Just wanted to get a lill feedback. I have always been a proponent of kicking off to start a game, because MOST defenses can stop a 3rd down conversion, thus stopping an opening drive. Then, if things are working right for your offense, you start the 2nd half, with a lil momentum.

I post this, on the heels of the UF game, because we were on a roll ending the 1st half.

Thoughts? Anyone?

I understand your reasoning. I think teams generally try to kick in order to get the ball in the second half. I really think it depends on the strength of the team. If the team has a great defense go ahead and kickoff with the expectation of getting a three and out. If the offense is high powered I would say receive the ball and try to get down the field and score early in order to get some momentum right away. It is always nice to go up early.

GO OWLS!!!

owlfan1 said

I understand your reasoning. I think teams generally try to kick in order to get the ball in the second half. I really think it depends on the strength of the team. If the team has a great defense go ahead and kickoff with the expectation of getting a three and out. If the offense is high powered I would say receive the ball and try to get down the field and score early in order to get some momentum right away. It is always nice to go up early.

GO OWLS!!!

I understand your reasoning too, but if the offense is "High Powered", then once it's clicking then you can keep it going to set the tone at the start of the 2nd half too. It's a lil risky IMO to start a game on offense, because IMO most teams don't score on opening drives.

Just my opinion, no facts.

I had always thought about this question in the back of my mind while watching games, but never actually put a lot of thought into it.  If i'm standing at the 50 yd line and the coin falls in my favor, what do I do?  I guess a lot if it depends on who you are playing.  Take for instance west virginia.  Even though USF shut them down, they have an incredibly fast offense, and their punt return can very easily go all the way, so do you give it to the returner and try for a stop to excite your defense, or do you choose to receive and try to score first, building up your own momentum.  I think I like the certainty of having the ball to start the second half, but I am definetly no football coach.

Id go with the ball to start the 2nd half.

Always been my preference, as Id rather start on offense after teams have adjusted to get the ball rolling both physically and metaphorically.

Always kickoff first half and receive second half. Actually, it's better to defer your option. What if a hurricane comes through Lockhart and produces 60 mph winds (exaggerating to prove a point). If you defer in the first half, you'll choose the wind in the second half.

smittysahoot said

Always kickoff first half and receive second half. Actually, it's better to defer your option. What if a hurricane comes through Lockhart and produces 60 mph winds (exaggerating to prove a point). If you defer in the first half, you'll choose the wind in the second half.

Except that when the University of Miami chose to kickoff in both halves of a game, it ended their 56 game home winning streak when they lost to Washington. 

smittysahoot said

Always kickoff first half and receive second half. Actually, it's better to defer your option. What if a hurricane comes through Lockhart and produces 60 mph winds (exaggerating to prove a point). If you defer in the first half, you'll choose the wind in the second half.

However
since FAU historically putters out in the third quarter
in our case
it's better to recieve in the first half and put those points up early