Last Drive Play Calling

[scrantoncane]

Just watched the replay and something jumped out at me and this could have really gone horribly for us. CMR calls 2 huge run plays which Homer gets back to back first downs. The balls you have to have to call those run plays in with very little clock left! Gotta give him a ton of credit for the play calling especially when he is often criticized for his play calls. And then the finishing touch was not settling for a FG, we all know Golden crew would have taken a knee in that moment. Very proud of the team! They officially look competent. All we need to do is stop with the miscommunication between safeties and corners, and start taking better angles in the run game. a few of those big runs were completely shut down until a horrible angle was taken by a safety or LB.

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

I don't get this. You are a good poster for the most part as best I recall. You understand that the clock stops (until the ball is spotted) after a first down, right? Even if it's a running play. A well coached team that gets up to the line of scrimmage immediately after the play can be ready to run another play almost immediately once the ball is spotted and clock restarted, which is basically what happened as I recall. I thought it was played perfectly. The TO is FAR more valuable to be used after a sack, or when the runner gets stopped in bounds short of the first down than it is after a first down play. If I recall correctly, we had one time out left in our pockets when the game winning TD was scored. That TO would have been absolutely CRITICAL to have if DH had been stopped just short of the goal line, or if Malik had to scramble or took a sack on that play.

Respectfully, you are just wrong on this one.

Clock management is not an issue for the first time in a decade. Thank God.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ghost2]

I may be wrong (just re-watched the plays and haven't broken them down) but both of those runs by Homer looked like Read-Option RPOs to me? On both plays the outside WRs run block but you can see the two slot guys leaking into the flats for screens, and Rosier fakes the keeper on both plays. Not sure if these were calls from the sideline or at the LOS, but if it was in fact a post-snap read by Rosier then hats off to the kid for making a **** of a read. Great calls wherever they came from.

 

[Marcelo2988]

Just watched the replay and something jumped out at me and this could have really gone horribly for us. CMR calls 2 huge run plays which Homer gets back to back first downs. The balls you have to have to call those run plays in with very little clock left! Gotta give him a ton of credit for the play calling especially when he is often criticized for his play calls. And then the finishing touch was not settling for a FG, we all know Golden crew would have taken a knee in that moment. Very proud of the team! They officially look competent. All we need to do is stop with the miscommunication between safeties and corners, and start taking better angles in the run game. a few of those big runs were completely shut down until a horrible angle was taken by a safety or LB.

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

Yea.......i'll go with Coach Richt on this one.

Oh and yea we won

 

[paksat]

The first pass attempt to Cager may have been incidental contact, but on the second attempt, the defender definitely pushed him down. I was really getting ****ed with how much contact the refs were allowing from the defenders while at the same time flagging BB8 for barely touching a guy.

he didn't show an ounce of fight about it is what really got me

you can't let the refs dictate the game, put it on video if you have to but make a ***ing scene about it when i gets that atrocious

ffs espn can show it all they want as being a thug but the rest of the world with open eyes will what's really going on

 

[mackjones]

Also, major kudo's to the much maligned offensive line. Those Cane brothers, and Homer, gave Malik plenty of time to connect with Berrios and Langham for the winning TD. dUh. Especially when everyone in the house KNEW the Seminoles were coming FULL THROTTLE with five rushers. hUh.

 

[mackjones]

The first pass attempt to Cager may have been incidental contact, but on the second attempt, the defender definitely pushed him down. I was really getting ****ed with how much contact the refs were allowing from the defenders while at the same time flagging BB8 for barely touching a guy.

he didn't show an ounce of fight about it is what really got me

you can't let the refs dictate the game, put it on video if you have to but make a ***ing scene about it when i gets that atrocious

ffs espn can show it all they want as being a thug but the rest of the world with open eyes will what's really going on

Yeah. Those JOHNNY REBEL DEEP SOUTH officials were letting FSU's secondary ' man handle ' Miami's receivers all game long. Heck, FSU's line was also GETTING AWAY with holding all game long. Matter of fact, the only time they threw a couple of flags was when FSU's tight end literally grabbed and slammed a Miami player to the ground. LOL Even ESPN's McElroy suggested their were FSU ' holds ' several times during the game. Nevertheless, it's all moot now. Because Miami came away with a much needed victory. dUh.

 

[mackjones]

Am I the only one who saw a huge improvement in Rich's play calling in the second half vs. first half?
Even the sideline reporter was commenting how predictable our passing the first half.

Miami had difficulty running the ball in the first-half. Thus the Miami passing game. dUh.

 

[mackjones]

I may be wrong (just re-watched the plays and haven't broken them down) but both of those runs by Homer looked like Read-Option RPOs to me? On both plays the outside WRs run block but you can see the two slot guys leaking into the flats for screens, and Rosier fakes the keeper on both plays. Not sure if these were calls from the sideline or at the LOS, but if it was in fact a post-snap read by Rosier then hats off to the kid for making a **** of a read. Great calls wherever they came from.

Yes, they were RPO calls. dUh.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Just watched the replay and something jumped out at me and this could have really gone horribly for us. CMR calls 2 huge run plays which Homer gets back to back first downs. The balls you have to have to call those run plays in with very little clock left! Gotta give him a ton of credit for the play calling especially when he is often criticized for his play calls. And then the finishing touch was not settling for a FG, we all know Golden crew would have taken a knee in that moment. Very proud of the team! They officially look competent. All we need to do is stop with the miscommunication between safeties and corners, and start taking better angles in the run game. a few of those big runs were completely shut down until a horrible angle was taken by a safety or LB.

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

I don't get this. You are a good poster for the most part as best I recall. You understand that the clock stops (until the ball is spotted) after a first down, right? Even if it's a running play. A well coached team that gets up to the line of scrimmage immediately after the play can be ready to run another play almost immediately once the ball is spotted and clock restarted, which is basically what happened as I recall. I thought it was played perfectly. The TO is FAR more valuable to be used after a sack, or when the runner gets stopped in bounds short of the first down than it is after a first down play. If I recall correctly, we had one time out left in our pockets when the game winning TD was scored. That TO would have been absolutely CRITICAL to have if DH had been stopped just short of the goal line, or if Malik had to scramble or took a sack on that play.

Respectfully, you are just wrong on this one.

Look, I'm not wrong.

We burned our second timeout AFTER the second incompletion to Cager (AFTER both Homer runs).

So, yeah, we wasted one timeout.

Again, respectfully, you are just wrong on this one.

 

[dookie blaylock]

Just watched the replay and something jumped out at me and this could have really gone horribly for us. CMR calls 2 huge run plays which Homer gets back to back first downs. The balls you have to have to call those run plays in with very little clock left! Gotta give him a ton of credit for the play calling especially when he is often criticized for his play calls. And then the finishing touch was not settling for a FG, we all know Golden crew would have taken a knee in that moment. Very proud of the team! They officially look competent. All we need to do is stop with the miscommunication between safeties and corners, and start taking better angles in the run game. a few of those big runs were completely shut down until a horrible angle was taken by a safety or LB.

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

***** on poster about what-ifs. proceeds to make an entire rant based on what-ifs.

their defense was on its heels on both of the last drives. as soon as the 3rd down to berrios was completed they lost all confidence in what they were doing. it's like they went out with a single mindset of forcing a 3-and-out, then had zero clue what to do after that. don't give them a chance to regroup when you're moving on them.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Just watched the replay and something jumped out at me and this could have really gone horribly for us. CMR calls 2 huge run plays which Homer gets back to back first downs. The balls you have to have to call those run plays in with very little clock left! Gotta give him a ton of credit for the play calling especially when he is often criticized for his play calls. And then the finishing touch was not settling for a FG, we all know Golden crew would have taken a knee in that moment. Very proud of the team! They officially look competent. All we need to do is stop with the miscommunication between safeties and corners, and start taking better angles in the run game. a few of those big runs were completely shut down until a horrible angle was taken by a safety or LB.

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

No need to get bent out of shape. Just posting a hypothetical. I guess in your mind there are no guarantees except what you think should have been done. Take it up with Richt.

Again, I'm not getting bent out of shape with posters, I had a legitimate concern DURING the game.

See my prior response. We burned our second timeout after an INCOMPLETION.

I'm very happy with the ultimate outcome, but it is just nuts to deny that we had a couple of mistakes in clock management.

We made mistakes. Fortunately, we overcame our mistakes.

That's just honesty.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Just watched the replay and something jumped out at me and this could have really gone horribly for us. CMR calls 2 huge run plays which Homer gets back to back first downs. The balls you have to have to call those run plays in with very little clock left! Gotta give him a ton of credit for the play calling especially when he is often criticized for his play calls. And then the finishing touch was not settling for a FG, we all know Golden crew would have taken a knee in that moment. Very proud of the team! They officially look competent. All we need to do is stop with the miscommunication between safeties and corners, and start taking better angles in the run game. a few of those big runs were completely shut down until a horrible angle was taken by a safety or LB.

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

Yea.......i'll go with Coach Richt on this one.

Oh and yea we won

Ignorant post.

We took a timeout after an incompletion.

No amount of "after-the-fact-justification" changes the actual reality of what transpired.

We made a mistake, and we were fortunate to get the win, and not just tie the game and pray for overtime.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Just watched the replay and something jumped out at me and this could have really gone horribly for us. CMR calls 2 huge run plays which Homer gets back to back first downs. The balls you have to have to call those run plays in with very little clock left! Gotta give him a ton of credit for the play calling especially when he is often criticized for his play calls. And then the finishing touch was not settling for a FG, we all know Golden crew would have taken a knee in that moment. Very proud of the team! They officially look competent. All we need to do is stop with the miscommunication between safeties and corners, and start taking better angles in the run game. a few of those big runs were completely shut down until a horrible angle was taken by a safety or LB.

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

****s on poster about what-ifs. proceeds to make an entire rant based on what-ifs.

their defense was on its heels on both of the last drives. as soon as the 3rd down to berrios was completed they lost all confidence in what they were doing. it's like they went out with a single mindset of forcing a 3-and-out, then had zero clue what to do after that. don't give them a chance to regroup when you're moving on them.

What a dopey buffoon you are.

What-ifs BASED ON THE ACTUAL CLOCK are valid.

Instead, you are talking about "confidence" and a bunch of retarded psychological stuff.

Bottom line, if that idiot DB committed pass interference, we would have been forced to kick a FG and risk losing in OT.

But sure, a bunch of moron posters are going to talk about "confidence" and "regrouping" and a bunch of worthless stuff that they invent in their own heads.

The clock is real. We've seen plenty of teams mismanage the last few seconds and lose the chance to run a final play. If we take a timeout AFTER A RUN and not AFTER AN INCOMPLETION, we have another chance to win the game if the desperate ACC replay officials try to place the ball on the half-yard line (actually, the 15 and a half yardline after the penalty).

I'm not playing what-if games with intangibles like "confidence", I'm logically analyzing the what-ifs that every coach must consider when managing the clock.

Lots of dolts trying to rationalize taking a timeout after an incompletion (just because we eventually won). Ridiculous.

 

[MiamiVice7]

I don't understand Cager. I don't expect him to make every play just because he's so much bigger than the defender, but he should definitely make his fair share for the same reason when the ball is anywhere close. I was really disappointed that he couldn't pull down at least one big play with the physical advantage he had/has.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I don't understand Cager. I don't expect him to make every play just because he's so much bigger than the defender, but he should definitely make his fair share for the same reason when the ball is anywhere close. I was really disappointed that he couldn't pull down at least one big play with the physical advantage he had/has.

Agreed.

I know that Cager missed a lot of time, and it SHOWED. Did all kinds of things wrong that should be instinctual at this point.

To contrast, both Berrios and Langham made 180 degree turns on their touchdown catches, to snag the ball towards the outside, beyond the reach of the DBs. Absolutely beautiful both times that I saw them do it.

 

[GR8]

CMR went for the W not a tie, you play to win.

 

[Loose Cannon]

The first pass attempt to Cager may have been incidental contact, but on the second attempt, the defender definitely pushed him down. I was really getting ****ed with how much contact the refs were allowing from the defenders while at the same time flagging BB8 for barely touching a guy.

he didn't show an ounce of fight about it is what really got me

you can't let the refs dictate the game, put it on video if you have to but make a ***ing scene about it when i gets that atrocious

ffs espn can show it all they want as being a thug but the rest of the world with open eyes will what's really going on

Yeah. Those JOHNNY REBEL DEEP SOUTH officials were letting FSU's secondary ' man handle ' Miami's receivers all game long. Heck, FSU's line was also GETTING AWAY with holding all game long. Matter of fact, the only time they threw a couple of flags was when FSU's tight end literally grabbed and slammed a Miami player to the ground. LOL Even ESPN's McElroy suggested their were FSU ' holds ' several times during the game. Nevertheless, it's all moot now. Because Miami came away with a much needed victory. dUh.

Yeah. It wasn't just Cager, although I have been unimpressed with his lack of physicality, they were holding AR15 on **** near every down as well. BB8 was a little too slippery for them, though. And basically because I'm a biased homer I can't really say if our defenders were getting away with similar stuff, but I doubt it. I was more getting ****ed because it was starting to have the feel of one of those games where the refs "let 'em play" for 55 minutes, but all of a sudden can't keep their flags in their pockets with the game on the line. I have to say I was impressed that the refs didn't let it become that.

 

[Dacane]

Just watched the replay and something jumped out at me and this could have really gone horribly for us. CMR calls 2 huge run plays which Homer gets back to back first downs. The balls you have to have to call those run plays in with very little clock left! Gotta give him a ton of credit for the play calling especially when he is often criticized for his play calls. And then the finishing touch was not settling for a FG, we all know Golden crew would have taken a knee in that moment. Very proud of the team! They officially look competent. All we need to do is stop with the miscommunication between safeties and corners, and start taking better angles in the run game. a few of those big runs were completely shut down until a horrible angle was taken by a safety or LB.

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

"idiotic" lol. The last drive was masterful. There was no need to call timeouts, and giving the defense time to regroup is absolutely a valid consideration. Some people are never happy.

 

[g8rh8rMD]

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

I don't get this. You are a good poster for the most part as best I recall. You understand that the clock stops (until the ball is spotted) after a first down, right? Even if it's a running play. A well coached team that gets up to the line of scrimmage immediately after the play can be ready to run another play almost immediately once the ball is spotted and clock restarted, which is basically what happened as I recall. I thought it was played perfectly. The TO is FAR more valuable to be used after a sack, or when the runner gets stopped in bounds short of the first down than it is after a first down play. If I recall correctly, we had one time out left in our pockets when the game winning TD was scored. That TO would have been absolutely CRITICAL to have if DH had been stopped just short of the goal line, or if Malik had to scramble or took a sack on that play.

Respectfully, you are just wrong on this one.

Look, I'm not wrong.

We burned our second timeout AFTER the second incompletion to Cager (AFTER both Homer runs).

So, yeah, we wasted one timeout.

Again, respectfully, you are just wrong on this one.

Roger Dodger... Agree to disagree.

Take issue if you want with the timeout following two incompletions facing 3rd and 10, I guess I won't argue with you on that, and I'm done arguing with you on this point as it is, but you don't call TO following a first down with the clock stopped and the D reeling... unless you're Al Golden.

Have a great day, Cane. Enjoy the win.

 

[Loose Cannon]

I was fine with the running calls.

I was NOT fine with not taking a timeout after each. It all worked out for the best, but I was freaking the fvck out.

I can understand saving one TO for a FG, but not both.

might have been just to keep the pedal to the metal. It also maybe prevented some subs on their side. They were probably gassed. Why give them time to regroup? Personally I thought it was fine. Gave them just enough time to try one more play in the endzone and last second field goal with no time left on clock .

For the millionth time, we can talk about what-ifs all day long.

The bottom line is that if you are comparing, you know, ACTUAL TIME ON THE CLOCK to some sort of a strategy to minimize substitution, TIME ON THE CLOCK wins every single motherfvcking time.

If we do not get first downs, if we do not have incompletions, then the clock keeps running and we might never get in range for a FG, we might never get guys on the field to kick a FG, we might miss a FG.

Oh, but sure, we should waste time to prevent them from substituting.

Sometimes I wonder if some posters have ever actually played football.

It all worked out, so I'm fine as it played out, but it was certainly an unnecessary risk. ****, even the F$U defender could have committed pass interference on that play, which would have forced us to kick a FG.

NO GUARANTEES when kicking. NO GUARANTEES in OT.

I thank God it worked out as it did, but it was idiotic to not use one of our TOs after a running play on that drive.

I don't get this. You are a good poster for the most part as best I recall. You understand that the clock stops (until the ball is spotted) after a first down, right? Even if it's a running play. A well coached team that gets up to the line of scrimmage immediately after the play can be ready to run another play almost immediately once the ball is spotted and clock restarted, which is basically what happened as I recall. I thought it was played perfectly. The TO is FAR more valuable to be used after a sack, or when the runner gets stopped in bounds short of the first down than it is after a first down play. If I recall correctly, we had one time out left in our pockets when the game winning TD was scored. That TO would have been absolutely CRITICAL to have if DH had been stopped just short of the goal line, or if Malik had to scramble or took a sack on that play.

Respectfully, you are just wrong on this one.

Look, I'm not wrong.

We burned our second timeout AFTER the second incompletion to Cager (AFTER both Homer runs).

So, yeah, we wasted one timeout.

Again, respectfully, you are just wrong on this one.

You mean the play right before the one where we won the game? You mean we wasted a time out to ensure everybody had the right play and were all on the same page? The time out we wouldn't have had if we had called timeouts after two first down runs that stopped the clock anyway?

Sorry dude, but I'm going to have to agree with [MENTION=14474]g8rh8rMD[/MENTION] on this one. Calling the timeout, even with the clock stopped, just to make sure we get the final play called correctly makes perfect sense. Calling a timeout after a 14 yard first down run that stopped the clock anyway does not.