Electing to receive?
-
When down 14-3 there was offensive life and then the drop/turnover ruined any chance and killed momentum as it was returned about 50 yards. The team was done after potentially being 14-6 to 21-3.
I’m just saying maybe the defense should get the opportunity to get the game started on the right foot instead. Much better than falling in a hole and then having to kick to start the second half.
-
I'm fine with it. This team (Baker) plays much better with a lead. I hate to say it, but this team needs to be run heavy for a spell. Baker looked like he was about to cry late in the 4th.
“It is impossible to get a man to understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding.” -
-
Feel like this is problem #19 of our offense.
If you call a decent a play, QB makes a decision with the Ball, we block and the WRs catch. We get praised for striking first and quickly and putting a run based team in an early hole.
i actually get it but execute something
weve had back to back to back games against teams that can be lethal with a lead and probably play much better from in front
-
There's a reason the best coaches in the league defer. There's much more to be had from building momentum right before half and into the 3rd quarter, as opposed to the early momentum of a game This is validated by stats which indicate teams that defer win approximately 62% of the time, on average.
https://www.si.com/2016/01/14/nfl-coin-toss-deferral-patriots-bill-belichick
Equally as important, our team is not an elite offensive unit, right now anyway. To put the pressure on the struggling side of the ball to go out there is just a stupid, stupid decision by Freddie that isn't supported by data or by the elite HC's of the NFL. As I've noted now in both game threads, it's an objectively wrong decision.
-
I liked it - except I suppose, that giving your offense better field position than the usual non-return, would be a good thing, if they stop them...
not worried about that decision.
-
I'm fine with it. This team (Baker) plays much better with a lead. I hate to say it, but this team needs to be run heavy for a spell. Baker looked like he was about to cry late in the 4th.
I'm fine with it. This team (Baker) plays much better with a lead. I hate to say it, but this team needs to be run heavy for a spell. Baker looked like he was about to cry late in the 4th.
The score starts 0-0 and and then this offense comes out with a risky trick play. That’s not legitimate offense, it’s a gimmick. The offense does not have an identity yet.
Like I said, if this offense was firing on all cylinders. Sure; why the hell not try and drive down the field opening drive and get points.
But until the offense is clearly established...defer till second half, Coach!
-
There's a reason the best coaches in the league defer. There's much more to be had from building momentum right before half and into the 3rd quarter, as opposed to the early momentum of a game This is validated by stats which indicate teams that defer win approximately 62% of the time, on average.
https://www.si.com/2016/01/14/nfl-coin-toss-deferral-patriots-bill-belichick
Equally as important, our team is not an elite offensive unit, right now anyway. To put the pressure on the struggling side of the ball to go out there is just a stupid, stupid decision by Freddie that isn't supported by data or by the elite HC's of the NFL. As I've noted now in both game threads, it's an objectively wrong decision.
There's a reason the best coaches in the league defer. There's much more to be had from building momentum right before half and into the 3rd quarter, as opposed to the early momentum of a game This is validated by stats which indicate teams that defer win approximately 62% of the time, on average.
Same reason the worst, and the other 38% do...
The decision you make should put your best unit on the field first. All the nonsense about setting up two possessions in a row at end of the 1st half and start of the 2nd, is wishful thinking.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
It wasn't that many years ago that EVERY team took the opening kickoff when they won the toss - then Bill the genius changed all of that. Taking the ball first was not the reason the Browns lost......... they lost because the 9ers are a much better team.
It wasn't that many years ago that EVERY team took the opening kickoff when they won the toss - then Bill the genius changed all of that. Taking the ball first was not the reason the Browns lost......... they lost because the 9ers are a much better team.
Just one more example of why it’s called a “copycat” league
-
There's a reason the best coaches in the league defer. There's much more to be had from building momentum right before half and into the 3rd quarter, as opposed to the early momentum of a game This is validated by stats which indicate teams that defer win approximately 62% of the time, on average.
Same reason the worst, and the other 38% do...
The decision you make should put your best unit on the field first. All the nonsense about setting up two possessions in a row at end of the 1st half and start of the 2nd, is wishful thinking.
Same reason the worst, and the other 38% do...
The decision you make should put your best unit on the field first. All the nonsense about setting up two possessions in a row at end of the 1st half and start of the 2nd, is wishful thinking.
Agreed. I prefer kicking first so you get the ball on 3rd quater, not necessarily because you can get two possessions in a row, but because it's where the game really is at stake. Moreover, I would only elect to receive if it were the 99 Rams or a once in a lifetime offense that will give you a lead that you can work from.
In our case, I think we've been able to stop most of the first drives of the other teams (apart from SF, I don't remember any first drive TD). And our defense is way better than our offense as of today, so let the best unit start the battle.
It could also work in favor of Mayfield not being the first one in the spotlight right when the game begins.
-
Even if the offense was playing up to its potential. Why?
Even if the offense was playing up to its potential. Why?
Why not? To me it is six of one, half a dozen of the other.
-
There's a reason the best coaches in the league defer. There's much more to be had from building momentum right before half and into the 3rd quarter, as opposed to the early momentum of a game This is validated by stats which indicate teams that defer win approximately 62% of the time, on average.
Same reason the worst, and the other 38% do...
The decision you make should put your best unit on the field first. All the nonsense about setting up two possessions in a row at end of the 1st half and start of the 2nd, is wishful thinking.
Same reason the worst, and the other 38% do...
The decision you make should put your best unit on the field first. All the nonsense about setting up two possessions in a row at end of the 1st half and start of the 2nd, is wishful thinking.
Eh, agree to disagree with you on that one. I can't think of a game where a team doesn't have a strong chance to build momentum going into 1/2 time. Obviously execution comes into play, but that doesn't have to mean getting the last possession before half and kicking a FG as time expires. Games are much more won or lost after halftime than on the first possession (our MNF debacle aside).
-
My friend always complains when a team doesn’t take the ball when they win the toss. Claims he has some math that proves you average more possessions when you take the ball at the beginning of the game. He’s kind of a drunk, so I never checked his math, but at one point in his life he was pretty damn smart, so he may be correct.
My friend........ Claims he has some math that proves
1) If you elect to receive: you could - start with the ball and end the half with the ball. Then end the game with the ball. That's.....umm....three
2) If you elect to defer: you could - end the half with the ball. Then start and end the second have with the ball. That's....three
* you may substitute 'meaningful possessions' with the term 'the ball'.
----------------
If you receive, and you go 3 and out because they're doing something on D that you didn't expect....
If you defer, then you've seen their plan and can perhaps make a meaningful adjustment to give you a better chance at not going 3 and out.
BEING A BROWNS FAN IS A TEST TO SEE HOW MUCH YOU CAN TAKE -
I always thought it was because teams wanted their Offense on the field after 1st half adjustments.
-
We played two run based teams (arguably three until The Rams forgot about Gurley) in a row.
i actually see exactly what Freddie Dining Room wanted to do by getting the ball - scoring - and putting a run based team in an early hole. Now he just needs to work on the going down the field and scoring part.
Way too many other things to worry about than electing to receive.
-
“The central reason most coaches have given for deferring comes down to the chance to pair a score at the end of the first half with one at the start of the second. It’s the only opportunity a team has for two straight possessions and can be a chance to instantly put the game out of reach.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.si.com/2016/01/14/nfl-coin-toss-deferral-patriots-bill-belichick
-
My friend........ Claims he has some math that proves
1) If you elect to receive: you could - start with the ball and end the half with the ball. Then end the game with the ball. That's.....umm....three
2) If you elect to defer: you could - end the half with the ball. Then start and end the second have with the ball. That's....three
* you may substitute 'meaningful possessions' with the term 'the ball'.
----------------
If you receive, and you go 3 and out because they're doing something on D that you didn't expect....
If you defer, then you've seen their plan and can perhaps make a meaningful adjustment to give you a better chance at not going 3 and out.
1) If you elect to receive: you could - start with the ball and end the half with the ball. Then end the game with the ball. That's.....umm....three
2) If you elect to defer: you could - end the half with the ball. Then start and end the second have with the ball. That's....three
* you may substitute 'meaningful possessions' with the term 'the ball'.
----------------
If you receive, and you go 3 and out because they're doing something on D that you didn't expect....
If you defer, then you've seen their plan and can perhaps can make a meaningful adjustment to give you a better chance at not going 3 and out.
Ya.... I wasn’t talking about counting on your finger type math.... was statistical stuff.... but ok.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login