.  I suspect you are wrong regarding quite a few others and the majority of them use the Spider-Dan approach.  Namely, "what does the Patriots, Steelers, Colts or Saints do?  I am gonna do whatever they do"   

To clarify, that's not my approach.

I agree with Belichick's logic in this case and many others (including the 4th down vs. Indy last year) because he makes decisions based on grounded logic, and unlike most other coaches, he has no fear of making the mathematically sound choice without having to worry about what the mindless talking heads say afterward; his job is secure.

I don't agree with Belichick because he's winning; I agree with him because he's right, which usually leads to winning.

Jets won the coin toss.  Elected to receive.  Dolphins started on defense. 

Dolphins won. 

And the defense forced a punt!  First one of the year on the first drive!  A 3 and out even!!!  I nearly fainted.  I was worried when they ran the opening kickoff out to the 45 though. :)  I had the Dolphins losing 45-3 in the guess the score thread.  There's nothing I like better than being wrong sometimes. :)

So you think Rex's one game experiment is over?

Who the heck knows with that moron.  In his post game press conference he called out the defense and defended the teams offense and Sanchez.  The Dolphins threw for 5 completions.  The Jets defense recovered 3 fumbles. 

I don't know who you can blame the defense for that loss.   

And his reasoning for the switch was the same as MikeO's reasoning....have your best unit take the field first.  The Jets best unit is not the offense. Not by a long shot.