Idiotic clock management

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimmytantric. Show jimmytantric's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    Another silly response-nio time left for Brady instead of 1:30 left for winning FG-if Skins had scored-thank god you are not coaching!!!In Response to Re: Idiotic clock management:
    [QUOTE]While admitting I fully expected to see the 'Skins score -- and easily -- on that drive, I agree with not using the timeouts. Play defense (or the closest thing to defense that you can play  )    and force your opponent to execute. As we saw, when push came to shove, Washington couldn't execute . . .   which is why the Redskins are 4-9 despite the fact that they gave the Pats all they wanted yesterday.
    Posted by p-mike[/QUOTE]
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

     Sure you hope your defense can stop them, but the way the Pats were playing defense that wasn't a given. How would you have liked it if the Skins had scored, made the 2 point conversion and the Pats had no time on the clock? Hello! The Pats would have lost the game because we relied on the worst defense in the league. Wouldn't it have made sense to at least try to get the ball back to Brady with a minute plus on the clock?
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimmytantric. Show jimmytantric's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    And if the Queen had a _ick she'd be King!In Response to Re: Idiotic clock management:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Idiotic clock management : If Underwood had made more of an effort he could have prevented the int or, better yet, have caught the ball? Of course the Redskins could also block the FG and run it back for a TD ala the Vikings vs. the Rams in the playoffs in the 1970's.
    Posted by Patsfansince1966[/QUOTE]
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattC05. Show MattC05's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    Calling timeouts on that drive would have had the following negative effects:

    1 /> It would allow the O to have more time to call a play, or sequence of plays.

    2 /> If there were a D pass interference, it would allow the Skins to run extra plays to get into the end zone.

    For all the trouble the Pats D has had this year, the one thing it has done well is preventing touchdowns in the red zone.  Game managing as if the Pats were trailing when they were actually up by 7 seems silly in this case.

    In short, there were benefits and negatives to calling timeouts.  BB thought the negatives outweighed the possible benefits.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from capecodwilly. Show capecodwilly's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    In Response to Re: Idiotic clock management:
    [QUOTE]Calling timeouts on that drive would have had the following negative effects: 1 /> It would allow the O to have more time to call a play, or sequence of plays. 2 /> If there were a D pass interference, it would allow the Skins to run extra plays to get into the end zone. For all the trouble the Pats D has had this year, the one thing it has done well is preventing touchdowns in the red zone.  Game managing as if the Pats were trailing when they were actually up by 7 seems silly in this case. In short, there were benefits and negatives to calling timeouts.  BB thought the negatives outweighed the possible benefits.
    Posted by MattC05[/QUOTE]

    You are apparently correct, that is what BB thought, that the negatives out weighed the positives. However as much of a fan of BB that I am, once again I submit that common sense tells you that he was wrong. As to your first point, it's pretty weak. If Wash had wanted more time, or felt they needed it, to call a play or a sequence of plays, they could have used one of their own timeouts. Yet with the way their O was moving, why would they? To your second point, which is really a stretch, see point one.

    As to being ahead by 7 points, do not forget that if they scored Wash was most likely going to go for the win with a two point conversion. We'd have had maybe 20 or 30 seconds left to try to drive for a fg. In other words, it seems to me that in using our timeouts and saving time on the clock the positives far ouweighed the negatives of not doing so.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from flutie66. Show flutie66's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    if you want to see what BB had to say about it go to patriots.com and check out his post game presser.

    i have to agree tho, i was screaming at my tv to call timeouts, and was thinking they would go for 2 even at the start of their drive.

    the only neg that could have come out of it would be if there was some kind of defensive penalty that gave them a fresh set of downs.  i know its not real football, but if you play madden im sure youve gotten very good at clock managment.  ive had that same situation come up, and once they get to a first and goal situation, its always a good idea to use the timeouts to give yourself some time just in case.

    the other thing is, even tho we all know how good our D is in the redzone (right?) did anyone think that they were going to stop them on that drive once they got past our 40?
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from capecodwilly. Show capecodwilly's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    In Response to Re: Idiotic clock management:
    [QUOTE]I'm wondering what would have happened had the Pats listened to the idiots here that are saying they should have called time outs: would that pass still have been intercepted if the Skins weren't being forced to rush? I say if the Psts had called timeouts on d, it would have HELPED the Skins.
    Posted by Patsfansince1966[/QUOTE]

    I say that it wouldn't have helped the Skins more than it would have helped us. It's a valid point of view, with reasoning that has already been explained. There's no way of knowing if there would have been an intercepted pass, however, in no way were the Skins being forced to rush anything. To call others idiots for having a different opinion is more a reflection on you than on others.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    In Response to Re: Idiotic clock management:
    [QUOTE]I'm wondering what would have happened had the Pats listened to the idiots here that are saying they should have called time outs: would that pass still have been intercepted if the Skins weren't being forced to rush? I say if the Psts had called timeouts on d, it would have HELPED the Skins.
    Posted by Patsfansince1966[/QUOTE] Somebody disagrees with you and you call them idiots. What a mature well-thought-out response!
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from msteven. Show msteven's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    Of all the coaches in the league, I want BB running my team with 2 minutes left on the clock.  I am sure he had every possible result figured out before he decided that calling time out was not a good move.  The Patriots were ahead by a touchdown.  Washington had to score a touchdown and kick the PAT for the tie score.  If they decided to try to go for the two point conversion, odds were in the favor of the Patriots.  So with all the possibilities, why not take a chance and let the clock run down.  What if there was a pass interference in the end zone.  Washington ball on the 1 yard line with 4 tried to get it in the endzone.  The more time on the clock the more chances for a run play.  Was it a gamble, YES.  Would most coaches have taken that gamble, NO.  Did it work, YES.  I think it also showed confidence in his red zone defense that they were going to need to make a stop.  This could go a long way with a young team.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimmytantric. Show jimmytantric's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    This post is why there will never be peace in this world. Everyone has a different idea of what is good/bad  right/wrong etc. I am baffled by posters not understanding how stupid it was to not use the timeouts in case the Skins had scored. And with the defense we got  the Pats were very lucky. Had the Skins scored the Pats would have had no time left to go for a drive for a field goal. It would have resulted in a coin toss and I can't think of any rational Pats fan wanting to lose that coin toss and give the Skins first dibbs at getting a field goal in O/T!! They give teams timeouts for a reason and in close games I don't believe it is to save them-you cannot carry them over to the next game.LOL. I'm sure if the Skins had scored and went for 2 points and got it there would be alot of pissed off fans on this board for having 3 timeouts left on the clock when the Pats could have used them and given Brady 1:30 left to go get the 3 points!!!!In Response to Re: Idiotic clock management:
    [QUOTE]I'm wondering what would have happened had the Pats listened to the idiots here that are saying they should have called time outs: would that pass still have been intercepted if the Skins weren't being forced to rush? I say if the Psts had called timeouts on d, it would have HELPED the Skins.
    Posted by Patsfansince1966[/QUOTE]
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: Idiotic clock management

    In Response to Idiotic clock management:
    [QUOTE]I just don't understand why BB didn't use his timeouts during the last Washington drive.  Washington had first and goal with about 1.5 minutes left.  They can run 4 plays at most, which kills the clock.  Use the timeouts before they can kill the clock!  If they score, you'll at least have a chance to mount a comeback. If it were me, I would have used the timeouts much earlier, before the two-minute warning.  I just don't understand why you would save timeouts in situations like these.  If you don't use them, you'll have so little time you won't be able to get many plays off.  If you use the time outs, you'll at least have more time with which to work.  Get out of bounds, hurry up, spike the ball, etc can all be used to slow the clock even without timeouts.   
    Posted by devault[/QUOTE]

    Put that on the job application and I'm sure they will fire BB and give you the job.  

     

Share