1st and 15 or 2nd and 10?

[d10]

There are a lot of factors in this, Washington's defense took a 2nd & 10 over a 1st & 15 against Arizona today also, and I thought it was a good idea at the time, because the Washington defense was getting tired and needed to get the ball back to the offense ASAP for other reasons.

[UATrewqaz]

I think the answer is definitely 2nd and 10.

Having 3 plays to get 15 yards is much better than having 2 plays to get 10.

You can plan out how to get the yards in decent chunks in 3 plays better.

A more interesting question imo, 2nd and 20 or 3rd and 10? You see this often if there is a holding call on a 2nd and 10.

Which is typically better for the DEFENSE (which would you take as defensive coach)

[stormstarter28]

[ QUOTE ]

A more interesting question imo, 2nd and 20 or 3rd and 10?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not interesting at all, because the answer is 2nd and 20.

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

A more interesting question imo, 2nd and 20 or 3rd and 10?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not interesting at all, because the answer is 2nd and 20.

[/ QUOTE ]


Agreed. I feel significantly more confident about my answer to this one.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Score?
What quarter? Time left (if late in half or game)?
Field position?
Flow of the game to this point?

It depends.

[prohornblower]

1st and 15 has got to be better.

Although each requires 5 yards per play before punting, think of it in terms of "implied odds".

From, say your own 20, you need 15 for the first but 80 for TD. But with the ball 3 times as opposed to 2, you might end up covering much more of that 80 yards with three plays than with two.

That is to say, you may end up punting an equal amount in each scenario, but when you do move the chains with 3 tries, you may do so in a much bigger way. Of the times you punt, it doesn't matter, you're punting. Of the times you get a first you may end up doing more damage with the third attempt.

EDIT: Think about the difference in Y/A average opposed to Y/A median.