NEVER Defer to 2nd half again

[rodell330]

This is dumb on McCarthys part. Just have to get the ball first and try to be up by 3 or 7 instead of sending Rodgers out there with all the pressure on him to immediately have to play catch up. This defense can't be trusted. Rodgers plays better when he has a lead because he can play more relaxed instead of pressing to play catch up. Inhope McMufgin has learned a lesson about deferring.

 

[Mondio]

Considering Rodgers is a fan of this as well, you're probably going to see it continue for a while.

 

[PackerDNA]

Me , I like getting the ball for the 2nd half. Ideally, if you can go on a long drive and score to end the 1st and start the 2nd, you're putting a lot of pressure on the opponent.

 

[PackAttack12]

As a general principle, I like the idea of receiving the 2nd half kickoff, as it gives you a chance to dictate possessions and scoring at the end of the 1st half if you manage the game correctly. But I must admit, prior to the Atlanta game I kept thinking please take the football now.

In a game against a team like the Falcons, I think it would make a difference. But against the likes of the next two opponents we will be facing, I have no problem with deferring to the 2nd half.

 

[rodell330]

Me , I like getting the ball for the 2nd half. Ideally, if you can go on a long drive and score to end the 1st and start the 2nd, you're putting a lot of pressure on the opponent.

Except for when you're trailing right away...like we usually are Haha.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Here's something I think they should do just to make teams weigh their options even more heavily. Give them the options of either receiving the ball first to start the game, or deciding to have it first if OT comes so that way there is no second coin toss in OT. How's that for one?

 

[Jerellh528]

I prefer to get the ball to start the game because it's guaranteed that you're getting that possession. If you defer and the opposing offense scores right before half then it's a complete waste because you're getting the ball to start the second half when you woulda gotten it anyways on the post score kickoff. Sure the potential is there to double up if you score before half but there are wayyyy too many variables and the other team can dictate too much of what goes on. Just elect to receive, take the guaranteed extra possession, try to score first to set the tone and put the other team in the hole. This is especially important for our team considering the strength is the offense, not the defense. I would really prefer to see them change to receive on opening drives. Actually I wouldn't mind seeing data if it makes a difference for us to receive or defer.

 

[Half Empty]

Here's something I think they should do just to make teams weigh their options even more heavily. Give them the options of either receiving the ball first to start the game, or deciding to have it first if OT comes so that way there is no second coin toss in OT. How's that for one?

Need the Capt to weigh in here, but what percentage of games see OT? Whatever the actual number, it'll be low enough so as not affect one's thought process.

 

[PackAttack12]

Another thing, specifically as it relates to Atlanta: If Atlanta gets the opening kickoff, you have to think they're going to put it in the endzone, just as they have in the past two meetings. That obviously puts Green Bay behind the 8 ball immediately and if for some reason Green Bay can't score a touchdown on its first drive, you immediately risk going down 10 or 14 to nothing.

But if we get the opening kick off and score, it immediately puts us in a position of comfort. If we don't, we give the ball to Atlanta in a 0-0 game and even if they turnaround and score, it's still only 7-0. We had a drive to figure out what the defense is trying to do, and by the 2nd drive we'll have a better idea of how to attack them.

I think all things considered, receiving the opening kickoff is the way to go, just with Atlanta. Especially with McCarthy's tendency to screw up the end of halves anyway.

 

[rmontro]

Another thing, specifically as it relates to Atlanta: If Atlanta gets the opening kickoff, you have to think they're going to put it in the endzone, just as they have in the past two meetings. That obviously puts Green Bay behind the 8 ball immediately and if for some reason Green Bay can't score a touchdown on its first drive, you immediately risk going down 10 or 14 to nothing.

I really like the idea of deferring. But against Atlanta, it might not be the best idea.
We want the ball and we're gonna score!

 

[Mondio]

Let's not forget the often used argument that MM gets too conservative with a lead LOL But that probably doesn't apply in this situation, well because it doesn't. and let's not forget that this now will give Atlanta a good shot at an extra possession and also the ball to begin the 2nd half. and let's not forget the also often used argument that Dom Capers and MM suck at in game adjustments, so you're practically just inviting Atlanta to double dip in scores to end the half and and a TD to start the 2nd because our defense will have adapted to nothing, which might just play back into the first point where MM plays too conservative with a lead and thus put more pressure on him this way and make our offense better? Brilliant young lad, Brilliant!

 

[swhitset]

Let's not forget the often used argument that MM gets too conservative with a lead LOL But that probably doesn't apply in this situation, well because it doesn't. and let's not forget that this now will give Atlanta a good shot at an extra possession and also the ball to begin the 2nd half. and let's not forget the also often used argument that Dom Capers and MM suck at in game adjustments, so you're practically just inviting Atlanta to double dip in scores to end the half and and a TD to start the 2nd because our defense will have adapted to nothing, which might just play back into the first point where MM plays too conservative with a lead and thus put more pressure on him this way and make our offense better? Brilliant young lad, Brilliant!

You had my brain twisted in logic circles lol.

 

[C-Lee]

They love getting the ball back to start the 2nd half, but when it comes to high-powered offenses like ATL, I agree they should set the tone first and try to get the early lead.

 

[Mondio]

You had my brain twisted in logic circles lol.

it always comes back to the beginning at the end or something

 

[Sky King]

McCarthy has been quoted in the past to have said, "We're nobody's underdog." Well, as a matter of fact they are. Whether it is a result of talent, injury or simply what circumstance the team finds themselves in when they meet any of their opponents, IMHO it would be wiser to formulate all those items into a kickoff strategy rather than to engage in a one-size-fits-all show of bravado.

Personally, I think against Atlanta it would have been better to receive the opening kickoff. They had a better chance to score first than to stop Atlanta first. Trying to break serve against a team that talented seems to be a better overall strategy than to risk the offense already having to play from behind the first time they touch the ball. We've all seen how successful the other option of trying to end the first half and start the second half on offense has worked out so far this season. Save that stop 'em first strategy for those teams having less-powerful offenses than the Packers. Otherwise, try scoring first.

Hopefully, McCarthy is not too proud or stubborn to reconsider how he exercises his opening kickoff options based upon the actual talent of their opponent rather than living by a cookie-cutter dogma.

 

[Mondio]

Ballsy and bravado would have been going into a situation where you're opening a brand new stadium in front of a wild crowd on the road against the NFC Champs in their own house and without both starting tackles, your top back up and using a C/G as your RT that hasn't played tackle in a couple years and your former PS RT making a start at LT and think that is going to quiet that crowd.

 

[Sky King]

Well, I never said anything about quieting the crowd if that comment was aimed my way. However, when the team plays well on both sides of the ball the crowd noise should take care of itself. That would have been the benefit of being on offense first and scoring. Cause and effect.

As it was the Packers scored on their first possession and they did so pretty much by playing methodical, ball control football. Also very importantly they chewed-up some clock. It's too bad that even at that early juncture for the offense it was also a matter of their having to play catch-up the first time they got their hands on the ball instead of it being the other way around. The D stunk-up the joint on that opening drive and put the offense in an early hole. If anything, that may have fired-up the crowd even more.

Even if the Packers had taken the opening kickoff but had failed to score, and even if the Falcons then scored on their first possession of the game, the Packers would have been down by only the same 7 points. Despite that it would have taken time off the clock - helpful if it were to become a shoot-out. It's difficult to deny that the tone had not immediately been set by the Falcons going through the Packer D like a hot knife through butter on their opening drive. That sure didn't help to take the crowd out of the game. To me, given a choice via the flip it would be better to open some games with the more reliable of the two: Offense. That's been proven season after season to be true. The D hovers near the bottom every season and its the exact opposite for the O. The McCarthy deferral method may be more successful if mostly used against weaker teams with poor offenses.

For the McCarthy deferral method to work out as hoped the Packers would need to make a stop on the opening drive, score on their first drive, score on the last drive to end the first half, and complete the scoring trifecta by also scoring on the first drive of the second half. Talk about long odds! This method is especially shaky since it would require the D to make a stop before the half combined with proper management of the clock, allowing the Packers enough time to score. So far this season: Flop and flop.

 

[OldSchool101]

I have zero statistical information to back this up, but it seems like in many cases Offenses can be a little more jittery that first drive. I do remember Brett Favre being terrible at overthrowing receivers for that first drive or two. I remember the one time he hit a receiver for a TD on the second play of the game in the SB... but that was such an anomaly being that early in a game for him. Maybe that's why he ran around crazy with his helmet off, because he couldn't believe it either!
It would be interesting to get a better perspective on why teams choose this option and what the strategy is there or if there is any statistical probability that goes into it.

 

[rmontro]

you're practically just inviting Atlanta to double dip in scores to end the half and and a TD to start the 2nd because our defense will have adapted to nothing

I think the strategy of deferring to the second half is a sound one, I like it. I'm just thinking we haven't had much success with Atlanta lately, so maybe it would be good to try something different. But you're right, it could just as easily blow up in our faces. But at least we wouldn't be doing the same old thing and expecting a different result.

I have zero statistical information to back this up, but it seems like in many cases Offenses can be a little more jittery that first drive.

It seems to me that good offenses tend to score a lot on their first drive. A lot of the time the coach has scripted the first however many plays, and the defense hasn't had a chance to adjust yet.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Just score when you have the ball and stop the other team when you don't. The coin flip evens out any "possionson advantage" of taking the ball first to start the game or to start the 2nd half. My guess with the Atlanta game, MM was fully confident in his defense and wanted to put them on the field first to hopefully quiet the Atlanta offense right out of the gate and maybe even more importantly, quiet the home team's fans who were fully pumped. I think I would be more apt to put my defense out there first on the road and the offense first at home. Unless, your defense sucks as bad as the Packers defense did in that game.

 

[rmontro]

My guess with the Atlanta game, MM was fully confident in his defense

It's very possible McCarthy was encouraged by their performance against Seattle and maybe expected to see more of that.

On the other hand, he's not the type to change what he likes to do. I haven't really kept track (heck I don't usually notice who won the coin toss), but my impression is McCarthy likes to defer. Are there cases in the recent past where he hasn't deferred?

 

[Mondio]

almost every team in the league is deferring to the 2nd half these days. It does just come down to scoring when you have the ball and not letting the other team when on defense. None of it matters if you don't execute during the game. but I'll say it again, I have zero issues doing it anywhere against any team when Rodgers is leading this offense. When all it takes is 30 seconds and no time outs for him to get us into FG range, the ability to use or not use TO's to give us that time and possibly gain an extra possession is worth it, even if it doesn't work out. Because sometimes it will and sometimes it won't.

 

[Jerellh528]

I like when we receive to start

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I like when we receive to start

I agree, said that last week. Take the ball....ram it down their throats and score. Great start to this game, glad the Bears won the toss!

 

[Poppa San]

I haven't really kept track (heck I don't usually notice who won the coin toss), but my impression is McCarthy likes to defer. Are there cases in the recent past where he hasn't deferred?

Stumbled on this nugget over the weekend from:

Here’s their game-by-game record (with their ongoing season coin-flip record) and their decision whether to receive or defer.
1-0 Seattle – Seahawks call tails. (HEADS). Packers defer.
2-0 Atlanta – Packers call tails. (TAILS). Packers defer.
3-0 Cincinnati – Bengals call tails (HEADS). Packers defer.
3-1 Cincinnati OT – Bengals call tails (TAILS).
3-2 Chicago – Bears call tails. (TAILS).
4-2 Dallas – Packers call tails. (TAILS). Packers defer.
4-3 Minnesota – Packers call tails. (HEADS).
4-4 New Orleans – Saints call tails. (TAILS).
5-4 Detroit – Lions call heads. (TAILS). Packers receive.
6-4 Chicago – Packers call tails. (TAILS). Packers defer.
6-5 Baltimore – Ravens call heads. (HEADS).
7-5 Pittsburgh – Packers call tails. (TAILS). Packers defer.
8-5 Tampa Bay – Buccaneers call tails. (HEADS). Packers defer.
9-5 Tampa Bay OT – Buccaneers call tail (HEADS). Packers receive.
9-6 Cleveland – Packers call tails. (HEADS).
9-7 Cleveland OT – Packers call tails. (HEADS)
9-8 Carolina – Packers call tails. (HEADS)
10-8 Minnesota – Vikings call heads. (TAILS). Packers receive.
11-8 Detroit – Packers calls tails. (TAILS). Packers defer."