@ the 2 min in the superbowl....score is 28 - 27

[Ring 6]

Before the Polian Rules, I would want to be on defense. After them, and especially after the Goddell 2 hand touch on recievers rules, you have to want the ball with the chance to have it last and score at 0:00 to win.

 

[BradyFTW!]

If it was 3 points, I'd strongly consider the D. If it's only a one point margin, give me the offense.

 

[lamafist]

I've always been under the impression that the offense has more of an advantage than usual in this situation. First of all, they have four downs to work with. That extra down makes it much easier to score. Second of all, the offense is able to play more aggressively, because they don't have to worry about what happens if they fail, because throwing an interception and turning the ball over on downs are one in the same at the point. Therefore, I'd have to imagine that the offense scores more often than usual. I don't have any actual data on it though, so I could be wrong.

You're not wrong. Brian Burke of AdvancedNFLStats.com wrote a great, chock-full-of-data article on this back in 2008.

The wildest detail from which is that in the NFL's recent history, a team that has the ball and is behind by a point has won more often than a team with a one point lead and the ball. Crazy, huh?

As it happens, during most of the game, NFL coaches employ overly-cautious sub-optimal strategy. They run too often (except in third/fourth and 2 to 3 situations, where they pass to often) and they punt waaaaay too often. Playing with a late lead only aggravates this tendency, while a late deficit prods coaches into playing more like they should be all game.

That said, in recent history, teams with a 1 point deficit and the ball on their own 30 at the 2 minute warning have still lost more often than they've won, by a margin of 57%-43%. So if you're talking about two generic teams, you'd have to take the narrow lead -- even in today's NFL.

But we're not talking about generic teams... we're talking about a team with a fantastic offense and an overall sub-par defense. There's pretty much no way that the Patriots' relative strengths and weaknesses don't more than make up that 7% differential in historical winning percentage. So I think, at this point in time, you'd have to take the ball in the OP's scenario.

 

[PatsGirl2011]

If the defense is on the field in order to win the game, I will freaking pass out from anxiety.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

From a comfortableness standpoint, I hate either option, but if I had to pick I'd take the ball. I think the average points per drive in the NFL is above 2.5, so it seems like an easy choice. I guess the only complication is if they score a field goal too quickly, and then the Giants have time and a 2 point deficit.

 

[patstd]

Being ahead suites me fine.

 

[Theplayer]

2 minutes at the 30 would leave Eli too much time..rather be down 1 with 1 minute

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

Offense, it's just too easy to pick up the needed yards in this case.