BUMP (Again) - Ben and Tomlin Have a Kindergarten Clock Management Education

Yeah, so, this again...

The latest offense came after Heath's first down catch near the end of the half. Ben's options:

1) Call timeout with 30 seconds left. 3 plays, 30 seconds to score a TD.
2) Spike the ball with 20 seconds left. 2 plays, 20 seconds to score a TD.

I'll say that again, and I swear I'm not trying to sound like the guy from those AT&T commercials with the focus group of children, but this is what Ben's reduced me to: What's better? More tries to get a touchdown, and more time to do it? Or fewer tries, with less time?

Oh, but if we do it your way, Ben, then you get to keep your precious time out. That way, if we get tackled in bounds on one of our TWO plays, we won't have to scramble to the line and spike the ball, wasting 10 seconds and a down. You know, like we.... just..... did........



Who knows? Maybe this is the time he and Mike learn their lesson. Maybe 35th time is the charm.

And for anyone keeping track, we were just coming OUT of a timeout, so they had plenty of time to consider the scenarios. Sometimes we score a TD anyway and get away with it, other times we don't. Today we didn't, but we still won the game, so no one will take notice. The sad thing is, even if we'd lost, and lost because of it, I'm 99% sure they still wouldn't attempt to fix the problem.

 

I'm not defending their clock management skills but I don't recall anything negative about the final drive of the first half yesterday. I'd like to see it again though but I thought they managed the clock as well as you could in that situation.

 

If they call timeout, it's 1st and 10 from the 14 with 30 seconds left. Three plays and 30 seconds to score or get a first down before kicking a field goal. Instead, they spiked it with 20 seconds left. Now they have two plays and 20 seconds to try and score (or get a first down) before kicking a field goal. We threw two incomplete passes. A third attempt would have been nice. We forfeited that option for no reason.

Like I said, what really kills me is that it happens over and over and they don't make any effort to fix it. Costing ourselves points is not smart.

 

If we use the timeout we may not get a chance at a field goal. A sack or a catch that's not a touchdown more than likely runs out the clock.

 

Yeah im ok with keeping a to in our back pocket Justin casetoo

 

I was frustrated at first when I saw them going for the spike, but yeah. It wouldn't be unimaginable for either of those two things to happen.

 

In what was a close game at that point. It was better to have a chance at making a close FG than getting no points.

 

Snack is 100% correct. This is a problem that Ben has always had, and will cost us eventually. It wouldn't be that big of a deal this game if we hadn't wasted a timeout earlier in the half on 4th down and tried to draw them offside in a spot that no coach in their right mind would go for it from. Seems like we try to do that every game, it never works, and we waste an early timeout that could be used in situations like what Snack described. More TO's means less Big Ben and Tomlin have to think about clock mgmt, which they suck at anyway. I don't know why Ben loves to spike the ball so much.

 

Ben likes to spike the ball so much because he is hoping to one day use the Marino fake spike touchdown pass. Just because it hasn't happened in ten years doesn't mean he has to give up hope.

 

Clock management is most certainly a major deficiency in Tomlin's coaching abilities. Ben is not much better, but that primarily falls on the HC.

 

I think at this point tomlin and Ben are hoping that the competition committee put in place some new rules that allow you to pool your time outs and exchange them at the end of the year for a wildcard spot. Ben is hoping that spiking the ball will give him more tickets that he use with his Chucky Cheese skeeball tickets and finally get that Terry Bradshaw bobblehead

 

I agree that our clock mgmt is pretty dang gimp. There are all kinds of times when I'm screaming "TIMEOUT" at the tv. Also something that really annoyed me yesterday was when the clowns were majorly confused on d and Ben didn't snap it quick and catch them looking. Instead he just stood there and called out the play and gave them all kinds of time to get things settled. I really wish he would be more perceptive in those situations. If Brady or manning or Rodgers catches them looking they are gonna pay badly. It also seems like we don't try to snap it quick after questionable plays that might be challenged.

 

That's not so much true if you do the math. Miller went down with 31 seconds, which is plenty of time. Remember, if you use your timeout early instead of keeping it in case of getting tackled in bounds, then you save time up front, which can be applied toward spiking the ball on another down IF you need to. Spiking the ball up front is the equivalent of guaranteeing a sack or catch that gets tackled in bounds. It costs the time it takes to spike and a down.

If you want to break it all the way down to the second, I'll grant you that if it's a sack, it could take a couple seconds longer to spike the ball, compared to spiking it after a play like Miller's catch. But how long do plays take? Short plays - like ones that only have to go 14 yards or out of bounds - take 4, 5, 6 seconds. Maybe 7. The actual plays we ran in this game on first and second down took 4 and 5 seconds, respectively. Add another 10 or 11 if our guy gets tackled in bounds. It took about that long for us to do it in this game. Obviously plans change play to play, in terms of where you can throw the ball, how long you can take, whether or not a sack is acceptable, etc. So let's assume we do it my way, and the worst happens: he gets sacked on first down, or we complete a pass that gains only 6 yards over the middle. That 30 seconds turns to 13 or 14, then you spike the ball and only have one play left. That's bad, but then again, we should have been trying hard to avoid both of those scenarios by going to the sideline or end zone. Now let's assume we do it your/Ben's way, and the same happens. You spike the ball with 20 seconds left. Then, on the next play, you get sacked or only gain 6 yards over the middle. Now there are 13 or 14 seconds left when you are granted your timeout. You have one play left.

See? Exactly the same, and that's assuming the worst-case scenario. If it's a normal scenario (we do what we can to try and get the ball thrown into the end zone or to the sidelines, and don't take a sack, or even if we do get tackled in bounds, but get inside the 4 yard line for a first down), then my way gets us an extra down. An extra throw into the end zone.

 

Ok so you call a time out with 31 seconds left, lets say you burn 13 seconds on the first two downs and and get no completions. That's 18 seconds left then you get sacked on third down? Guess what, no time to get the field goal unit on the field. And what if you catch the ball inbounds on one of the first two downs and you have to spike it anyway?
I'm with you for the most part that we misuse the clock often, but in this situation they did it right.

And to those complaining about Ben spiking the ball, I'm sure he's being told whether or not to do it by Haley through the little speaker in his helmet.

 

Yeah I see what you are saying now.

But I can also see saving the TO too in that situation, so maybe that's why it didn't bother me too much. As it was said above, you are protecting against a sack. What if the protection on the next play breaks down Ben scrambles and is sacked. You're now looking at a longer FG in a windy stadium in a hurry up situation. Given that the game was still close, getting pts at that time was big. Also, not only do you safeguard against a sack, but you also keep your options open regarding the playbook. You're not limiting your plays to ones that reach the EZ. The (dreaded) screen, draw, and quick slant are still in play. Although you could spike then if you chose to run those plays.

So basically they sacrificed 1 play for some security at a crucial time of the game. It could've gone either way and I'd be fine with it.

I do agree that the more puzzling thing was calling a timeout on the 4th down.

 

Yeah, I'm with you too, although given our history in the final 2:00 of a half, and the distance from the end zone in that situation and the insurance factor of a final timeout (although they may have made the same decision with 2 timeouts), I too would have been concerned about the 3rd down clustersack and not getting on the field in time, even though a disciplined team should have no problem getting out there in 15 seconds. But, you're right....you want to maximize your potential attempts at the end zone rather than wasting downs. Maybe I'm just a bit numb after historically seeing us waste downs by spiking or taking timeouts with a full minute to play on first and GOAL no less.....or taking a timeout on OFFENSE with 2:01 to go and then throwing to the end zone on the next play thereby negating the 2 minute warning (we did this against Tennessee this year).... or lining up to spike and having someone move, causing a 10 second runoff (never got over that Atlanta game from several years ago) or the ever popular calling timeout with 2:42 when the play clock would have forced a snap BEFORE the 2-minute warning thereby negating the timeout entirely....Ah, memories! So, compared to all that, I'd say we're making great progress!

 

If you spike on first, you sacrifice a play (in order to 100% secure a FG attempt and not risk a Clustersack on 3rd down). I don't like that, I think that having a play in which you know you can't take a sack (moving the pocket, fades/fade-stops, any kind of play where the QB throws it after 1 second or so) is a part of football, and being too incompetent to do that is as bad as being too incompetent to make a 32 yard field goal in the first place. However, that's just my opinion.

But here's the beautiful part! If you do it my way and call the time out, then it turns to 3rd and long and you're worried about a Clustersack and not getting the FG attempt at all.... Why not just kick on third down? Or spike it even though the clock is stopped? There's no rule that says you have to run a play. You have the option. Now, I think those things sound ridiculous (especially spiking it on 3rd down with the clock already stopped, just to bring up 4th, and then kick it), but that's essentially what you're doing by spiking it on first down.

Actual scenario:

1st - Spike 20)
2nd - Incomplete 16)
3rd - Incomplete 11)
4th - Kick

Timeout (Clustersack prevention):

*Timeout* 30)
1st - Incomplete 26)
2nd - Incomplete 21)
3rd - Spike 20)
4th - Kick

See? The spike just moved. But that's silly. So call timeout and give yourself the choice to turn that spike into a play. In fact, by calling timeout, you not only give yourself THAT option in case you want to call a play, but you give yourself even more options in the event that you pick up yards on the first two downs. What if you gain 12 yards on the 2nd play? Now it's 1st and goal from the 2 with 18 seconds left. You can throw three fades in that amount of time and still kick it on 4th!!

 

I think in the off season it would be beneficial for all involved to get with people much smarter than who we employ and to go over time management
strategies/scenarios. I have seen
way too much to my dislike out of this group over the years. Its depressing.

 

All your senerios are perfect world scenarios. None of those are going to work with our track record. Like I said I'm with you in that there's a lot of mismanagement of the clock, but in this case they got it right. The fourth down timeout when they were trying to draw the Browns offside was a waste, although there may be a future reason why they did it.

 

My point is, it works with any scenario. A sack IS the worst case scenario. When you're out of timeouts and time is winding down, there's nothing worse (besides a turnover, which has nothing to do with any of this - unless you are doing what Ben did against TEN in 2011). It could happen on 1st or 2nd down, whatever. At that point, you scramble your guys and spike the ball, and you can afford to do that because you already saved spiking time by calling timeout earlier. It's possible you might lose an additional second or two, but we weren't that desperate for time. I suppose you're thinking something like, "What if we get sacked every play?" But, a couple things... if that's happening, we have other issues. You might as well ask, "What if we miss the field goal?" or "What if we throw an interception?" This is just about giving ourselves the best opportunity to score as many points as possible (more specifically, not throwing away opportunities already earned). The other thing is, not all three plays are determined at once. As time goes, you can adjust. If we get sacked on 1st down, and then 2nd down is a looooong play that takes like 12 seconds before becoming incomplete and now there's not enough time for a third pass, then just kick it! We don't have to call all three plays at once. You can adjust as you go, and 30 seconds is too much time to run out after one mistake. You continue to do math after each play. It's easy with practice, but our QB and coach have been practicing wrong.

 

With an extra timeout, the Minnesota game might have ended differently. I think they did the right thing. Spike the ball, take the time to call two plays that give you a shot at a touchdown. Walk away with a field goal should they fail. If you call the last timeout on 1st down, then you cannot stop the clock with a catch in bounds or a sack. Most teams will spike on 1st down because it was the right thing to do.

 

How do you reconcile your theory with the way I addressed that above?

 

Well, I disagree that an incompletion would end with 26 seconds. Without the spike, they are calling a play at the line and don't hike the ball until 20 seconds are left. If the pass is caught inbounds, then they have to burn the timeout, leaving them not enough time to guarantee one shot and a FG because a sack could happen. Whereas with a completion over the middle on 2nd down that gives you another first down, you could spike the ball again, get one shot, burn your timeout and take your FG.

My point is not to be in a confrontation, but there are several ways this could work out. Tomlin and company weren't wrong with how they did it. They put themselves in position to take 2 shots at the endzone, but it didn't work out so they came away with 3 points. No other scenario guarantees a touchdown, so the best any other scenario could produce was 3 points. Mismanagement means coming away with no points, because you run out of time.