I have no issues with the end of game clock mismangement

[DanA]

No offense intended to your post, but if the clock MM was looking at went dark, he didn’t have a whole lot of options. If it was intentional, the Chargers should forfeit a pick.

When you say not a whole lot of options, do you mean to say turning his head 90 degrees to look at the giant clock in the endzone (which Dak was using) isn't a viable option?

 

[Awakened]

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...stionable-clock-management-before-field-goal/

McCarthy himself said they wanted to run another play to get a shorter field goal but couldn't because of a personnel mixup and clock errors. So McCarthy believed that was the optimal play.

Exactly. The excuses on here are amazing. McCarthy basically said they wanted to run another play but are incompetent. $4 Million a year. It's not like he's paid $400,000.

 

[Verdict]

When you say not a whole lot of options, do you mean to say turning his head 90 degrees to look at the giant clock in the endzone (which Dak was using) isn't a viable option?

Maybe so. Were you standing next to him? I doubt he has a go go gadget neck to look up at the Jumbotron, but hey maybe I’m wrong here.

 

[DanA]

Maybe so. Were you standing next to him? I doubt he has a go go gadget neck to look up at the Jumbotron, but hey maybe I’m wrong here.

I think you just need to google what the stadiums screen layout looks like. Then you'll understand that what McCarthy is saying is Mike Nolan "hot sauce" level of stupidity.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Zeurlein hit 33% from 50+ last year, and very shaky last week. It's near a miracle that he hit the FG.

Can't believe you are excusing incompetence from a guy paid $4 Million a year. He should be prepared for every scenario at the end of a game.

You realize that furthers the argument that you don't want to call timeout and let them have the ball back?

That makes it that much more likely that they would get the ball back with a short field in a tie game.

It basically boils down to missing a shot at one more play. Boo friggin hoo.

Personally, understanding the above and taking into consideration Pollard running off the field and the issues with seeing the playclock I am fine with going conservative. There is no such thing as being too careful in the midst of chaos.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

OMG, not trying because things could go wrong? I mean, isn't that what Brady did when he threw 3 passes OOB at the end of game last week? I mean, he sure the heck wasn't "trying to pick up more yards" , so I guess the only thing to say is ..... WHAT A COWARD!!!!!

Come on man, this is getting silly.

As far as the actual FG attempt...

Did GZ miss a 60 yarder the week before in TB? Absolutely.

Was LA as humid as TB was last week? I don't think so. At least the announcers did not seem to mention it like they did last week several times.
Even if it was, it sure seemed like SoFi stadium is an indoor stadium. If not indoors, pretty close to it.
Was he kicking off of grass? Nope.

So I think complaining about a 56 yard attempt in LA, in a "indoor" stadium, on artificial turf and in really good kicking conditions because of a 60 yard miss GZ had the week before, in much less kicker friendly conditions, is overreaching a bit.

I hope you can at least admit it is probably easier kicking at SoFi than it is at Raymond James? If you can't, oh well.

Lastly. I hate stupid plays too. And I don't disagree with you on a few of Moore's "college plays" he made at crucial times in the game, AND in the RedZone. Yet some of those "college plays" have had some really positive gains this year. So it's great, until it doesn't work.

But I've never seen a coach who has "always" called non-stupid plays. I'm sure Landry did it. I know Jimmy did. I've seen Parcells do it. I've even seen Andy Reid do it. Just name a coach, they have, and unless they are retired, will in all likelihood, call other stupid plays in their careers.

So instead of focusing on a few specific plays, I tend to be a "big picture" type of guy. And overall, outside of those handful of plays, we have had two weeks of exceptional play calling and game planning.

Where they perfect? No, not even close. But unlike previous coaching staffs, you know who I'm talking about, I am seeing an offense that is attacking opposing D weaknesses and taking advantage of what the defense is leaving open.

Hopefully when Kellen decides to get cute next time, it works. OR he realizes some things just won't work at this level and leaves that to non-critical moments.


I don't know what to tell you man. What happened was not perfect, even blowout Super Bowl wins by the Cowboys were not perfect, but in this game, MM gave us a shot at winning without giving the other team a shot of stealing the win in regulation.

Ain't nothing wrong with that.

LOL. wow. just wow...you are all over the place. follow no logic and can't even follow your own posts. do you have severe ADHD by any chance and this is not an insult.

you said and I quote:
"You seem to forget the possibility of having a NEGATIVE play and/or PENALTY that could have moved us to a 61 or 69 yard attempt.",
"Yet there was confusion, by a coach or player somewhere, and had the Cowboys tried to run a play without everyone knowing what to do and someone does something like "
"Again, I'm not AGAINST us running another play in that situation"
"Bad snap, fumble, sack, TFL, interception, false start, holding, illegal shift, illegal formation, delay of game ... or anything else you can think of could have happened, "


so you have argued with yourself both side of the argument. you said the end of the game was chaotic and we should have ran a play, but then also say, we did it right, by not trying to run a play. so which is it?

and to your comment about
"Ya, Brady looked like he REALLY tried to get more yards at the end of the game last week. Never mind, he was just trying to run down the clock because all those incompletions were STOPPING the clock in the first place"

tell me if something could have gone wrong? bad snap, sack, tfl, intercpetin, holding, false start, illegal shift, illegal formatin, delay of game, etc....yet Tampa still ran those plays, not worrying...and tell me if a WR was clearly open on the sideline that Brady would throw the ball away or would he attempt to make the pass and move the ball closer?

so as you said, and all I argued, we had a 56 yard kick. makable, but questionable...all this weatherman reporting and assumption aside...tampa is more humid, LA is not and blah blah blah.....Zeirline missed several kicks the game before. even makable ones...do you not give him a chance? of course not..you do....you don't play scared as I said...but do you try to put him in a better position to make the kick? yes, you should increase the odds best you can....

the facts I pointed to. we seem unprepared. MM had said as much. they were confused. players were on the field they shouldn't have been. we didn't seem to know what we were doing....if the plan was to run the clock and kick, then why did players act as if they are trying to run another play. why did the coaches and then call a timeout with 4 seconds to go...yet, Tampa same situation, seemed ready. they didn't panic. players knew what to do. nobody jumped offsides. nobody panic. there was no chaos.

I am not concerned as I said, with the play and how we won....yes, we drove down and won...but we just don't look prepared in these tight situations and doesn't seem we undersand what's expected and how the situation needs to be managed. we were not ready managing the end of the game. we were not ready managing the end of tampa game. I am concerned with unpreparedness of the coaches, which manifest itself in how the team plays in those situations. confused. not ready. chaotic.....there is no arguing we mismanaged it. fortunately we were in a situation that allowed us to kick a 56 yarder and win the game....

will the next time we get into a similar situation, be more like Tampa where we screw it up or more like SD, we get lucky. I rather us be prepared. look prepared. play prepared.

 

[Chuck 54]

Some kickers, it’s a big deal. With Zeurline, it’s his normal kick, not like he needed to kick it harder than normal.
The only way the distance matters is if he kicked one of those sailing right or left kicks that Clips the upright and clearly would have missed it 5 yards earlier.
It was a stupid mistake by coaches that really doesn’t matter. After all, Z also missed a chip shot and an extra point just a week ago…..lol.

 

[SackMaster]

LOL. wow. just wow...you are all over the place. follow no logic and can't even follow your own posts. do you have severe ADHD by any chance and this is not an insult.

Who knows, maybe I do. Not that I think you would care, so ...

you said and I quote:
"You seem to forget the possibility of having a NEGATIVE play and/or PENALTY that could have moved us to a 61 or 69 yard attempt.",
"Yet there was confusion, by a coach or player somewhere, and had the Cowboys tried to run a play without everyone knowing what to do and someone does something like "
"Again, I'm not AGAINST us running another play in that situation"
"Bad snap, fumble, sack, TFL, interception, false start, holding, illegal shift, illegal formation, delay of game ... or anything else you can think of could have happened, "

Since apparently I was not very clear, let me attempt to clarify myself:

I was not against running another play given that:

1. Everyone knew what to do .... They did not
2. We did not rush to get everyone in position and ready to go during the chaos .... Which tends to lead to mistakes
   
3. The Cowboys DID NOT use a TO to do it .... I did not want to give the ball back to LAC in regulation

I'm hoping that helps.

so you have argued with yourself both side of the argument. you said the end of the game was chaotic and we should have ran a play, but then also say, we did it right, by not trying to run a play. so which is it?

The first part of this statement is actually the OPPOSITE of what I was saying, but again, maybe I was not clear enough about it.

You DON'T force running a play in the middle of chaos/confusion and you DON'T call a TO just to run another play.

So given what DID happen, the coaches did the right thing by letting the clock run down to 4 seconds and not giving the LAC Offense another shot at stealing the win.

IDEALLY, the Cowboys run like a well oiled machine, get another play off to get a little closer, and THEN use their TO with 4 seconds left.

But that was not the case, so they went with the BEST OPTION given the situation.

Being able to handle chaos matters. Ask any Vet (but not me since I may have ADHD)

and to your comment about
"Ya, Brady looked like he REALLY tried to get more yards at the end of the game last week. Never mind, he was just trying to run down the clock because all those incompletions were STOPPING the clock in the first place"

tell me if something could have gone wrong? bad snap, sack, tfl, intercpetin, holding, false start, illegal shift, illegal formatin, delay of game, etc....yet Tampa still ran those plays, not worrying...and tell me if a WR was clearly open on the sideline that Brady would throw the ball away or would he attempt to make the pass and move the ball closer?

Based off how the Bucs were "running routes" with such a lack of purpose, and how quick Brady was throwing the ball OOB, I find it hard to believe they Bucs were doing anything other than trying to run the clock down since:

1. Their WR ran OOB after the (OPI) catch ... Clocked stopped
2. Every following pass ... Clocked stopped again
3. Took more time off the clock than just spiking the ball
   
4. And taking a super quick drop back and throwing it OOB had virtually no chance of drawing a holding call or creating a turnover

I have no doubt had Goodwin not gone OOB, the Bucs would have likely just ran up and spiked it with just ~4 seconds to spare. And if they REALLY wanted to move the ball closer, they had the time (~18 seconds) to call a running play AND spike it since it was only 1st Down before Brady started throwing the ball OOB.

So I will repeat, according to YOU it seems like Tom Brady and the Bucs "played scared" by not wanting to give Dallas ANOTHER shot at creating a turnover OR they did not want to put their players in a situation where they would have to rush and spike the ball and possibly have a false start or illegal formation call or something else of that nature.

They had the time, the downs, and the ability to do so, but instead, they line up and ran some causal OOB pass plays just take time off the clock without making any real attempt to gain yards. So to you, THEY PLAYED SCARED.

so as you said, and all I argued, we had a 56 yard kick. makable, but questionable...all this weatherman reporting and assumption aside...tampa is more humid, LA is not and blah blah blah.....Zeirline missed several kicks the game before. even makable ones...do you not give him a chance? of course not..you do....you don't play scared as I said...but do you try to put him in a better position to make the kick? yes, you should increase the odds best you can....

I am not against increasing the odds.

But in this particular situation, it seemed like there was arguably a higher chance of DECREASING the odds had the Cowboys attempted to run another play during the confusion. Confused people tend to make mistakes. If we can't agree on that simple principle, then we just can't agree.

Oh ... and if you think kicking conditions don't matter, OK I guess?

Yet in less than ideal kicking conditions, TB did not make any REAL attempt to get closer, thus making ZERO attempts at increasing the odds, after their last completed attempt.

If you believe lazy route running and quick throws OOB are a legit attempt to get more yards for shorter FG, then I don't know what to say.

Like I said above, if the Bucs "didn't play scared" they would have ran the ball to get whatever yards they could have, spiked it with just a few seconds left, and then kicked the FG.

the facts I pointed to. we seem unprepared. MM had said as much. they were confused. players were on the field they shouldn't have been. we didn't seem to know what we were doing....if the plan was to run the clock and kick, then why did players act as if they are trying to run another play. why did the coaches and then call a timeout with 4 seconds to go...yet, Tampa same situation, seemed ready. they didn't panic. players knew what to do. nobody jumped offsides. nobody panic. there was no chaos.

Was the Cowboys confused? ABSOLUTELY. Never argued otherwise.

Unprepared? Debatable. While you should TRY to prepare for every situations, the fact of the matter is that is impossible. I mean, how do you prepare for "stadium malfunctions"? Stuff happens, therefore ..

I also give credit to the coaching staff for not PANICKING during the chaos. Instead they stopped the clock at the perfect time, giving the FG unit time to settle in, and giving the Charger no chance of winning outside of a blocked kick and run back.

As for TB, the situation in TB was NOT like the situation in LA. I guess from the 10,000 foot view, you could say they were similar, but when looking at details (because details do matter) they were pretty different.

1. Tampa Bay was at home, and probably didn't have to worry about any play clocks suddenly going out
2. They were much closer for a kick and showed no signs of trying to get closer (see above)
3. Once they got into position, it was 1st Down and had more options (for Dallas, it was 3rd down)
4. One of their starters did not just get injured, so no need for personnel change
   
5. They were not dealing with a running clock, so they had plenty of time to address any situation without having to rush

I am not concerned as I said, with the play and how we won....yes, we drove down and won...but we just don't look prepared in these tight situations and doesn't seem we undersand what's expected and how the situation needs to be managed. we were not ready managing the end of the game. we were not ready managing the end of tampa game. I am concerned with unpreparedness of the coaches, which manifest itself in how the team plays in those situations. confused. not ready. chaotic.....there is no arguing we mismanaged it. fortunately we were in a situation that allowed us to kick a 56 yarder and win the game....

will the next time we get into a similar situation, be more like Tampa where we screw it up or more like SD, we get lucky. I rather us be prepared. look prepared. play prepared.

Believe it or not, I agree. Hopefully we are better prepared next time.

But I also know there will be times when things are not perfect and stuff happens. And in THOSE moments, I will acknowledge when people keep their cool and make the right call under those situations.

If you think calling a TO with 28 seconds left was the right call, then I just flat out disagree. Under no circumstances was the Chargers getting the ball back in regulation, from a missed FG or otherwise, was the right call.

JMHO

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Who knows, maybe I do. Not that I think you would care, so ...



Since apparently I was not very clear, let me attempt to clarify myself:

I was not against running another play given that:

1. Everyone knew what to do .... They did not
2. We did not rush to get everyone in position and ready to go during the chaos .... Which tends to lead to mistakes
   
3. The Cowboys DID NOT use a TO to do it .... I did not want to give the ball back to LAC in regulation

I'm hoping that helps.


The first part of this statement is actually the OPPOSITE of what I was saying, but again, maybe I was not clear enough about it.

You DON'T force running a play in the middle of chaos/confusion and you DON'T call a TO just to run another play.

So given what DID happen, the coaches did the right thing by letting the clock run down to 4 seconds and not giving the LAC Offense another shot at stealing the win.

IDEALLY, the Cowboys run like a well oiled machine, get another play off to get a little closer, and THEN use their TO with 4 seconds left.

But that was not the case, so they went with the BEST OPTION given the situation.

Being able to handle chaos matters. Ask any Vet (but not me since I may have ADHD)



Based off how the Bucs were "running routes" with such a lack of purpose, and how quick Brady was throwing the ball OOB, I find it hard to believe they Bucs were doing anything other than trying to run the clock down since:

1. Their WR ran OOB after the (OPI) catch ... Clocked stopped
2. Every following pass ... Clocked stopped again
3. Took more time off the clock than just spiking the ball
   
4. And taking a super quick drop back and throwing it OOB had virtually no chance of drawing a holding call or creating a turnover

I have no doubt had Goodwin not gone OOB, the Bucs would have likely just ran up and spiked it with just ~4 seconds to spare. And if they REALLY wanted to move the ball closer, they had the time (~18 seconds) to call a running play AND spike it since it was only 1st Down before Brady started throwing the ball OOB.

So I will repeat, according to YOU it seems like Tom Brady and the Bucs "played scared" by not wanting to give Dallas ANOTHER shot at creating a turnover OR they did not want to put their players in a situation where they would have to rush and spike the ball and possibly have a false start or illegal formation call or something else of that nature.

They had the time, the downs, and the ability to do so, but instead, they line up and ran some causal OOB pass plays just take time off the clock without making any real attempt to gain yards. So to you, THEY PLAYED SCARED.


I am not against increasing the odds.

But in this particular situation, it seemed like there was arguably a higher chance of DECREASING the odds had the Cowboys attempted to run another play during the confusion. Confused people tend to make mistakes. If we can't agree on that simple principle, then we just can't agree.

Oh ... and if you think kicking conditions don't matter, OK I guess?

Yet in less than ideal kicking conditions, TB did not make any REAL attempt to get closer, thus making ZERO attempts at increasing the odds, after their last completed attempt.

If you believe lazy route running and quick throws OOB are a legit attempt to get more yards for shorter FG, then I don't know what to say.

Like I said above, if the Bucs "didn't play scared" they would have ran the ball to get whatever yards they could have, spiked it with just a few seconds left, and then kicked the FG.


Was the Cowboys confused? ABSOLUTELY. Never argued otherwise.

Unprepared? Debatable. While you should TRY to prepare for every situations, the fact of the matter is that is impossible. I mean, how do you prepare for "stadium malfunctions"? Stuff happens, therefore ..

I also give credit to the coaching staff for not PANICKING during the chaos. Instead they stopped the clock at the perfect time, giving the FG unit time to settle in, and giving the Charger no chance of winning outside of a blocked kick and run back.

As for TB, the situation in TB was NOT like the situation in LA. I guess from the 10,000 foot view, you could say they were similar, but when looking at details (because details do matter) they were pretty different.

1. Tampa Bay was at home, and probably didn't have to worry about any play clocks suddenly going out
2. They were much closer for a kick and showed no signs of trying to get closer (see above)
3. Once they got into position, it was 1st Down and had more options (for Dallas, it was 3rd down)
4. One of their starters did not just get injured, so no need for personnel change
   
5. They were not dealing with a running clock, so they had plenty of time to address any situation without having to rush

Believe it or not, I agree. Hopefully we are better prepared next time.

But I also know there will be times when things are not perfect and stuff happens. And in THOSE moments, I will acknowledge when people keep their cool and make the right call under those situations.

If you think calling a TO with 28 seconds left was the right call, then I just flat out disagree. Under no circumstances was the Chargers getting the ball back in regulation, from a missed FG or otherwise, was the right call.

JMHO

ok, I don't have ADHD and I just couldn't read all of that..

at this point you are just arguing to prove you were right...

this debate is done! way over done!

 

[SackMaster]

ok, I don't have ADHD and I just couldn't read all of that..

at this point you are just arguing to prove you were right...

this debate is done! way over done!

I read you long post and gave responses to each of your arguments. Well, I guess you don't respect me enough to do the same.

Oh well. It was nice while it lasted. That was fun.

 

[blueblood70]

When you say not a whole lot of options, do you mean to say turning his head 90 degrees to look at the giant clock in the endzone (which Dak was using) isn't a viable option?

so blame the coaches only>?

who has the ball and control if the team?? DAK hes the general why didn't he call a TO? im sure this will be nice learning lesson from a win vs a loss..but all are to blame..a TO should have been called and then 1-2 plays called to get few more yards for FG..it worked out but hopefully they learn from this..

your super star 160mil dollar qb has to take control in that situation..

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

I read you long post and gave responses to each of your arguments. Well, I guess you don't respect me enough to do the same.

Oh well. It was nice while it lasted. That was fun.

I think you just want to have a back and fort.....the responses were getting too long and repetitive.

 

[SackMaster]

I think you just want to have a back and fort.....the responses were getting too long and repetitive.

I'm on a fan forum .... wanting to have a conversation "back and fort" with other forum members ....

How DARE I.


As far as "getting too long an repetitive". Agreed. But that is what happens when you have to explain things to people so they can clearly understand your point of view. Not saying they have to agree, but it is nice when they acknowledge and show they understand, even if they do disagree, instead of attempting to insult and/or run away.

But here we are. Stuff happens.

 

[DanA]

so blame the coaches only>?

who has the ball and control if the team?? DAK hes the general why didn't he call a TO? im sure this will be nice learning lesson from a win vs a loss..but all are to blame..a TO should have been called and then 1-2 plays called to get few more yards for FG..it worked out but hopefully they learn from this..

your super star 160mil dollar qb has to take control in that situation..

No argument from me on that point. He’s got to do better.

 

[glimmerman]

Again, not saying what we asked GZ to do was ideal, but at the same time, that is a BIG assumption that something bad does not happen trying to get those extra ~10 or so yards.

Unless of course, you thought the officiating was spot on yesterday and the refs "let the players play"? If so, then I guess I can't argue.

#11 was held all day. A few of those qb pressures would have been sacks if he wasn’t held. Was right in front of the refs. Guess they were watching someone else.

 

[SackMaster]

so blame the coaches only>?

who has the ball and control if the team?? DAK hes the general why didn't he call a TO? im sure this will be nice learning lesson from a win vs a loss..but all are to blame..a TO should have been called and then 1-2 plays called to get few more yards for FG..it worked out but hopefully they learn from this..

your super star 160mil dollar qb has to take control in that situation..

Well, we could run 1 play for sure, but to run more, we would have had to get a 1st Down. So let's just say we call TO on 3rd-&-3 (because it was 3rd and 3 when we kicked the FG) and there is 28 seconds left.

What if we don't get a first?

• At that point the clocked is stopped (LAC calls a TO / incomplete or OOB) with ~24 seconds left
• We are still kicking a 53+ yard FG, BUT LAC gets the ball back either by miss or kickoff
• Therefore LAC gets the ball with ~20 seconds left

Is giving the ball back, especially if our shaky kicker missed it, more ideal than kicking the ball as time-expires?

I would say no.

 

[SackMaster]

#11 was held all day. A few of those qb pressures would have been sacks if he wasn’t held. Was right in front of the refs. Guess they were watching someone else.

Agreed. I don't think ANYONE would say that the refs in that game were anywhere near good. There were bad calls and bad no calls, and even with the bad no calls, there were 20 accepted penalties in the game.

 

[blueblood70]

Well, we could run 1 play for sure, but to run more, we would have had to get a 1st Down. So let's just say we call TO on 3rd-&-3 (because it was 3rd and 3 when we kicked the FG) and there is 28 seconds left.

What if we don't get a first?

• At that point the clocked is stopped (LAC calls a TO / incomplete or OOB) with ~24 seconds left
• We are still kicking a 53+ yard FG, BUT LAC gets the ball back either by miss or kickoff
• Therefore LAC gets the ball with ~20 seconds left

Is giving the ball back, especially if our shaky kicker missed it, more ideal than kicking the ball as time-expires?

I would say no.

sorry but 30-32 coaches call TO after run with 28 secs left..doesn't matter what might have happened it matters that dak or MM or KM wasnt aware enough to call the TO realizing 56yarder wasn't a chip shot..that what matters situational football says you try another play or two before the fg..

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

I'm on a fan forum .... wanting to have a conversation "back and fort" with other forum members ....

How DARE I.


As far as "getting too long an repetitive". Agreed. But that is what happens when you have to explain things to people so they can clearly understand your point of view. Not saying they have to agree, but it is nice when they acknowledge and show they understand, even if they do disagree, instead of attempting to insult and/or run away.

But here we are. Stuff happens.

exactly. I repeated the same thing, you agreed and disagreed at the same time on several posts.....

and at some point, its meaningless and pointless to argue/debate over something that provides no points any longer.

 

[SackMaster]

sorry but 30-32 coaches call TO after run with 28 secs left..doesn't matter what might have happened it matters that dak or MM or KM wasnt aware enough to call the TO realizing 56yarder wasn't a chip shot..that what matters situational football says you try another play or two before the fg..

I don't disagree that had we not screwed up the rotation and was able to get another play off WITHOUT the timeout, that was RIGHT way to do things.

But taking a TO, just to stop the clock and possibly give the ball back when LAC was conceding the last possession? I think that is a worse decision.