Tavern talk: Smart decision by McDaniels

Michael,

Thank you for calling out Wade Phillips. ESPN's Bill Simmons has rightfully said that NFL teams should hire teenagers who play a lot of Madden video games to manage the clock on the sideline.

I honestly don't understand how you can be an NFL head coach and do what Phillips did. It's just inconceivable. You're not going to attempt a 72-yard field goal once you recover an onside kick (unless you have Sebastian Janikowski), so why waste all your time going for a touchdown?

It's worth noting that Green Bay coach Mike McCarthy correctly navigated this scenario in the Packers' 31-24 loss to the Bengals earlier this season. Trailing by 10 points, McCarthy had Mason Crosby attempt a 45-yard field goal on second down with 49 seconds remaining. Crosby's kick was good, the Packers recovered the onside kick and drove to the 10-yard line.

It's not quite accurate to say that McDaniel's made the "right" decision by opting to kick off the game, just as its not possible to say whether Belichick made the right decision by going for it on 4th down from his own 28. The issue is whether the decision is a defensible exercise of the coach's discretion. And I absolutely agree that McDaniel's decision to kick off is eminently defensible.

As you noted, statistics apparently bear out the proposition that the team who kicks off the first half often ends up with the last possession of the first half. So whether you are down big, the game is close, or you are up big, its an opportunity for your team to have two straight possessions to either close the gap or ice the game. Furthermore, I would rather have my possession at the beginning of the second half, when most of the crowd is still waiting for the bathroom or digesting their half-time Nachos, then at the beginning of the game when they are guaranteed to be in their seats and fired up for the first possession. There's lots of reasons to prefer taking the ball to start the second.

Its funny that Jason mentioned Simmons suggestion that coaches should use a teenage Madden freak for game management issues, because this is another issue that gamers understand, as the result of playing hundreds or thousands of games - which is far more than most coaches will ever be involved in, whether as a player or coach.

In my experience, GAMERS ALWAYS TAKE THE SECOND HALF KICKOFF.

I watched the Cowboys-Chargers game sunday and Phil Simms, while calling the game, said exactly the same thing that Lombardi pointed out in his article. I know it was a desperate situation but coach Phillips looked completely lost. It seems like the whole Cowboys teams are the first to believe in their December course. If you add to that that their kicker in the last 5 games is 3 out of 9...Elam was cut for much less.

I agree that recieving the kickoff in the 2nd half is the better move.
It may result in a forced turnover. For example, opponent cannot score and time runs out. Our team now gets the ball to start the next half. We didn't have to cause a turnover. We didn't have to stop them on downs. On the other hand, if they score to end the half, we get the ball just like we otherwise would. If we have the ball to end the half, we get a do-over.

Seems like the best strategy to me.

"...which is why McDaniels will win a Super Bowl in Denver." HUH?! I normally give Lombardi a fair amount of credibility but those days are over now. Put down the crackpipe and clear your head of such wild speculation, Lombardi. McDonk outsmarted himself just like his mentor Bellichick did vs. Colts earlier in the year. When your team stinks, I guess you have to resort to unconventional tactics to try and win the game. Why don't you do a story on how these former-player-turned-TV-talking-heads all suddenly became politically correct in failing to call out Randy Moss for tanking it vs. Panthers. Moss is almost as big a baby/loser as McDonk/Bellicheat!

Just a FYI Michael, the cowboys actually do have another kicker on their roster, David Buehler the kickoff specialist

I have re-read Michael's comments three times as well as above comments -- I still fail to clearly see what the advantage is to deferring. If being down three touchdowns is what must be avoided to keep your team in the game psychologically, then taking the ball first reduces that possibility because you would always be +1 or even and not -1 in terms of net possessions.

However, what I can surmise from one angle is that you do have increased information getting your possession later. This is comparable to college football overtime where you are at an advantage if you go second because you know what you need to beat. If you need seven, you don't kick a field goal... Same in baseball, where you might manage your at-bats more effectively if you know you need to get two runs in the bottom of the ninth as opposed to one.

I don't think McDaniels chose to kick off in the first half for the strategic reasons mentioned in this article. I think he was simply trying to do the opposite his mentor Belichick did. When Belechick went for it 4th down against Manning it was seen as a slap in the face of his defense. McDaniels was trying to get the opposite reaction by saying he is so confident with his defense he is willing to put them on the field first. Both coaches were intimidated by Manning and ultimately made the wrong decision because of this intimidation. Congrats to Manning and the Colts for winning the mental as well as physical game.

I don't think McDaniels chose to kick off in the first half for the strategic reasons mentioned in this article. I think he was simply trying to do the opposite his mentor Belichick did. When Belechick went for it 4th down against Manning it was seen as a slap in the face of his defense. McDaniels was trying to get the opposite reaction by saying he is so confident with his defense he is willing to put them on the field first. Both coaches were intimidated by Manning and ultimately made the wrong decision because of this intimidation. Congrats to Manning and the Colts for winning the mental as well as physical game.

Receiving the kick in the second half favors teams that can play good situational football and manage the clock well by giving them an extra possession in the game. If you use it right, its essentially a turnover.

I agree that kicking off to start the game is the right move. They do it all the time in college. My reason is a little different though. If you stop the team you kicked off to, 3andOut or close to that, you've already flipped the field position. Also, I never like to put the offense on the field, in a dome, on the road, to start a game. That's a 3andOut waiting to happen, a punt that the home team gets on about the 40-yard line, and then it just rolls down hill after that. My position is that there are far more good reasons to kick off first, than bad reasons.

ha...that makes no sense..if you go by that logic..then if mcjunior would have taken the kickoff...he would have only been down 14-7 at the half... talk about a stretch on trying to talk up something from the bellicheck world... how bout a comment on moss...or maybe cassel ??? or aldaius thomas??

TC, when that choice was first extended to teams whether to defer or not if they won the toss Belichick pretty much stated that his policy would mostly be to defer and why he felt that way. McDaniels is likely a follower of his general logic rather than simply intimidated by Manning.
Also, I wish yahoodave would lose his internet privileges. He posts the kind of troll like drivel you see on fan boards.

I don't agree with just kicking the field goal from 35 yards out. What if you miss that FG? the mistake was romo's throwing the ball in bounds. In those situations, you need to reach a point where your offense is designed to either get in the end zone or kick the FG - but dont just waste 3 downs. under your situation, it would take making a 35-yd FG, getting the on-side kick and then scoring a touchdown with likely under 20 seconds to play. those aren't good odds. i know we all like to beat up on the cowboys, but winning the game down 10 points, in that situation, would have taken a miracle.

I wonder how many games McDaniels will have to win before people stop calling him names.

The entire football watching world thought he was a fool for trading Jay Cutler, botched the draft, and predicted a horrendous season.

Now, 2 months later, Cutler stinks, the Broncos are in contention for the playoffs, Knowshon leads all rookies in rushing, the defense is great, BMarsh is setting NFL records, and the Broncos overall are playing well. 3 Manning INTs? The Broncos were in contention for much of that game, at home in Indy with Manning playing at the peak of his career.

It's pretty sad how many fans need to put someone down to make themselves feel better. And calling McDaniels names doesn't change the fact that the team is likely headed for the playoffs when people were predicting a 3-13 season. The rookie coach is doing great, and I'm psyched we have him.

I know it was a desperate situation but coach Phillips looked completely lost.