We knew it was going to be a field position game. Why not kick off the first half and try to make it that type of game from the get go? I know they deferred but who cares? Let's play to our strength, which is defense. We started with our backs to the wall and never got it going because we were handicapped by field position and a porous offensive line the entire first half.
Should have kicked off
- Thread starter ua9899
- Start date
Did Auburn win the toss? If Auburn won the toss and deffered, we didn't have a choice. But I doubt it would have been the difference in the game either way.
By winning the toss Auburn deferred to the 2nd half... Which means, they get the choice in the 2nd half. This means UA gets the choice in the first half. So we could have kicked off if we electe to. I would like to have had our defense on the field first as well. I am sure in retrospect that Shula would have preferred to kickoff... .
Yes, Auburn won the toss and deferred. But that means they deferred their choice until the second half, and we got our choice in the first half. We could have kicked off if we had wanted to. Simple logic tells you that rather than give the other team more possessions, however, that you take the ball in that situation so that they don't start both halves with the football. Defer does not mean 'kick'. It means we will save our choice until the second half.
Ummm... How did you come up with that? If Auburn wins the toss and defers, that means they want the ball first in the 2nd half and they kick off to us in the first half. The only thing we get to choose if we lose the toss is which end zone we want to defend. It has never worked the way you stated. Just wanted to clear that up. 
BayouBama75 said:
rolltidega,
You're wrong. Here's how it works: there is a coin toss. The visiting team calls the toss. Whoever wins the toss has a choice: They can choose to A)Kick or receiver or B) Defer their choice until the second half. If they choose to defer their choice, the team who lost the toss is presented with choice A to begin the game. Logic tells you that because the other team is going to want the ball to start the second half, you should take it now as to not give them extra possessions. However, you still have a choice and could kickoff to start the game.
In short, Auburn winning the toss and deferring to the second half does not equal Auburn saying they want the ball to start the second half. It means they defer their choice (of whether to kick or receive) until the second half, while Alabama (in this case) has to make that choice now. That is why the captains meet at midfield before the start of the second half. Before each half there is a decision made whether to kick or receive, and the other team gets to decide which side of the field they want to begin that half.
You're wrong. Here's how it works: there is a coin toss. The visiting team calls the toss. Whoever wins the toss has a choice: They can choose to A)Kick or receiver or B) Defer their choice until the second half. If they choose to defer their choice, the team who lost the toss is presented with choice A to begin the game. Logic tells you that because the other team is going to want the ball to start the second half, you should take it now as to not give them extra possessions. However, you still have a choice and could kickoff to start the game.
In short, Auburn winning the toss and deferring to the second half does not equal Auburn saying they want the ball to start the second half. It means they defer their choice (of whether to kick or receive) until the second half, while Alabama (in this case) has to make that choice now. That is why the captains meet at midfield before the start of the second half. Before each half there is a decision made whether to kick or receive, and the other team gets to decide which side of the field they want to begin that half.
Last edited:
I must say that I had never thought of doing this before, but the original poster actually brings up a good point. That said, i would imagine every head coach is thinking about the possibility of a good return and at least winning the early field position battle, if not scoring first.
Bayou is correct, rolltidega. If you listened to the toss on the radio, I doubt that TV showed it, then when Auburn won the toss the ref asked them what they wanted to do; their captain said they would "defer". The ref then turned to the Bama captains and asked them what they would like to do; Brodie,acting as spokesman said " we want to recieve." The reason why you never see someone choose to kick is for the reasons previously stated, you give the opposition an extra possesion. If Auburn wanted to take their choice to start the game, then Bama could choose what they wanted to do to start the second half. When you win the toss you can use your pick to choose to start the game or you can defer your choice to the second half. If you lose the toss you will still be able to choose to kick or receive, you just can't choose which half you will have the choice.rolltidega said:Ummm... How did you come up with that? If Auburn wins the toss and defers, that means they want the ball first in the 2nd half and they kick off to us in the first half. The only thing we get to choose if we lose the toss is which end zone we want to defend. It has never worked the way you stated. Just wanted to clear that up.
I hope this rambling makes sense.
one things for sure, it would have broken common thought pattern. We could have kicked off, held them on a 3 and out, got the ball at our forty, had Brodie drop back to pass, NO, its a draw, Darby to the 50, 40, 30, 25, 15, 10 5,4,3,2,1 TOUCHDOWN ALABAMA!
Damn, got to stop doing this to myself.
Damn, got to stop doing this to myself.
Last edited:
has anyone in the history of football chosen to kick after losing the toss...on purpose that is? what would we all be saying had we elected to kick and AU drove the length of the field or had a good return and put them selves in good field position?...people would be blowing smoke out of thier ears demanding heads roll for giving AU the ball to start both halves.
Alright, so we got the "deferred" confusion cleared up. We still would have lost if we kicked off to start the game.
Yep, we got hammered because we elected to receive the ball first. Makes sense to me now. Thanks for pointing that out to me. rtr
"Yep, we got hammered because we elected to receive the ball first. Makes sense to me now. Thanks for pointing that out to me. "
Noone said that is the reason we got beat, but it make sense to try to play field position from the start. The obvious reason was the 11 sacks they had. Did you honestly think that we would be able to block their front consistently? It definitely makes it easier to protect when your not on your own fifteen yard line. If we kickoff first, the crowd doesn't get into it as quickly because they are going to be quiet for their offense. Also, if we stop and get the ball back it now turns into the type of game we need to win. But, obviously the way of thinking on Saturday worked. Whatever. RTR.
Noone said that is the reason we got beat, but it make sense to try to play field position from the start. The obvious reason was the 11 sacks they had. Did you honestly think that we would be able to block their front consistently? It definitely makes it easier to protect when your not on your own fifteen yard line. If we kickoff first, the crowd doesn't get into it as quickly because they are going to be quiet for their offense. Also, if we stop and get the ball back it now turns into the type of game we need to win. But, obviously the way of thinking on Saturday worked. Whatever. RTR.
I can remember some games a while back where there was a strong wind and bad weather where the team that won the toss elected to defend a certain goal (with the wind a their back). That was when the offenses weren't scoring as much.
Latest threads
-
-
What if "Deep State" really doesn't exist? (link)- Started by Its On A Slab
- Replies: 4
-
-
News Article: SEC increase fine to 500K for rushing the field- Started by Elefantman
- Replies: 4
-
-