1st and 15 or 2nd and 10?

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't read OP and voted wrong. 1st and 15 is better for the offense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Always?

[BigCummins]

[ QUOTE ]
Against Minnesota? 2nd and 10. Dallas is smart.

[/ QUOTE ]

[vixticator]

[ QUOTE ]
Against Minnesota? 2nd and 10. Dallas is smart.

[/ QUOTE ]Don't you want more plays from Jackson though? Heh.

[KUJustin]

An interesting poll would be to ask ppl if they answered the OP from the perspective of the defense or the offense. I'm guessing it's about 50/50.

[punkass]

from defense position:

if it kicks them out of FG position, 1 and 15.
if they are fighting the clock and will go on 4th down, i'd lean on 2 and 10.
if your defense is really tired, 2 and 10.
if their offense is tired, 1 and 15.
if your defense can take their offense no problem, 1 and 15.

too many factors.

[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.

[SuperUberBob]

Depends on the situation.

I hate giving those responses, but it really does.

I think defenses would rather have 2nd and ten though. I'm not sure, but wouldn't an offense have more options on first and 15 than on 2nd and 10? If so, then there's more to prepare for and more unpredictability in 1st and 15.

[Pudge714]

Well one thing that changes the situation is that it's 4 down territory for the Vikings. I mean down 10 points with 5 minutes at midfield they could never punt.

[stormstarter28]

It really depends on a number of things. However, if they're anywhere near field goal range, you obviously push them back 5 yards.

[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
Well one thing that changes the situation is that it's 4 down territory for the Vikings. I mean down 10 points with 5 minutes at midfield they could never punt.

[/ QUOTE ]

ha