The Big Deferral--Why Josh McDaniels is Still Smarter Than You

I can’t wrap my head around it. Maybe that strategy works against mere mortals but against a god-king who cannot die? Was anyone really surprised when he started throwing lightning bolts at us for 21 quick points?

I know I remember yesterday feeling glad all of a sudden that the Broncos were getting the ball first in the 2nd half, given how the tide had turned for them and how they needed the ball to get back in the game. Admittedly, I wasn’t around at the beginning of the game and as you point out given the score it’s understandable why people were second guessing it as armchair quarterbacks. But as you also point out there’s a strong case to be made as to why it’s the right move. And btw, it’s A) up to the defense to stop them on that first drive REGARDLESS of whether the Colts get the ball 1st or second, and 2) up to the offense to respond.

I have to say I was really disappointed with some of the McDaniels bashing that went on here during the game yesterday. Which is NOT to say that I didn’t agree with some of the criticisms, as there were a few times I definitely questioned the gamecalling (of course, what do I know? Who am i?) but there were other times where people were ready to tar and feather him for doing things that seemed perfectly logical to me, or in some cases, the ONLY thing he could do. Case in point: Burning time outs on that late fatal Colts drive where they ran so much time off the clock to get in scoring position if they hadn’t called timeouts, score or not the Broncos would have almost no time left to go back and score (and then try to get ball back on onside kick). That seemed a no-brainer to me.

So while there are defintely things to question or critique McDaniels about, besides the fact that he is a rookie coach who will go through some growing pains I also ask people to be fair in their criticisms when at all possible.

Though I understand it’s also a given that when a game is as frustrating as yesterday’s was for all of us, given how many chances they had to actually win it. that things will boil over into the irrational. It’s human nature.

Great conclusion.

We get 18 games worth of film to chew on in the offseason, minimum. Much will be fixed.

There was a heated debate a few months ago about no of possessions. It takes some semantics but I conclude that a team can never have greater than one more pssession than the opponent.

We played a great game yesterday with a few awful plays mixed in like moldy raisins in fresh banana bread.

We can build on that.

Also, he has spoken about this before as well…

I should have said pop warner through high school ball. juco ball ended for me before the first practice, so maybe the deferral philosopy is different there.

to criticize the deferral. It really doesn’t matter. We’ve deferred several times this year, and we’re undefeated. The only way it could be a factor is momentum, but it’s impossible to predict that.

I have zero problem with McDaniels deferring.

“Hopefully, we can focus on what’s really wrong with the Broncos”.

Like why McDaniels insists on calling runs between the tackles on 3rd and 4th and short yardage when these plays have failed consistently all season long. When is our coach going to realize we don’t have the O-linemen to execute in these situations? It’s like putting Simms in a situation to throw a bomb. It’s arrogant, stubborn, immature and stupid coaching.

That the people on this site know way more about coaching and this team than McD and company. Quick someone get Bowlen on the phone and tell him to find the right coach from MHR. Then 19-0 cant be far away can it?
I will take my chances with McD . . . then again. . .

I always used to defer when playing Madden for the exact same reason…I always liked having the opportunity to drain the clock on my last drive of the first half and then have the ball to start the 3rd quarter.

Momentum has to mean nothing when you face the Colts…you know they will score…just keep playing. We have much bigger issues for why we lost then a flipping choice about who gets the ball first.

If you get the first possession at the beginning of the game and have the last possession of each half, then you would end up with ONE extra possession. If the team having the second possession at the start of the game ends up with possession at the end of each half, then THAT team ends up with an extra possession. ANY other combination will result in exactly equal number of possessions. In other words: Whether or not you start the game with possession, the only way you can have an extra possession is by having possession at the end of each half. If you had possession as a half ended, however, then you did not score, which means having had the extra possession did nothing for you. Conclusion: There is no such thing as a worthwhile extra possession.

Like it or hate it, there is no doubt that McDaniels is always thinking about every little aspect of the game looking for an edge.

Thanks, Dude.

Unprofessional sports analyst who thinks he knows more than Josh McDaniels! He couldn’t be a pimple on Josh’s butt.

…I always defer on Madden, and I usually hope we lose the toss or defer, but I think common sense has to trump statistical progressions in certain situations. If you’re playing Peyton Manning at home, your own offense struggles without balance, and you haven’t had much success playing from behind all year, it seems like you ought to take the opportunity to strike first.

That said, I wouldn’t trade Josh McD for anything. Last year’s Broncos would have spotted Peyton Manning a 21-0 lead and lost 48 – 3 or something. In McD I trust.

Another factor playing into the decision, and someone else may have already said this, is you want your best unit on the field first. For our team, our defense is better than our offense, however, we’re playing the Colts, so maybe in this case, that’s not the best option.

GO BRONCOS!!!

I referee high school football in Idaho and teams almost always choose to defer the choice of whether to receive or kick until the second half.The defense ususally comes out fired up and it ususally leads to a three and out by the offense.Manning defused our energy on the first series with a quick 30 yard pass to Garcon.I guarrantee that if the Colts come out with a running play Addai gets stopped for little or no gain,then the Broncos can play the pass and hopefully Denver would have forced Manning into an incompletion or a turnover.Plus,I think its always a boost to your team,especially in a tight game,in knowing that you have the ball to start the second half.

What I had a problem with was McDaniels play calling.After Buckhalter went down early in the second quarter he refused to alternate Moreno with another back,even when Moreno was obviously hurt or tired.The series right before halftime, Denver had the ball at midfield and gave the ball t Moreno four consecutive plays, and I was wondering if Moreno was even going to get lined up correctly.If McDaniels is not going to use Hillis,at least activate Jordan so Denver has a third option at tailback.While Buckhalter is an important back in the system,he has shown a propensity to injury,losing two full years in Philadelphia to knee injuries and I dont know what the problem is with Moreno’s conditioning,maybe he has hit the rookie wall,but he should not be gasping for air when Denver is trying to claw its way back into the game.Maybe Jordan,if healthy,should have been activated instead of McKinley who I didnt see take the field yesterday outside of special teams.

One more thing,Denver was 0 for 2 on 4th down when Moreno carried the ball up the middle,failing to gain a single yard each time.Generally the short yardage offense looked pathetic,so my hat is off to the Colts.But why with all the momentum do you call an off guard play on a two point conversion to Moreno that could have swung the game in Denver’s favor? I hate fade routes,but if that;s the only success that you have perhaps a fade routs to Marshall would have woked.Or even better use Marshall as a decoy and hit Royal or Gaffney in the center of the field.Anything except for a run up the middle that had a success rate of around 10 %

Denver has a great young coach in McDaniels,but yesterday he had his hat handed to him by another rookie head coach in Jim Caldwell.Denver played well enough to win,besides an inspired effort by Brandon Marshall and the defense after looking ugly early,but McDaniels was clearly outcoached.Hopefully McDaniels will learn from his mistakes.

Only to find the crowd fuming and bellyaching on every turn of event. I do not find that to be the mood I prefer during the game so I left.

As for the deferral I view it like the draft pick we traded, McDaniels got roasted because he gave ours but obviously Chicago was going to be better so we should have given up ours right? Nope.
He showed real confidence in the team and trust me that meant a lot to them. Yesterday he did the exact same thing with our defense. And when you analyze the whole game our D outplayed our O by far so I see why he felt that way.

His decisions are based on the team. I admire him for that.

He gave up our pick and kept the Bears.

while it’s preferable not to lose, it’s not the end of the world. Nevertheless, I still like our chances to go 11-5. The truth of the matter is the Colts’ game is ancient history and that’s how I’m treating it. Bring on the Faiders. Nice job T.J.!

I always prefer getting the ball first in the second half. The second half is when games are won and lost – and the same was true yesterday. The Broncos LOST the game in the second half through poor execution and missed opportunities more than the Colts won in the first half.

You get to game plan the offensive attack based on adjustments from first half information.Seems like a good idea to me.

Even if the other team scores a TD, I’m fine with deferring. It would have been good for our offense to make a nice long drive to answer the Colts opening possession yesterday, but they went 3 and out…

was just featured as one of the ESPN MNF’s pregame crew’s guys for “Come On, Man!”

Lol.

I think the bottom line is most people thought Denver would be three and ten right now. The fact that the brash youngster came in to town, shook it up and has won as many games as he has says a great deal. Denver very well could have won that game if we didn’t shoot ourselves in the face and forgot some offensive fundamentals. We’ll probably get a playoff spot, which I must say, I did not predict in the begining of the season. I think with a few adjustments, some good draft picks and good free agent signs we could be amazing next year. Plus at the start of the playoffs every team is 0-0 so I’m lookin forward to it. GO BRONCOS!! (P.S. I thought we’d go 4-12 so overall I’m stoked)

Great write up LB.

and this:

we want to find a reason—other than missed blocks and missed opportunities—to get our minds around why the Broncos got off to such a slow start yesterday

its the idea that our favorite star can’t be the problem, it has to be the villainous controlling arrogant coaches! sure coaches make mistakes, but often fans are too quick to blame a bad play call and give the coach an F when the same plays properly executed would have yielded exactly what we wanted.

I liked the deferal call, I like knowing what to plan for the next half in advance. In case you don’t remember our 6-0 start, our offense had a rough time out of the gate also, against better teams I think we spotted many something like ten points before our offense kicked in gear. Also, Indy has had a rough time getting started in many of their recent games. I was participating in the Texan’s game-time thread and watched them stuff Indy their first four drives.

Now I go back to my opening:

“As much as I hated the loss, did anyone notice that we actually outplayed Indy for much of the game.”

I’m excited guys, take away a couple really crippling penalties and we may have seen a different result in this game.

I’m finally starting to like Orton, but for old-times sake I have to point out his worst throw, which may have changed the game.

Remember our first visit to the ‘red-zone’ and the just terrible pass and the INT?. It either slipped out of Orton’s hand or was just plain stupid. Did anyone notice Brandon’s reaction? He was obviously heading for the back corner, had to suddenly stop and slipped trying to get back to the ball, but had two defenders (he had beat to the back of the zone) between him and the ball. What a bad throw by Orton!

But what a great showing by our team, I’m convinced we can hold our own against anyone.

Go Broncos!!
Playoffs here we come!!!

While all of you MMQ every aspect of the game the fact still remains. McDaniels is a coach in the NFL..all of you shop at Coach for your wives or girlfriends during Christmas.

And as you type away in your basements about how PO’ed you are at McDaniels for a few hours…Josh is at Dove Valley working 15+ hours on football.

Big picture fellas…big picture.

Good article…..I wanted him to defer but the D came out a little confused with new scheme and no passion….right decision but let down by execution!

We are talking about a 50/50 chance of whether you’re going to be on offense or defense to start the game. You still have to play it.

you’re absolutely right, dude. and in this case, mcdaniels is NOT smarter than me, because i’d have done the same thing. i’d pretty much always want the ball to start the second half rather than at the beginning of the game when teams are trying to get their game bearings about them. anyway, way to bloviate, denver post. keep up the good work.

now, about clady…

I’ve been out a few days, so I’m sorry I missed this conversation.
 
There are actually a few reasons to defer a kick. Let me cover the big three.
 
1) Our own MHR crew is spot on about number of possessions. It is great to have the ball at the end of a half and at the start of the second. So why not do this every game? A lot goes into balancing the need to get an early lead, or how well one expects one’s defense to do on the initial drive of the first half based on match-ups. or the pairing of the STs, or even the strength of wind. There are multiple factors that go into defering, but most of the time a team will NOT defer.
 
In our own program, we actualy defered about half of the time. Our defense was pretty elite, and we counted on the defense to hold opposing offenses on the first drive. With special teams punt units not being up to pro standards, we also expected our offense to (thus) get good field position after that first punt.
 
2) But with respect to our own fine reporting, I don’t think Josh took the above route. For this match up, I think Josh used a different calculation to get to the same conclusion.
 
Let’s say we are playing a team that outmatches us. I think the Colts do. It is reasonable to say that the Colts should have won the game, and everyone knows it (despite my own belief that Denver was a good match-up, and indeed – I think we gave them a hell of a good game). Josh may have played the pyschology card, and I think that is exactly what he did. The coach sent a message to his own team.
 
“We are not going to be bullied, and we’re going toe to toe with this team. I expect you guys to treat this team like any other team. If we can’t beat Manning on the opening dirve, we don’t deserve to beat him. Let’s put our defense on the field right away and challenge Manning right away”.
 
That was my very first thought, and I liked it. There are two outcomes. If Manning doesn’t drive down the field, the team gets a huge boost of confidence and momentum right away. If Manning scores, nothing is lost (since the default assumption is that “Well, that’s what was expected”).
 
Even if we had the ball first and scored, everyone is waiting for Manning to take the field and just tie it up, so no momentum has shifted. But stopping Manning and making a long drive for Denver to score would surprise people.
 
In fact, even though the initial gambit didn’t work, did anyone notice how well we did taking the fans out of the game? Denver having the ball at the start of the second half had the same effect as Denver having the ball on the second series of the first quarter… It gave Denver the momentum. The crowd (and even the announcers) felt Denver was controlling the game, EVEN with Denver playing from behind.
 
3) Another possibility (also in the realm of psych) is one that I might have considered if I had ever been a HC. I personaly like the concept of having the ball first after the first half because I will have had half-time to make the adjustments needed to beat a team that was likely beating me in the first-half. The team that is losing has the advantage in terms of making adjustments during the half, and it is a safe bet that IND was assumed to be the team that would take the first-half lead.

I think the first point is dead on accurate. I also think the 2nd reason is what Josh used. I also think the third reason is a popular reason with coaches, and might have been in play on Sunday.

(Note – I just noticed I didn’t spell “deferral” correctly throughout my long comment and in its various forms. My apologies. I’m to hurried at the moment to go back. lol)

I think it is the right approach but not against the Colts.

Statistically, it was the right move. Teams that receive in the 2nd half (over time) have a slight edge in the win column.

What McD forgot to do was check the Colts 3rd quarter defense stats, as its been the case this season our defense gets underestimated, the Colts D plays their best in the 3rd quarter allowing just 17points in 13 games in 3rd quarter.

 I dont know how many 3 and outs the Colts defense have in the first drive of the 3rd quarter but they have played out of their minds the 3rd quarter , so i dont get why would your coach played to try to beat our strengths instead to try to capitalize on our weaknes.

Colts D is playing clutch ball and beating the stats,stopping big 4th downs ,not allowing a single TD out of 18 turnovers this season and redzone defense. Deferring because its been researched without considering the opponent owns stats is a bad decision IMHO.