Maybe it's a mistake to defer

[Pappy13]

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.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

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.

[Pappy13]

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

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.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

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." 

[Dave Gray]

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.

[Pappy13]

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

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.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Sorry, but this reason ALONE is reason enough for me. 

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.   

[Pappy13]

Your offense has had a 100% fail rate.

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.

[Spider-Dan]

Depends on your definition of success/failure.  My definition of success is based on getting into scoring range, not necessarily scoring.

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

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.

...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.

[Pappy13]

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

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

...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.

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.

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

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.

, yet an offensive success if we get a big return and the offense does literally nothing, followed by a FG. That's simply absurd.

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.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

^^^ 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.   

[Spider-Dan]

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.

[Pappy13]

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.

[Pappy13]

^^^ 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.   

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.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

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.