09-14-2020, 10:30 PM
proving once again that he’s a great Defensive Coordinator. Unfortunately for Denver he’s the HC. Maybe he thought Vrabel would pull a Carroll.....
Fangio
09-14-2020, 11:31 PM
(09-14-2020, 10:30 PM)lex24 Wrote: proving once again that he’s a great Defensive Coordinator. Unfortunately for Denver he’s the HC. Maybe he thought Vrabel would pull a Carroll.....
Yeah, you probably need to take a timeout on the play before Henry ran out of bounds. But if you do that, what are the chances Tennessee runs OOB on second down? Or throws the ball on third down?
And given that kicker was 0-3 on FG, plus a missed PAT, it's not crazy to want to encourage the other side to have that guy try and beat you. But here's my real complaint: if you're going to let that much game clock expire before the other side tries the FG, don't you burn a TO to ice the guy?
For whatever reason, the end game I didn't find THAT egregious. 2 TOs and 17 seconds gives you 2-3 plays, including using the middle of the field, to possibly line up for 60-yarder. (In Denver, that's makeable). The first down INC made the second TO superfluous, but they would have needed it had the pass been completed.
(09-14-2020, 10:30 PM)lex24 Wrote: proving once again that he’s a great Defensive Coordinator. Unfortunately for Denver he’s the HC. Maybe he thought Vrabel would pull a Carroll.....
Yeah, you probably need to take a timeout on the play before Henry ran out of bounds. But if you do that, what are the chances Tennessee runs OOB on second down? Or throws the ball on third down?
And given that kicker was 0-3 on FG, plus a missed PAT, it's not crazy to want to encourage the other side to have that guy try and beat you. But here's my real complaint: if you're going to let that much game clock expire before the other side tries the FG, don't you burn a TO to ice the guy?
For whatever reason, the end game I didn't find THAT egregious. 2 TOs and 17 seconds gives you 2-3 plays, including using the middle of the field, to possibly line up for 60-yarder. (In Denver, that's makeable). The first down INC made the second TO superfluous, but they would have needed it had the pass been completed.
(09-14-2020, 11:31 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(09-14-2020, 10:30 PM)lex24 Wrote: proving once again that he’s a great Defensive Coordinator. Unfortunately for Denver he’s the HC. Maybe he thought Vrabel would pull a Carroll.....
Yeah, you probably need to take a timeout on the play before Henry ran out of bounds. But if you do that, what are the chances Tennessee runs OOB on second down? Or throws the ball on third down?
And given that kicker was 0-3 on FG, plus a missed PAT, it's not crazy to want to encourage the other side to have that guy try and beat you. But here's my real complaint: if you're going to let that much game clock expire before the other side tries the FG, don't you burn a TO to ice the guy?
For whatever reason, the end game I didn't find THAT egregious. 2 TOs and 17 seconds gives you 2-3 plays, including using the middle of the field, to possibly line up for 60-yarder. (In Denver, that's makeable). The first down INC made the second TO superfluous, but they would have needed it had the pass been completed.
He had all three time outs prior to Tenn last series. Should have used all three if necessary. If they get a firstvdown, younarevin the same situation anyway - a last second kick. If they stop them, Denver would have had about a minute left. He ends the game having two seconds to run last play. While holding 2 timeouts.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2020/09/broncos...-time-outs
(09-14-2020, 11:31 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(09-14-2020, 10:30 PM)lex24 Wrote: proving once again that he’s a great Defensive Coordinator. Unfortunately for Denver he’s the HC. Maybe he thought Vrabel would pull a Carroll.....
Yeah, you probably need to take a timeout on the play before Henry ran out of bounds. But if you do that, what are the chances Tennessee runs OOB on second down? Or throws the ball on third down?
And given that kicker was 0-3 on FG, plus a missed PAT, it's not crazy to want to encourage the other side to have that guy try and beat you. But here's my real complaint: if you're going to let that much game clock expire before the other side tries the FG, don't you burn a TO to ice the guy?
For whatever reason, the end game I didn't find THAT egregious. 2 TOs and 17 seconds gives you 2-3 plays, including using the middle of the field, to possibly line up for 60-yarder. (In Denver, that's makeable). The first down INC made the second TO superfluous, but they would have needed it had the pass been completed.
He had all three time outs prior to Tenn last series. Should have used all three if necessary. If they get a firstvdown, younarevin the same situation anyway - a last second kick. If they stop them, Denver would have had about a minute left. He ends the game having two seconds to run last play. While holding 2 timeouts.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2020/09/broncos...-time-outs
09-15-2020, 10:37 AM
(09-15-2020, 08:12 AM)lex24 Wrote:(09-14-2020, 11:31 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(09-14-2020, 10:30 PM)lex24 Wrote: proving once again that he’s a great Defensive Coordinator. Unfortunately for Denver he’s the HC. Maybe he thought Vrabel would pull a Carroll.....
Yeah, you probably need to take a timeout on the play before Henry ran out of bounds. But if you do that, what are the chances Tennessee runs OOB on second down? Or throws the ball on third down?
And given that kicker was 0-3 on FG, plus a missed PAT, it's not crazy to want to encourage the other side to have that guy try and beat you. But here's my real complaint: if you're going to let that much game clock expire before the other side tries the FG, don't you burn a TO to ice the guy?
For whatever reason, the end game I didn't find THAT egregious. 2 TOs and 17 seconds gives you 2-3 plays, including using the middle of the field, to possibly line up for 60-yarder. (In Denver, that's makeable). The first down INC made the second TO superfluous, but they would have needed it had the pass been completed.
He had all three time outs prior to Tenn last series. Should have used all three if necessary. If they get a firstvdown, younarevin the same situation anyway - a last second kick. If they stop them, Denver would have had about a minute left. He ends the game having two seconds to run last play. While holding 2 timeouts.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2020/09/broncos...-time-outs
Lex, there was only one play on the last set of downs where he should have used a TO to stop the clock (the first down run). The second down run, the guy went OOB; the third down play was an INC pass that also stopped the clock. If you're saying he should have used the TOs on the prior set of downs (and the same plays occurred), then he would have been left withe zero timeouts and in the same position (well, 17 seconds worse and no timeouts left).
Thus, yes, use one after the first down. After you fail to do that, use one to ice the kicker.
But what I'm saying is that if he had used a timeout after the first down, then Tennesee may have put way more emphasis on burning clock than they did on second and third downs. (At least I would have had I been the coach). Thus, in best case scenario, you may have 45 seconds and no timeouts, versus 17 seconds and three timeouts. You probably would prefer the former; but with pro rules (and not college rules where first down stops the clock), the delta isn't that great.
Another way to look at it: when Shaw decided to let the clock run down at the end of regulation in the Fiesta Bowl to try a 35 yard FG, should the Oklahoma State coach have used his timeouts to "save some clock" for his prolific offense, assuming a make? No. Because the coach rightfully knew that his best chance to win the game was a missed FG and go to OT and win there (which of course happened). Given that the Tennessee kicker was O-3 and had missed a PAT, Fangio might have had the same thoughts - though I admit that pro kickers are incredibly good and almost automatic. Still, the guy was a mess in the game and mental game is ultra important for kickers.
(09-15-2020, 08:12 AM)lex24 Wrote:(09-14-2020, 11:31 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(09-14-2020, 10:30 PM)lex24 Wrote: proving once again that he’s a great Defensive Coordinator. Unfortunately for Denver he’s the HC. Maybe he thought Vrabel would pull a Carroll.....
Yeah, you probably need to take a timeout on the play before Henry ran out of bounds. But if you do that, what are the chances Tennessee runs OOB on second down? Or throws the ball on third down?
And given that kicker was 0-3 on FG, plus a missed PAT, it's not crazy to want to encourage the other side to have that guy try and beat you. But here's my real complaint: if you're going to let that much game clock expire before the other side tries the FG, don't you burn a TO to ice the guy?
For whatever reason, the end game I didn't find THAT egregious. 2 TOs and 17 seconds gives you 2-3 plays, including using the middle of the field, to possibly line up for 60-yarder. (In Denver, that's makeable). The first down INC made the second TO superfluous, but they would have needed it had the pass been completed.
He had all three time outs prior to Tenn last series. Should have used all three if necessary. If they get a firstvdown, younarevin the same situation anyway - a last second kick. If they stop them, Denver would have had about a minute left. He ends the game having two seconds to run last play. While holding 2 timeouts.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2020/09/broncos...-time-outs
Lex, there was only one play on the last set of downs where he should have used a TO to stop the clock (the first down run). The second down run, the guy went OOB; the third down play was an INC pass that also stopped the clock. If you're saying he should have used the TOs on the prior set of downs (and the same plays occurred), then he would have been left withe zero timeouts and in the same position (well, 17 seconds worse and no timeouts left).
Thus, yes, use one after the first down. After you fail to do that, use one to ice the kicker.
But what I'm saying is that if he had used a timeout after the first down, then Tennesee may have put way more emphasis on burning clock than they did on second and third downs. (At least I would have had I been the coach). Thus, in best case scenario, you may have 45 seconds and no timeouts, versus 17 seconds and three timeouts. You probably would prefer the former; but with pro rules (and not college rules where first down stops the clock), the delta isn't that great.
Another way to look at it: when Shaw decided to let the clock run down at the end of regulation in the Fiesta Bowl to try a 35 yard FG, should the Oklahoma State coach have used his timeouts to "save some clock" for his prolific offense, assuming a make? No. Because the coach rightfully knew that his best chance to win the game was a missed FG and go to OT and win there (which of course happened). Given that the Tennessee kicker was O-3 and had missed a PAT, Fangio might have had the same thoughts - though I admit that pro kickers are incredibly good and almost automatic. Still, the guy was a mess in the game and mental game is ultra important for kickers.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »