zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,994
- 31,557
- 146
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,994
- 31,557
- 146
that's true, but the odds of something favorable happening on any given play are more or less exactly equal before the 2 minute warning as they are after.
the major factor, and what really matters, is that you have a different DOWN situation coming back from the 2 minute warning. Trusting your defense--and you really have to trust your defense to their job, just as you do offense--you expect to force the team to burn an entire down in 2 seconds.
that's extremely important. downs versus time.
But by that point, SD was playing strip ball strategy all the way. It was their best chance after their final score, because they really should not have tried a 2nd onsides kick (and they didn't). Even then--defense was giving the game back, until that 3rd down blunder.
still, you trust your defense on those calls.
but you never expect the other team to "be cute" and throw a pass because they are stupid. Sure, that happens, but only stupid people do it. And only stupider coaches and football players (the losing team int this example) would expect [of the offense] that to happen, thus calling the timeout after the 2min warning
that is probably, the only reason to make that call. it is the only way that the team would gain a mathematical benefit to calling a TO after the warning. And one only expects that of stupid teams. Therefore, you never do that shit at the professional level. ever.
Last edited:
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,994
- 31,557
- 146
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,994
- 31,557
- 146
It is still a loss of downs. that is why you do it.
If they get the first down on that 2 second play, it doesn't matter, and it wouldn't have mattered anyway, after the 2 minute warning.
the goal is to force them into a 2nd or 3rd down play after the 2 minutes warning.
It's really not a gift of any type of pass over a run play, in that situation. You are playing for downs, and that is why you make that call with 2 seconds to go
guys--yes, it's the end of the game with limited time outs, but the point of the call is that you are forcing downs. It is that situation that trumps time--well it doesn't trump time, but it is that moment where the losing team, on defense, gets the best opportunity from a down and clock perspective.
IIRC, it was Denver's second down when they ran that play and got first down anyways, so anything after that is pointless. If they didn't, then it'd be third down after the 2-minute warning, still plenty of opportunity for me to use that timeout. Like I said, if you're not planning on using that timeout, then you're playing to lose at that point because nothing will stop a clock after that, except for injuries and penaltieshmm:...)
Answering the bolded - that's not the clock stoppage I was referring to, I was referring to the clock stoppage that I would eventually need AFTER I somehow got the turnover and ran some plays - for when my receivers are stopped inbound - for instance. Anyways. I'm done with this topic.
Denver got a first down, then SD called the timeout at 2:02.
Code:
Timeout #3 by SD at 02:02.
1-10-SD 46 (2:02) (Shotgun) 18-P.Manning pass short left to 88-D.Thomas to SD 43 for 3 yards (31-R.Marshall).
Two-Minute Warning
2-7-SD 43 (1:57) (Shotgun) 27-K.Moreno right guard to SD 37 for 6 yards (91-K.Reyes).
Timeout #2 by DEN at 01:12.
3-1-SD 37 (1:12) 27-K.Moreno up the middle to SD 32 for 5 yards (29-S.Wright).
1-10-SD 32 (:36) 18-P.Manning kneels to SD 33 for -1 yards.
END GAMEThe only way SD doesnt use that timeout in that spot is if its 3rd down, and obviously 4th down. Its all about getting the ball back and preserving time. SD's only chance was forcing a punt and either getting a block, or a decent return (not gonna happen on the SD 37), or work the side lines a couple of times to set up a hail mary. They still had a shot to get the ball with around 30 sec left had they stopped them. They are gonna have to use the timeout to get the ball back in any scenario. They just saved a couple of secs.
That was risky though. I was surprised he actually passed it. Most teams wouldnt have, because of the risk of a bad shotgun snap, interception or sack. SD was in a bad spot anyway, and the only thing they can really do is play the percentages. They have to think Denver would run three times to eat the clock, and SD would force a punt. Even if SD had 3 timeouts it wouldnt have mattered since they couldnt stop Denver from getting first downs. Denver converted 3 3rd downs in the last 4 mins.
Last edited:
I have no idea what you're talking about.
The point all along is if you call your (last) TO after the 2 minute warning, you're no worse off except you may have lost two seconds. It'll still be the same down it would have been anyway. Although admittedly we've seen a lot of crazy shit happen in the last decade or so, this isn't the NBA and 2 seconds generally doesn't change outcomes.
However, if crazy shit happens and a team gets one last chance to drive and tie, having a timeout left is strategically valuable.
The debate here is whether to think tactically (save my precious 2 seconds) or strategically. A lot of coaches do more of the former when it's conservative and accepted practice. Some of the more successful ones have "gambled" more in recent years but I'm pretty sure they do it fully knowing/believing they actually have an edge. It doesn't matter if you're still fucked 99% of the time, you must try to make optimal decisions.
Last edited:
SSSnail
Lifer
- Nov 29, 2006
- 17,458
- 83
- 86
You know what, you guys were right. I mean why even bother keeping that one timeout you have left within the 2 minute anyways. I've never seen a team needing a timeout after the two minute warning to stop the clock drive down the field to either win or tie the game anyways, ever (They probably didn't think they're gonna get the ball back, amirite?). A few times that I've seen it this season, it's probably because they didn't care about the darn timeout anyways, and love performing laterals because that shit is FUN!
Carry on.
Edit: I just realized that some of you need to learn the differences between the game clock, and the play clock and how the two work.
Carry on.
Edit: I just realized that some of you need to learn the differences between the game clock, and the play clock and how the two work.
Last edited:
mugs
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2003
- 48,920
- 46
- 91
You don't eat up any more downs by taking the time out before the 2 minute warning. You shift one down from before the 2 minute warning to after the 2 minute warning, but because you have that time out you would have spent, the down takes only the time it takes, not 40+ seconds. There is no difference in downs. Atomic Playboy showed the two scenarios pretty clearly, there's no difference in downs consumed, only a very small difference on the clock.
It absolutely is a gift of an opportunity to pass! If you call time out at 2:02, they can pass without having any impact on the clock. It's going to stop either way. If you save that time out and let them run the play after the 2 minute warning, now they can't pass without risking a free clock stoppage.
If they are at the point of doing laterals, what good is having a timeout? They are doing laterals because there is no time left on the clock. Maybe if they had that extra two seconds in addition to whatever they had when they snapped the ball, they could work the sidelines one more time and get close enough for a hail mary. I think the minimum to complete a 5 yard pass and get out of bounds is like 5 sec. 2 more sec is potentially another play.
If you've been watching the Patriots the last 4 weeks it won't be so much Tom as much as the power run game ans as Patriot lineman Logan Mankins said,"if it's working, why stop doing it". Something I noticed from last nights game, PM threw into the wind with great accuracy, something he was struggling with in the earlier game in Foxborough..
Vapid Cabal
Member
- Dec 2, 2013
- 170
- 10
- 81
If the Patriots can run that effectively against the Broncos, Manning will need to put up some points...
MetalMat
Diamond Member
- Jun 14, 2004
- 9,687
- 36
- 91
Cam gets no credit for that bs. He has been flopping all season and this one just stole the academy award.
For Instance:
Miami Game - http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000286794/Did-Cam-Newton-flop
I can't wait for the NFL to turn into an arena football flopping league.
Last edited:
lupi
Lifer
- Apr 8, 2001
- 32,539
- 260
- 126
Wow what a lot of wasted space. The defense couldn't stop them on several third and long prior to getting to that point, what difference does it matter. And as noted by the conclusion of the game, the chargers could have had a hundred timeouts left and none of them would have mattered if you can't stip the other team from driving the length of the field.
Nintendesert
Diamond Member
- Mar 28, 2010
- 7,761
- 5
- 0
I think we can agree there are merits to both sides of the 2 minute warning timeouts. Either way it doesn't matter if your shit defense decides to keep blowing coverages on 3rd downs and can't get your offense the ball again.
Well Saturday went the way I wanted it to 2/2, Sunday was 0/2.
I guess I'm rooting for a Hawks / Patriots superbowl. I just don't want the 49ers or Broncos to win it
I guess I'm rooting for a Hawks / Patriots superbowl. I just don't want the 49ers or Broncos to win it
It is like that every year for the Conference Championship games. Better times for TV I guess.
It is curious how that they use different times for conference v divisional but I would assume 3 & 6 are the best statistical "middle ground" times to reach the biggest audience.
It just seems strange to change the times. If those were the best times, why would they not have all the games during those?
Maybe Goodell is conspiring with cable companies! Alex Smith wouldn't change the times on people.
Maybe Goodell is conspiring with cable companies! Alex Smith wouldn't change the times on people.
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
Opening line for SF-SEA is +3-3.5 SF with a 40 over/under. For DEN-NE it's +4.5-5 NE and 55. I'd probably take SEA and DEN and the under on those games, but I'm not excited about that action on either.
MetalMat
Diamond Member
- Jun 14, 2004
- 9,687
- 36
- 91
I'm sure Goodell and his cronies popped the champagne open as soon as JT caught that pass in the 4th quarter
I don't see why it is such a bad thing though. I mean, the Denver / NE game is basically a continuation of the Colts / NE rivalry. The Manning vs Brady saga continues. And the SF / Seattle rivalry is alive and well (now that the division stopped being terrible for the past couple years).
The over/under seems incredibly high for SF vs Seattle I think. Especially with how Seattle has sputtered on offense as of late. I am okay with Denver vs NE though. I could easily see 27 to 28 being the final score.
- Oct 9, 1999
- 46,936
- 10,827
- 147
This just in: Alex Smith is rumored to be the front runner to win the much coveted Alex Smith Trophy.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter