ISU-UNI: If we win coin toss....

**Trainer** · 09-01-2011, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by Clark

95% of the time, I agree with you guys. However, there are special circumstances where I want to have the ball first.

For example, I think ISU should absolutely take the ball first against Iowa. I think it's extremely important for ISU to get off to a good start in that game.

I thought we were talking about UNI?

**SalzundPfeffer** · 09-01-2011, 01:11 PM

Defer. Recover onside kick...

**cyclonedave25** · 09-01-2011, 01:12 PM

I like defense first. The crowd is still jacked from the intro and the energy is at an all time high. Have the defense get a 3 and out, and keep the crowd energized.

**JustRedman** · 09-01-2011, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by IcSyU

I still think you put the defense on the field first if you have the option. Iowa State hasn't done squat offensively or defensively against Iowa the last few years. The defense has been on the field with the lead for 40 seconds of the last 180 minutes of game time. I'd give them a chance to at least not start the game from behind.

I agree. If we get the ball in the second half, it really extends halftime for our defense. We will need all the rest we can get this year or we will hit a wall in the fourth quarter due to lack of total depth.

**Clark** · 09-01-2011, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by IcSyU

I still think you put the defense on the field first if you have the option. Iowa State hasn't done squat offensively or defensively against Iowa the last few years. The defense has been on the field with the lead for 40 seconds of the last 180 minutes of game time. I'd give them a chance to at least not start the game from behind.

I guess I understand that argument, and the defense is the better of the two units I believe. Under normal circumstances, I'd absolutely agree with you. That last two years though would make me reconsider. Whether they start on offense or defense, it's extremely important for ISU not to let Iowa get out to an early lead.

Under that same understanding, I think it is a good idea for Iowa to start with the ball as well..

Scoring first doesn't guarantee victory for either team by any means, but man does it really set up well with how each team plays if they do score first.

**WalkingCY** · 09-01-2011, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by IcSyU

I like deferring. Put the defense on the field, force 3 and out, give offense short field. Score. Rinse. Repeat.

This.

**ruxCYtable** · 09-01-2011, 01:18 PM

It doesn't matter. We score the first possession no matter what, offense or defense! If defense it will be Jeremy Reeves with a pick 6!

EDIT: And Rennie watches it happen on the scoreboard from his back.

**Clark** · 09-01-2011, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by Trainer

I thought we were talking about UNI?

It really doesn't matter for UNI. I'd defer just because that would be my normal philosophy. If ISU's normal philosophy was to receive, that would be ok to.

**IcSyU** · 09-01-2011, 01:25 PM

A team like Oklahoma State I can see receiving all the time. I would too if I had Weeden and Blackmon.

**Naughtius** · 09-01-2011, 01:25 PM

Think outside the box! I say when the coin is in the air, our captains drill theirs. Set the tone early. "Hit 'em coming off the bus, hit 'em during the coin toss."

Then, take the coin.

**Trainer** · 09-01-2011, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by Naughtius

Think outside the box! I say when the coin is in the air, our captains drill theirs. Set the tone early. "Hit 'em coming off the bus, hit 'em during the coin toss."

Then, take the coin.

That made me think of this.
http://www.thatvideosite.com/video/d..._perfect_crime

**dualthreat** · 09-01-2011, 01:35 PM

if i were guessing i'd say it is more likely the defense wins the first series of a game than an offense. especially in week 1.

it is easier to stop someone than to score on your first drive of the season.

so i say defer to second half. Although, this game might be out of reach by halftime anyway

**PabloDiablo** · 09-01-2011, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by JustRedman

I actually wouldn't mind receiving the kick. Best case scenario, we score on the first drive and get the momentum for the defense. Worst case scenario realisticly, we punt and put our stronger unit on the field.
If we kick the best case scenario is force a 3 and out or create a turnover. Worst case scenario is we are down 7-0 before the offense steps on the field.
I just think getting the offense out there and potentially going ahead and letting the defense play loose is more valuable than potentially having the offense go on the field for the first time down 7-0. The offense has enough pressure on them as is, I would rather see Jantz and Co. take the field to start the season than take the field 3 minutes into the game down 3-0 or 7-0.
Normally I don't like receiving, but in this case I would like to let the O build up a sweat, so even if we do fall behind, they at least have some sort of feel for the game.

I would love to see the O, take it to the house on the first possession of the game, set the tone especially with a smash mouth drive finishing with a Woody score, but...

Originally Posted by cyclonedave25

I like defense first. The crowd is still jacked from the intro and the energy is at an all time high. Have the defense get a 3 and out, and keep the crowd energized.

I hadn't considered the crowd intensity and our new improved "big play" defense that will blow them up on contact

Defer, D first... Run stuff by DL and AK47, out pass break up by LJ, Lat meets QB, punt.

**Clones21** · 09-01-2011, 02:12 PM

Take the ball and put that damn ball in the end zone. LETS GO CLONES! WOOO!

**CyCloned** · 09-01-2011, 03:21 PM

I would like to start on defense, especially if there is a strong wind. I remember a Kansas team that came into the Jack and did this and the game was over by the end of the first quarter. 3 and out, short field, quick score, 3 and out, short field, quic score.........

Plus I like the coaches to be able to scheme something offensively at half time and use it right away.