Is Deferring to the Second Half the Correct Strategy?
Is Deferring to the Second Half the Correct Strategy?
We’ve seen it often enough. The co-captains of the two opponents meet at the center of the field to determine which one kicks off and which one receives the ball to start the game. The visiting team calls the toss. The referee flings the coin into the air and identifies the winner, which then has a choice to make. They either elect to receive the kick or defer until the second half. Invariably, they elect to defer. The loser of the toss is then left with one option: receive the ball. For, choosing to kick off would most likely result in also kicking off in the second half as well and thereby forfeiting a possession. The winner of the toss then selects the end of the field from which it will kick and the game begins. It’s a rare day when the winner of the toss chooses to receive the opening kickoff. But is deferring really the optimum strategy?
Background
In earlier days of football the winner of the coin toss had a choice of either receiving the ball or defending a particular end of the field. But this changed in 2008 when the NFL introduced the option for a team to defer their decision until the second half. College and high school, of course, followed suit shortly thereafter.
Both options, receiving and deferring, have inherent advantages. A team that receives the kick to start the game has an opportunity to score first. Once on top, that team can then stay with their planned offense, as long as the score remains in their favor. And, historically, a team that scores first wins the game about two-thirds of the time.
Conversely, a team that defers and kicks off subsequently starts the second half by receiving the ball. This strategy provides the potential to open the scoring gap if they are ahead or close the gap if behind. They might also receive an extra possession if they are the last team with the ball at the end of the game. It could also be a psychological ploy to intimidate the opponent if they have an overwhelming defense. Finally, there is the possibility of going back-to-back with scores if they tally right at the end of the first half and then again on their first possession of the second half.
Analysis
But let’s go back to the original question: is deferring to the second half the right strategy? Granted, the first two possessions of each half comprise a small segment of the overall game. But any advantage that can be gained in defeating the great teams is certainly worthy of consideration. To answer this question, a detailed analysis was performed, focusing specifically on Massillon and its game data from the last six seasons.
The study encompasses 84 games, but focuses specifically on those against the better opponents, since little trending knowledge can be gained from the games that were more one-sided, where the Tigers scored almost every time they had the ball. So, it focuses primarily on two groups of opponents:
- 16 great teams where Massillon was either evenly matched or considered an underdog. This group includes the larger parochial schools and those public schools they faced deep in the playoffs. The Tigers’ record against those teams was 6-10.
- 38 good teams where Massillon was considered a favorite, but not by a large margin. This group includes mid-sized parochial schools and those public schools that qualified for the playoffs, excluding a few mismatches. The Tigers’ record against those teams was 35-3.
Data was collected for both Massillon and its opponents, for each one’s initial possession of each half, regardless of whether they kicked off or received the ball to start the half. So, if Massillon kicked off to start the first half then they would have the second possession of the first half. Then in the second half, they would receive the kickoff and have the first possession. The opponent, of course, would have the opposite situation. The remaining game possessions following these first two are not considered relevant to the study and were not charted.
The data was then analyzed to determine whether it was advisable to either kick off or receive to open the game, while considering the combined effects of both Massillon and its opponents. In other words, the analysis searched for the situation where Massillon was maximizing its scoring potential, while at the same time minimizing the opponent’s scoring potential.
Results – vs. Great Teams
The charts below depict the chances of scoring for Massillon and the opponent based on the data compiled over the past six years relative to the 16 great teams. Two scenarios are displayed, the first if Massillon defers the decision and kicks off to start the game and the second if the other team defers and Massillon receives. For each scenario, the possessions are shown in the order in which they would occur during the game. In other words, if Massillon kicks off in the first half, then the opponent would receive the kick and have the first possession. In the second half, the opposite would occur.
In order to consider the effect of both Massillon’s and the opponent’s results, the average chances of a team scoring in either half are calculated and then the difference is taken between the two numbers. If the difference is positive, then Massillon has the advantage; if negative, then the advantage goes to the opponent.
Per the chart, since the overall advantage is negative when Massillon kicks off but zero when receiving, then the favorable decision would be to receive the ball to start the game. That would set the opponent up for a difficult first possession in the second half, where historically they have failed to score.
If Massillon desired to play the odds and follow this recommendation they fortunately would be nearly in full control of this decision. That’s because (1) they could elect to receive the ball if they won the toss, and (2) obviously receive the ball if the opponent won the toss and elected to defer, which it nearly always does.
Side note: In most cases, a team with a second possession of the half has a higher chance of scoring than with a first possession. One could argue that field position may be better with a second possession, since the team would often be receiving a punt, rather than starting deep in its own end following a kickoff. But the difference in starting field position within these 16 games turned out to not be significant enough (around five yards) to influence the results. But the key factor might just be, at least for the second half, that the players need some time to return to game mode following a grueling half of football followed by decompression in the locker room. Perhaps teams need to alter their routine after returning to the field, such as running a few simulated plays rather than focusing exclusively on stretching.
Results vs. Good Teams
The charts below depict the chances of scoring for Massillon and the opponent based on the data compiled over the past six years relative to the 36 good teams.
The Massillon advantage is positive in both scenarios, but favors Massillon kicking off to start the game. Therefore, it would make sense for Massillon to defer to the second half if they win the toss.
Summary
The analysis attempts to determine whether it is better to receive the ball or defer the decision to the second half following the pre-game coin toss. Six years of data encompassing 84 games were considered, with the opponents broken down into four categories.
- Great teams – 16 teams where Massillon is at even odds or an underdog to win. Preferable for Massillon to receive the opening kickoff, thereby forcing the opponent to receive the second half kickoff, from which they have produced zero scores.
- Good teams – 38 teams where Massillon is a moderate favorite to win. Slight advantage for Massillon to kick off to start the game.
- Average to below average teams – 30 teams where Massillon is a clear favorite to win. Kick or receive? It doesn’t matter.
It should be noted that this same analysis was performed on Ohio State against against several of their great opponents and a similar result was obtained.
Larsuel began his varsity career in 1962 as a 5’-8”, 176 lb. sophomore when 
“THEY OWNED US down the middle in the second half,” said Altoona Coach Earl Strohm, headman of the Lions, now in his 11th year at the Pennsylvania football power house. The veteran coach was especially impressed with Larsuel, terming the senior all-county and all-state guard “a real good football player.” Based on the game movies, fullback Lawrence was named player of the week for his running and faking. Lineman of the week was guard Tom Whitfield with Larsuel the runner-up. — Massillon Evening Independent.
In 1993 during his junior year Spencer became a varsity starter at defensive back and was part of a team that compiled a 10-2 record, while losing in the playoff regionals. With an uncanny ability quickly break for the ball, he had six pass interceptions, three of which were returned for touchdowns, including 87 yards against Grove City, PA, 54 yards against Austintown Fitch and 36 yards against Akron St. Vincent. He also recovered two fumbles, returning one for a score. In addition, he was the backup quarterback, where he scored one rushing touchdown.
The following year it all came together and with just Franklin at the QB position the team exploded with an undefeated 10-0 season. Massillon led the All-American Conference in both rushing and passing and outscored its opposition 412-29. In a key Week 4 matchup with state-ranked Niles, Franklin led his team to a 22-3 comeback victory. He also scored all three touchdowns in a 22-0 win over Warren Harding and was involved in four TDs against Trotwood Madison. The magical season was then punctuated by a 28-0 victory over previously undefeated and state No. 3 Canton McKinley.
The following year, Sheegog was the starter and he help the Tigers to a consecutive unbeaten season and another state title. His key games included:
Joe had the long arm desired by most quarterbacks. It was so long that he eventually made a career of throwing fastballs for the 
As a sophomore he completed 111 of 205 (54%) passes for 1,643 yards and 14 touchdowns in helping his team to a 7-3 regular season mark and a birth in the state playoffs.
After a modest beginning as a sophomore, Huth became the starter in 2005, completing 141 of 223 passes (63.2%) for 2,017 yards and 18 touchdowns in leading his team to the Division 1 state finals. Huth was a part of many significant victories that year, including the following:
“Ruby” Ertle played both linebacker and lineman under 
In 
Springfield High School (1931) – Assistant coach and history teacher.
The game will be part of the 
In 2022 Valdosta finished with a record of 8-3, losing 28-13 to Westlake in the first round of the state playoffs. Their record over the past five years is 33-26. Four times in that span they qualified for the playoffs and, as their best performance, advanced to the Division 6A state semifinals in 2020.
Massillon owns an historical record of 932-338-32 and is currently fourth in the national rankings, one win behind Mayfield, Kentucky. The Tigers began playing football in 1891 and have won 9 national championships and 24 Ohio state championships (the most recent being in 1970). Twenty-three times they finished the regular season unbeaten. As the subject of numerous books and films, the most popular entry was the theater production, “Go Tigers,” which covered the 1999 season.
He was a bull of a player as recalled by Jim Schumacher (1948-50). “Reichenbach and I could work the blocking sled like a team of horses,” he said. “We hit that thing a lot. We could drive that baby 15 yards. We were good because we were a team.” – Massillon Memories, Scott Shook.
1951 – Record of 4-3-2. Lost to Michigan, 7-0.
“You grow up, and I don’t think I’ll ever change very much from when I was 16 years old playing for Coach Reichenbach,” said Pro Football Hall of Fame offensive lineman Dan Dierdorf, who played at Glenwood for Reichenbach. “I was deathly afraid of him. He looked to me … to be eight feet tall. He was an imposing guy.
The best player is not necessarily he who makes the longest runs or kicks, says the Chicago Inter Ocean, but the one combining good, hard individual play with team work, and is always willing to let the man make the brilliant play whose chances are the best. The training to thoroughly fit one’s self for a match game is as arduous as it is for a boat race; in addition to the daily practice, a run of two to three miles is necessary for the wind; smoking, drinking, pastry, and rich food must be given up, and plenty of sleep taken. Five minutes of brisk work will cause the player who enters a game in poor condition to make many good resolves for the future.
There are eleven men on a side, generally seven in the rush line, a quarterback, two half-backs, and a back. The prime qualifications of the rushers should be weight, strength, and endurance, for on them devolve the duty of forging ahead by running with the ball. They need know little or nothing about kicking, and should never touch foot to the ball except in case of a free kick. Even then it is not necessary, for a place kick can be taken instead by one of the other players, and is generally preferable. Weight is not so essential for the rest of the team, but in addition to the other qualifications of the rushes they must be good kickers; also they should be sure tacklers to stop an opponent if he succeeds in breaking through the rush line. The following diagram shows the relative position of the players:
The game is commenced by placing the ball in the center of the field, and, if there be no wind, the side winning the toss choosing as a general thing to kick off. But if the wind be blowing, however slightly, the winner will of course play with the wind, for this is a most important factor in foot-ball, a stiff breeze deciding whether the game shall be a kicking or running one. We will suppose the ball has been kicked off and stopped by one of the opposing half-backs, this player tackled and prevented from returning the kick; the ball must then be called down, which is a technical expression signifying a temporary suspension of hostilities in order to get the ball again in play. The middle rusher then takes the ball, and placing his foot upon it snaps it to the quarter-back or to one of the other rushers, but to whomever he may thus give it that player must pass it to still another before the ball can be run forward with. If in three consecutive downs by the same side that side does not advance the ball five or take it back twenty yards, the opposing side is then entitled to it, and as an aid in determining the distance parallel lines five yards apart are often marked across the field.
If the goal counts the ball is brought to the center of the field, and the losing side kicks off. If the try for goal fails the other side kicks the ball out and must do so within the twenty-five yard line. Now, we will again suppose that one side has forced the ball up to the opponents’ goal, but instead of making a touch-down, as in the former case, they lose the ball. The other side, having gained possession of it, is of course in a much better position than before, but nevertheless still in great danger, for they in turn may lose it any instant. In this dilemma there is an avenue of escape, and that is by touching the ball down behind their own goal line and making what is termed a safety touch-down. Although this counts against it is not nearly so expensive as a touch-down by the other side.
A drop-kick is made by letting the ball fall from the hands and kicking it the very instant it rises.
A player shall be disqualified for unnecessary roughness, hacking, throttling, butting, tripping up, intentional tackling below the knees, and striking with the closed fists.