Would Chicago Choose to Kick if they Win the Coin Toss?

[Water Boy]

I am looking over the endless number of Super Bowl proposition bets. One bet is "team who will receive the opening kickoff."

I would assume that if the Colts win the coin toss that they will elect to receive to put their best unit on the field to set the tone and to try to gain an early lead. As we've all been told, their defense has been built to play with a lead.

Chicago's best unit is probably their defense. We saw the type of momentum swings that occurred in the NE vs SD and NE vs IND games when NE and IND scored to end the half and scored on the openning drive of the second half. I think it is safe to say the Indy is a more dangerous team in the second half once they find the match ups that they can exploit in their Lightning "no huddle" offense. From this standpoint, it would probably make sense for Chicago to give Indy the extra possession in the first half.

Alternatively, Chicago may elect to receive to try to set the tone early with a big return by Hester.

If you were Chicago, would you defer if you won the coin toss? Do you think they will?

From a betting standpoint, knowing which team will have the first possession increases the odds on many of the "first team/player to..." bets.

 

[VJCPatriot]

If I had Chicago's D I would elect to receive so I could start the second half off with the ball. Sooner or later you've got to stop the Colts O to win the game. Might as well try it when you have FRESH legs under your D. Plus a quick turnover would quickly set the tone of the game. Just my opinion.

 

[PatsMyBoyz!]

I am looking over the endless number of Super Bowl proposition bets. One bet is "team who will receive the opening kickoff."

I would assume that if the Colts win the coin toss that they will elect to receive to put their best unit on the field to set the tone and to try to gain an early lead. As we've all been told, their defense has been built to play with a lead.

Chicago's best unit is probably their defense. We saw the type of momentum swings that occurred in the NE vs SD and NE vs IND games when NE and IND scored to end the half and scored on the openning drive of the second half. I think it is safe to say the Indy is a more dangerous team in the second half once they find the match ups that they can exploit in their Lightning "no huddle" offense. From this standpoint, it would probably make sense for Chicago to give Indy the extra possession in the first half.

Alternatively, Chicago may elect to receive to try to set the tone early with a big return by Hester.

If you were Chicago, would you defer if you won the coin toss? Do you think they will?

From a betting standpoint, knowing which team will have the first possession increases the odds on many of the "first team/player to..." bets.

Hester's one of their best weapons-that guy is phenomenal. Manning's capable of staying on the field way too long as it is.

 

[patchick]

IMO, the advantage of getting the ball first is pretty much illusory. The team that lost the coin toss has won the game in 8 of the past 10 Superbowls. In fact, I think I'd rather come charging out of the gate with the ball in the second half rather than receive it with start-of-the game jitters. So yes, if I'm Chicago I probably kick.

 

[The Sarge]

You also have a third choice. You can choose which goal to defend. In the CFL you can also defer your choice to the second half {this can be a good move if the game is played during high winds}

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

As I was informed on this board not too long ago, NFL rules about the coin toss are different from high school, college, or canada.

The loser of the coin toss gets the first choice in the second half. There is no "defering." So, if you win the toss, and do not take the ball to start the game, the other team can take it to start the second half too. Basically, unless weather makes one side dramatically better than the other, if you win the toss, you have to take the ball, or else your opponent will start both halves with the ball.

It's interesting that the vegas proposition is now which team will get the ball. In years pass, you could actually bet on the coin toss -- heads or tails, but I guess there was some confusion because it wasn't always clear on tv. Then the proposition was "which team will win the toss," but the NFL I guess hated that because they thought it could lead to conspiracy theories about refs deliberately affecting the toss. I suppose "which team starts with the ball" is objective and not subject to debate, so a good prop.

 

[Water Boy]

As I was informed on this board not too long ago, NFL rules about the coin toss are different from high school, college, or canada.

The loser of the coin toss gets the first choice in the second half. There is no "defering." So, if you win the toss, and do not take the ball to start the game, the other team can take it to start the second half too. Basically, unless weather makes one side dramatically better than the other, if you win the toss, you have to take the ball, or else your opponent will start both halves with the ball.

Thanks for enlightening me. From NFL.com:

"Coin Toss
1. The toss of coin will take place within three minutes of kickoff in center of field. The toss will be called by the visiting captain before the coin is flipped. The winner may choose one of two privileges and the loser gets the other:

(a) Receive or kick

(b) Goal his team will defend

2. Immediately prior to the start of the second half, the captains of both teams must inform the officials of their respective choices. The loser of the original coin toss gets first choice."

It's interesting that the vegas proposition is now which team will get the ball. In years pass, you could actually bet on the coin toss -- heads or tails, but I guess there was some confusion because it wasn't always clear on tv. Then the proposition was "which team will win the toss," but the NFL I guess hated that because they thought it could lead to conspiracy theories about refs deliberately affecting the toss. I suppose "which team starts with the ball" is objective and not subject to debate, so a good prop.

You can still bet on heads or tails as well as which team willl win the toss.

 

[JediMind]

As I was informed on this board not too long ago, NFL rules about the coin toss are different from high school, college, or canada.

The loser of the coin toss gets the first choice in the second half. There is no "defering." So, if you win the toss, and do not take the ball to start the game, the other team can take it to start the second half too. Basically, unless weather makes one side dramatically better than the other, if you win the toss, you have to take the ball, or else your opponent will start both halves with the ball.

It's interesting that the vegas proposition is now which team will get the ball. In years pass, you could actually bet on the coin toss -- heads or tails, but I guess there was some confusion because it wasn't always clear on tv. Then the proposition was "which team will win the toss," but the NFL I guess hated that because they thought it could lead to conspiracy theories about refs deliberately affecting the toss. I suppose "which team starts with the ball" is objective and not subject to debate, so a good prop.

This is not true. If the team that wins the coin toss picks a goal to defend, then the losers of the toss could get the ball to begin both halves. But if the winners of the toss elect to kick the loser of the toss still only gets to pick the goal to defend for the beginning of the second half.

 

[frankiesfly]

If i was the bears i would want to recieve. If the Colts start with the ball and easily march down field the early momentum will be on there side. If the Bears score on there opening drive i think they have a good chance to win.

 

[Aldogg]

I say take the ball if I am the Bears. Seeing what the Colts special teams did last week in the return game, and seeing how Hester is a better returner than anybody we have, I say give him a chance to fire the first shot of the game. Even with a good return, you can get the ball at midfield and have Benson and Jones to run it or hope to catch Sanders running into the box and throw is to Muhammed or Berrian.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

as a coach with a good defense, here's why you kick it ....

With opening game nerves, the offense will probably make a mistake. Plus, it will take a drive or two for the Colts to find out what the Bears strategy will be. If the Bears can make the Colts go 3-and-out, Hester will come out to PR. The Colts will probably pooch kick it away and do a terrible punt. Rex throws a long-bomb and if you get lucky with a pass-interference, 1st-and-goal. Line it up and run it in.

 

[pheenix11]

I don't care what game or what team you have, if I were a football coach I would choose to kick to start every game. Why?

Because I want the ball to start the second half. After both teams have seen each other for an entire half, I want the first crack at trying out my halftime adjustments and scoring first in the second half.

Often the last drive of the first half and the first drive of the second half are the most pivotal drives of the game.

Momentum wise, the first drive of a game doesn't last long even if you score. But if you score to start the second half you can often put the game away right there and start a downward spiral for the other team that they will not have enough time to recover from.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

This is not true. If the team that wins the coin toss picks a goal to defend, then the losers of the toss could get the ball to begin both halves. But if the winners of the toss elect to kick the loser of the toss still only gets to pick the goal to defend for the beginning of the second half.

Nope. The poster in post 7 above quotes the official NFL rule. The loser of the toss gets to pick whatever it wants to start the second half, including to receive, no matter what the winner of the toss picked for the first half.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

I don't care what game or what team you have, if I were a football coach I would choose to kick to start every game. Why?

Because I want the ball to start the second half. After both teams have seen each other for an entire half, I want the first crack at trying out my halftime adjustments and scoring first in the second half.

Often the last drive of the first half and the first drive of the second half are the most pivotal drives of the game.

Momentum wise, the first drive of a game doesn't last long even if you score. But if you score to start the second half you can often put the game away right there and start a downward spiral for the other team that they will not have enough time to recover from.

I agree with you, especially when you are a defensive team. You shouldn't be afraid to put your defense on the field first.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

I don't care what game or what team you have, if I were a football coach I would choose to kick to start every game. Why?

Because I want the ball to start the second half. After both teams have seen each other for an entire half, I want the first crack at trying out my halftime adjustments and scoring first in the second half.

I mean, you guys are great, but is it my imagination or is there a serious reading comprehension issue going on in this thread? Everyone is assuming the rule is something it is not.

If you win the toss and elect to kick, the other team can elect to receive to start the second half.

Really. See post 7. It quotes the rule.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

I mean, you guys are great, but is it my imagination or is there a serious reading comprehension issue going on in this thread? Everyone is assuming the rule is something it is not.

If you win the toss and elect to kick, the other team can elect to receive to start the second half.

Really. See post 7. It quotes the rule.

I still think you put your defense on 1st if you are the Bears.

And besides the real key is losing the "toss"

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

I still think you put your defense on 1st if you are the Bears.

And besides the real key is losing the "toss"

You'd really give the colts the ball to start both halves? Another team, maybe, but not them. I think you're right that if you're the Bears, you don't mind losing the toss, but if I won it, I would take the ball.

 

[PATRIOTS-80]

You'd really give the colts the ball to start both halves? Another team, maybe, but not them. I think you're right that if you're the Bears, you don't mind losing the toss, but if I won it, I would take the ball.

The whole key to this game for the Bears is field-position and defense. If they cannot win in those 2 categories, I don't think it really matters.

If there are 15-20 MPH winds, with gusts to 28, the wind might be even more important than who wins the toss. Give your kicker the advantage in the 4th, and make Adam kick into the wind.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

The whole key to this game for the Bears is field-position and defense. If they cannot win in those 2 categories, I don't think it really matters.

If there are 15-20 MPH winds, with gusts to 28, the wind might be even more important than who wins the toss. Give your kicker the advantage in the 4th, and make Adam kick into the wind.

I agree with all those things. But I think you also need to keep in mind the bad scenarios -- that is, imagine the colts score on their opening drive and the clock then works out to give them last possession of the first half and first possession of the last half. The superbowl is a long long game -- 4 hours, with a massive halftime. By the end of the game, that kind of extended defense can really be spent.

 

[dhamz]

No way. There is no upside to it.

The wind argument is not a big deal. You are going to get it 2 of the 4 quarters, which 2 is not worth giving up the ball.

All you do by choosing to kick is potentially give the Colts two extra possessions in the game - say there are 9 possession each half, the Colts would have the ball 10 times in the game, the Bears 8.

As we saw at the end of the first half/start of second half during the AFC title game, playing that offense 2 consecutive possessions is hazardous to your defenses health. It was a terrible break for the Pats that the game worked out that way. For the Bears to conciously set up that possibility is insane.