Garrett - clock management

[JBS]

I absolutely love Garrett, I am 100% sold on him as our head coach. However, Over the course of the last 5 games I have noticed that he does not manage the game clock properly. There have been multiple occasions now in which he has mismanaged the game situation.

From my experience, it seems like clock management is either something a coach has or does not have. One would absolutely think that over time and through experience a coach would learn how to properly manage a game clock, but I have seen a few coaches over several years continue to make the same mistakes. I really hope Garrett is not one of those guys.

 

[Gaede]

The clock management has kinda concerned me so far

But to be honest, I can't tell if he's just not good at it, or is making ultra-conservative calls (ie, kicking with 13 seconds left) because he's seen this team trip over it's own feet one too many times

 

[AbeBeta]

are these concerns? sure. but that is what you get with a very very young coach. he is smart and will learn from those mistakes. I do think he would benefit greatly from a little more experience on his staff to get in his ear in these situations - or at least to discuss them with him after the game

 

[BotchedLobotomy]

I'm not that concerned about it. I've seen guys with 10 times the experience handle it worse than Red, included the two fat guys that preceded him.

 

[CATCH17]

It's concerning for sure.


Also not getting us in better field goal range against the Saints with 2 timeouts was a head scratcher too.

 

[hmcorp]

we almost always have 2-3 timeouts at the end of the half.

we have always moved the ball with the idea that we can have a quick strike. no need to make a mistake giving the other team the ball. move methodically and correctly.

with romo we would be pressing more but with kitna it just isnt as feasible. he isnt as good.

 

[FLCowboyFan]

it seems like at the end of each half we let 40 or 50 seconds tick off the clock instead of calling a timeout. Then we get to a spot with only 13 seconds left with the ball the 30 yard line. If we use some of those timeouts earlier we would be able to have two or three extra plays to get in the end zone.

I haven't seen a lot of discussion on the board about this so I thought it was only my opinion. Some like others have a similar opinion.

 

[Oh_Canada]

we almost always have 2-3 timeouts at the end of the half.

we have always moved the ball with the idea that we can have a quick strike. no need to make a mistake giving the other team the ball. move methodically and correctly.

with romo we would be pressing more but with kitna it just isnt as feasible. he isnt as good.

Yup, at least he HAS timeouts to burn late in the half or at the end of games.

 

[john van brocklin]

I absolutely love Garrett, I am 100% sold on him as our head coach. However, Over the course of the last 5 games I have noticed that he does not manage the game clock properly. There have been multiple occasions now in which he has mismanaged the game situation.

From my experience, it seems like clock management is either something a coach has or does not have. One would absolutely think that over time and through experience a coach would learn how to properly manage a game clock, but I have seen a few coaches over several years continue to make the same mistakes. I really hope Garrett is not one of those guys.

I still dont get the kneel down with 23 seconds left on the clock and 2 timeouts at the Indy game.

The clock management at the end of the NewOrleans game was suspect as well.

 

[JBS]

I still dont get the kneel down with 23 seconds left on the clock and 2 timeouts at the Indy game.

The clock management at the end of the NewOrleans game was suspect as well.

You know I didn't have much of an issue w the kneel down @ Indy. However, I didn't like the pace / management of the series to end the first half vs Philly. Down by 7 w the ball and a few timeouts with over a minute left, I felt like it was possible to play for the TD. It was apparent from the get go that we played for a FG, which we ended up getting.

 

[CoCo]

You know I didn't have much of an issue w the kneel down @ Indy. However, I didn't like the pace / management of the series to end the first half vs Philly. Down by 7 w the ball and a few timeouts with over a minute left, I felt like it was possible to play for the TD. It was apparent from the get go that we played for a FG, which we ended up getting.

My perception is that Garrett is being careful about asking too much from this current lineup. Be it Kitna because of his limitations, or the inexperience of Dez, the instability of our O-line etc.

I think you'd see a different approach from Garrett with Romo in there and with what hopefully will be a more dependable supporting cast.

Plus coming out of this 1-7 hole I wouldn't be surprised if Garrett is playing closer to the vest in an attempt to avoid the mistakes that became the hallmark of our 1-7 start.

 

[NextGenBoys]

I am not necessarily disagreeing, but I cannot think of any examples off my head of clock issues.

Any examples?

 

[elcowboi]

I think that's something he'll learn as he goes along. He has only been THE head coach for a few weeks now.

 

[jblaze2004]

I think that's something he'll learn as he goes along. He has only been THE head coach for a few weeks now.

exacty this is his first time doing this he is basically a rookie coach. But like all rookies as long as he learns and improve in his bad spots then he will make a good coach as we are finding out already.

 

[Picksix]

I think a lot of it has to do with the idea that Garrett doesn't really trust this team, on either side of the ball. Indy, NO, and Philly are all teams that can strike quickly, and our defense has shown that it's prone to the big play, and not good at stopping teams in hurry-up situations. So I think his top priority was not to give the other team the ball with time to go down the field.

Against Philly, we were down 7, but were getting the ball to start the 3rd quarter. So I think the idea was to try to get some points, while milking as much of the clock as they could. Against Indy, they were up 10, and the Colts were getting the ball to start the 3rd. So not giving Peyton any time to score before the half was key, even if it meant not getting any more points. It wasn't as if they were in a situation where they absolutely had to get points before the end of the half.

The one problem I have with this, however, is that it's like playing not to lose. Of course, there is a fine line sometimes between prevention and aggressiveness. It's easy for us to say they should have done something different, but when you're in Garrett's position, your perspective is a little different. Who knows? Maybe if they had gotten more points before the half, it may have worked out better for them.

I saw one post that posed the question, "since Garrett is running practices more at game tempo, shouldn't the offense have a better handle on running the offense in uptempo situations," or something to that effect. Maybe they're not running the 2-minute drill well in practice. I've seen Kitna play for a lot of years, and I've never really known him to be that great at it. If that's the case, then it's understandable that Garrett would move more cautiously.

As for leaving TO's on the table, again, I think he'd rather run the clock than risk giving up a big play against them (see: Washington).

 

[goshan]

exacty this is his first time doing this he is basically a rookie coach. But like all rookies as long as he learns and improve in his bad spots then he will make a good coach as we are finding out already.

All this is so funny. The poster knew he would get hammered if he didn't preface the post with 'I love Garrett and hope he will be the head coach'.

Continues to show how agenda influences analysis - which is a total shame.

 

[JBS]

All this is so funny. The poster knew he would get hammered if he didn't preface the post with 'I love Garrett and hope he will be the head coach'.

Continues to show how agenda influences analysis - which is a total shame.

The only thing funny about this thread is your post...

do yourself a favor and do research before making ridiculous claims

I have supported Garrett in every single one of my posts..before, during, and after he was named interim head coach..THANK YOU VERY MUCH

I knew I would get hammered? funny..seeing as how just about every poster in this thread has agreed with me

nice try though...you can move along now..back into your hole of shame

 

[CoCo]

I think a lot of it has to do with the idea that Garrett doesn't really trust this team, on either side of the ball. Indy, NO, and Philly are all teams that can strike quickly, and our defense has shown that it's prone to the big play, and not good at stopping teams in hurry-up situations. So I think his top priority was not to give the other team the ball with time to go down the field.

Against Philly, we were down 7, but were getting the ball to start the 3rd quarter. So I think the idea was to try to get some points, while milking as much of the clock as they could. Against Indy, they were up 10, and the Colts were getting the ball to start the 3rd. So not giving Peyton any time to score before the half was key, even if it meant not getting any more points. It wasn't as if they were in a situation where they absolutely had to get points before the end of the half.

The one problem I have with this, however, is that it's like playing not to lose. Of course, there is a fine line sometimes between prevention and aggressiveness. It's easy for us to say they should have done something different, but when you're in Garrett's position, your perspective is a little different. Who knows? Maybe if they had gotten more points before the half, it may have worked out better for them.

I saw one post that posed the question, "since Garrett is running practices more at game tempo, shouldn't the offense have a better handle on running the offense in uptempo situations," or something to that effect. Maybe they're not running the 2-minute drill well in practice. I've seen Kitna play for a lot of years, and I've never really known him to be that great at it. If that's the case, then it's understandable that Garrett would move more cautiously.

As for leaving TO's on the table, again, I think he'd rather run the clock than risk giving up a big play against them (see: Washington).

The problem with your assessment is that, for instance, Garrett left 13 seconds I think on the clock for a recent (Philly I think) end of half FG which he attempted on 3rd down (or was it 2nd). So clearly he could have run more time off before the attempt. The result was that we had to give them a KO runback opportunity. I'm ok with not forcing a play to get more yardage but I sure don't want to give the opponent a chance at a big runback no matter how remote the chance.

And TO's on the table was NO I believe when we seemingly avoided the middle of the field to preserve time & TO's and then never used them settling instead for the 59 yard FG attempt. The thinking is we COULD have gained more yards utilizing the whole field since we had the TO's to stop the clock. So 59 yards (which was barely wide left I think) might have been good from 49 or so.

Truly a couple curious moves.

I had no problem taking a knee versus Indy after we barely dodged the KO fumble bullet on the previous play.

 

[Clove]

it seems like at the end of each half we let 40 or 50 seconds tick off the clock instead of calling a timeout. Then we get to a spot with only 13 seconds left with the ball the 30 yard line. If we use some of those timeouts earlier we would be able to have two or three extra plays to get in the end zone.

I haven't seen a lot of discussion on the board about this so I thought it was only my opinion. Some like others have a similar opinion.

That drove me in sane the other night. We were in the 2 minute warning, wasted like 37 seconds going into a freaking huddle, then the play ends in an incomplete. Next play we get a huge gain, but now we are up against the clock. I hate the way the Cowboys run the 2 minutes drill, for years now no matter who's the coach. The Colts know how to get their big butts down field and snap the ball quickly, preventing the false start. I wish we'd work on that in the off season, which I think we will.