(03-29-2021 08:55 AM)TDenverFan Wrote: (03-29-2021 08:33 AM)Zorch Wrote: (03-29-2021 08:28 AM)TDenverFan Wrote: I'm pretty sure just about every team that wins the coin toss chooses to defer. This seems like a weird thing to care about so much
Oldsters like myself can remember when every (99.9%) winning coin toss resulted in receiving the ball. Then about, what, 10 years ago suddenly everyone was deferring. The only explanation I ever heard was the one I wrote in my first post above -- which, logically, doesn't cut it for me. I actually think that it is just herd mentality and every coach does what every other coach does. Interesting that no one has posted with a good reason for doing it.
That's because the NFL used to only allow teams to kick or receive. The loser of the toss then got to choose to kick/receive to start the second half. So, if Team A wins the toss and chose to kick, team B would get to make the decision to kick/receive in the second half, basically giving team B an extra possession. This rule was changed in 2008, and from then on teams have generally chose to defer.
https://www.waldrn.com/how-the-nfls-2008...-strategy/
Since the rule change, teams that defer win 52% of their games, and teams that won the coin toss and chose to receive win 50.8% of their games.
Then number crunching shows that teams that receive in the first half average about .6 extra points in that half, while the team that receives in the second half score about 1.6 extra points. You also get about a 12% chance of 'stealing' a possession by deferring.
https://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/an...-or-defer/
Ultimately, the numbers show a slight edge to deferring in the first half/receiving in the second half, but nothing monumental.
Good info, thanks! My immediate observation is that all that data is from NFL games. There is far, far more parity in the NFL than in college football. Intangibles can make a bigger difference in college ball in trying to offset a disparity in skill levels. For example (quoted from the second link): "Even though the initial analysis points to a larger advantage for teams who receive the second half kickoff, an argument can be made that teams should want to receive the opening kickoff for a chance to jump out to an early lead. Playing with an early lead allows for an offense to stay balanced and not worry about pressing to get back into the game.". That is a major part of why I favor receiving the ball first. I think it is even more important if you are the home team -- get your crowd into it right away, put the opponent on the defensive (literally) right away. I also thought that this (from the second link) was very interesting:
"In fact, in both the first and second halves, the team that gets the ball second is more likely to score on their first possession
Score% and TD% on the 1st and 2nd Drive of Each Half
HALF DRIVE SCORE% TD%
1 1st 40% 26%
1 2nd 42% 27%
2 1st 38% 24%
2 2nd 41% 25%"
Lastly, the first link seemed to support my contention of the coaching herd mentality:
"But yet another possibility is that coin toss strategy doesn't really matter. It doesn't have a significant impact on scoring or who wins the game. Coaches initially favored receiving the opening kickoff after the rule change because that was called "winning" the coin toss in the past, and "winning" is a good word. Then they noticed that Bill Belichick was doing something different and was still winning games and was also being called "clever", so they wanted to be more like him."
So, there is data that shows that there could be a 1 point difference in deferring (+.6 - 1.6)
in the NFL. There are intangibles in college games that could increase or offset that. The factors of playing at home, wanting to score first, wind conditions, or being a large underdog could all play in. At least three of those factors were at play last Saturday against JMU.