Wisdom of Deferring?

[SteelDragon]

We needed to get off to a quick start.  It's been talked about all of last week. NO SLOW STARTS!

We win the coin toss, and well..... we defer.  Maybe it wouldn't have mattered, but I was thinking at the time, deferring was a tactical blunder. If we put together a drive and score, we're playing from ahead.  Maybe panic mode doesn't set in.

I, for one, am so happy that we are done playing the NFC West.  That division is brutal and may be one of the best divisions, from top to bottom, ever in football.  Our schedule this year has been as tough as it gets.  It's no surprise that it's taking a toll on our team.  BRUTAL!

[Gramz]

I understand Deferring.    I prefer having first possession in the 2nd half.  

 

I also agree they need to play better in the first half.  That's a Definite.

[Derakynn]

People complain, but really. We know we can't do anything in the first half while we can in the second half. Does it really make sense to take a possession when you won't capitalize anyways?

[The Colts Walker]

Id rather this team have second half possession. We play better in the second half, so let's maximize our number of good possessions. I've always liked deferring anyways, the possibility of scoring just before the half and getting the ball back keeps me in the game when we are down 2-3 scores in the 2nd quarter! 

[#12]

Deferring makes sense if you have Baltimore's defense of old or a defense you can trust to get a stop on the opening possession.  We don't.  Running the jumbo formations and the power run game makes sense if you have San Francisco's O-line.  We don't.  Schematically, we're playing a style befitting a team we don't have. 

 

The deferring should stop.  This team desperately needs to get an early lead and put pressure on the opposing offense for once.  Currently, every opposing offense gets an early lead and enjoys a 60 minute comfort zone.  There is no pressure.  By building a lead, the offense can make it easier on the defense.  That's what Manning did.  That's what Arians tried to do.  He never deferred. 

[Devildog]

Bottom line is they need to play better football regardless which half. Not the first half or the second half but both. The Colts need to play a good solid 60 minutes.

[Jason_]

I understand Deferring.    I prefer having first possession in the 2nd half.  

 

I also agree they need to play better in the first half.  That's a Definite.

 

I agree...I've always preferred to defer so that we'll have the first possession in the 2nd half.

[James Harden]

I rather have the ball first in game. If i can score first, it put pressure on the team to make a score. Then when our defense comes out and put a stop to their offense going 3 and out. It just demoralize the enemy.

[Thewholefnshow28]

I rather have the ball first in game. If i can score first, it put pressure on the team to make a score. Then when our defense comes out and put a stop to their offense going 3 and out. It just demoralize the enemy.

 

But on the other hand it gives the enemy the ability to score before half, get the ball and score again to start of the second half.  That demoralizes the enemy just as much. If you can punch it in for a TD before the half and then again at the start of the second you just posted 14 unanswered points on the board.

 

I understand why Pagano does it and if our defense actually came to play it would work out, but sadly our defense has not showed up since the Broncos game.

 

Honestly, given our putrid offense in the first half it is better to kickoff at the start of the game.

[Coltswarriors]

Getting off to a quick start isn't just about the offense. The defense has been getting off to slow starts as well.

 

If we would have caused a turnover the first drive or a 3 & out, that would be considered a quick start.

 

I don't have a problem with deferring.

[MarylandTerrapin]

When your team is executing, deferring is like getting a free turnover.  Run your 4 minute or 2 minute offense...score at the end of the half, then score on the 1st possession of the second half.  Of course, you still need to execute for it to work.

[Brent71]

Deferring was unheard of fifteen years ago. It was automatic the team that won the toss was receiving the kick.

[sfergson727]

If you remember long, long ago....(last year)  We (Arians or Luck made it, I don't remember which) made the statement that we want the ball, and would prefer not to defer.  In fact, that statement was made, making jest of teams that defer.  What a difference a year makes.

[basketballsteve]

This coaching staff has a lot of rigid ideas (I'd call them hang-ups). If we are playing the 32nd ranked run offense this staff is still gonna say the game plan is to "stop the run". If we're playing the 32nd ranked pass defense this staff will still say first we gotta "establish the running game". I think they defer because they think (fill in the blank) is always the right thing to do. I would say that when Walsh and the 49ers were at the top of their run that staff became famous for taking the ball first and for already having scripted the first 10-15 plays. The 49ers had so much success doing that that teams began to emulate and try to script their first drive too. I think that in some cases if you've studied film, devised a good game plan and found plays that you think might work do it at the opening gun cause game conditions (injuries/turn overs/etc.) might limited you later in a game. I would usually take the ball but nothing is right all the time and if I thought I could run something that would absolutely work on defense (exotic blitz maybe) and was anxious to try it then maybe I would defer. 

[Stephen]

Defferring is always better. If you are last one to have ball at end of first half and get it at start of second that coukd be a 14point swing.

[Bluefire4]

I like deferring because I think an early stop by the D can be a confidence booster.. but this defense is always letting up touchdowns.

[Brent71]

If you are last one to have ball at end of first half and get it at start of second that coukd be a 14point swing.

This just in ! The earth is round.

[Knuckles79]

I have always rather have ball first in the second half . If it falls right you can put 14 on the board without the other team even getting a chance to touch the bal

[Knuckles79]

I have always rather have ball first in the second half . If it falls right you can put 14 on the board without the other team even getting a chance to touch the bal

[Knuckles79]

I have always rather have ball first in the second half . If it falls right you can put 14 on the board without the other team even getting a chance to touch the bal

[21isSuperman]

I personally prefer to defer.  I think it gives you more control.  Say you have the ball with 7:00 left in the 2nd quarter.  You will be able to rest your defense, and ideally use a time control offense to score points and not leave the other team with much time.  Then, you get the ball again to receive in the 2nd half, so you make your halftime adjustments, your defense is able to rest more so they aren't gassed (and hopefully don't get rusty), and unleash your offense with its adjustments on the defense.  That's a potential 14 points with the other team not even touching the ball.  Furthermore, the more you hold on to the ball, the more the other team's offense has to sit and wait.  A lot of offenses work based on timing; if you make them sit, they are more likely to get rusty (in my opinion).

[Lucky Charm]

Deferring when winning the toss at away games makes a lot of sense. You have a home crowd very hyped up and loud but you're forcing them to be quiet when the offense is on the field first. Takes the steam out of the home crowd.

 

Deferring at home games also makes sense when winning the toss. Loud home crowd for the opposing offense on the field.

[esmort]

In addition to the double possession/scoring opportunity, I believe deferring also allows you to have more control of momentum.  If you have momentum going into halftime you get a chance to keep it going in second half.  If you have lost momentum during the 1st half getting the ball to start off allows you a chance to swing the momentum back your direction.

[coltsfanatic24]

The problem with this team is that were playing the wrong players. It doesn't matter if we defer or not if the players on the field can't produce.

 

Observations:

 

1.We have 2 of the worst o-lineman in the league in Satele and Mcglynn. Holmes was drafted in the 4th, let him play and Link is a better guard then Mcglynn. Until we bench Satele and Mcglynn this offense will not be good.

 

2. DHB has been what the Raiders fans have been saying since we signed him...a bust. Rogers can't be any worse and could possibly be a good player if he can actually get on the field. Also Whalen should be the starting slot WR.

 

3. Bethea....loss for words.

 

4. Were 27th ranked in run defense but yet our best run defending ILB in Conner is on the bench. Idk if anyone on this forum thinks Angerer is a better player then Conner but the coaches somehow do. I simply don't understand why Kavell Conner isn't starting over Angerer.

 

 

Everything else that's wrong with the team can be fixed but we need the best players on the field but right now the back ups are on the field.