Jerry Jones: Spike Was Bad Call***merged***

[Eric_Boyer]

why was running out the window? They ran a quick slant to Dez that would have been a first down and he would likely have been tackled in bounds as his guy was right on him. You hand the ball off you take away the chance of bad things happening like getting intercepted or batted down. Zeke was gashing them. The coaches failed to keep it simple.

the risk reward for spiking the ball makes no sense. we gave up a down to save a timeout. now we are going to run the ball and let the clock move? it would make no sense.

 

[waldoputty]

Absolutely and the game/time management at the end of the first half was equally awful. That has been a pattern here. JG is ultimately responsible for these issues. Some fans lack some basic understanding when they say "Garrett doesn't call the plays." Do these people really not know that JG is (or should be) in constant communication with his coordinators? Take the end of the first half for example. When we have the ball 1st and 10 from the 15 with almost 2 minutes on the clock it is absolutely Garrett's responsibility to tell the OC that we need to run some clock in that situation and to remind the OC that we can still get a first down without needing to go for a touchdown. Same deal with the spike at the end of the game.

Yes, despite going to Princeton, Garrett does not seem smart enough for these type of issues.
Or may be it is trouble making the correct decision under time stress.
This can be solved by delegating some tasks.

 

[AzorAhai]

yes, it was. saving the timeout keeps the entire field in play. the second we used the last timeout, our play calling gets far more restrictive.

No, even the win expectancy went down when they spiked the ball. You don't give up a down with over 40 seconds left when trying to do all of those things simultaneously. You either call the TO/run a play and go for the TD or you run the ball and go for a FG while killing time. You absolutely don't give yourself 2 downs to get a first down while leaving time on the clock. They did the absolute least efficient thing in spiking the ball.

 

[Eric_Boyer]

No, even the win expectancy went down when they spiked the ball. You don't give up a down with over 40 seconds left when trying to do all of those things simultaneously. You either call the TO/run a play and go for the TD or you run the ball and go for a FG while killing time. You absolutely don't give yourself 2 downs to get a first down while leaving time on the clock. They did the absolute least efficient thing in spiking the ball.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...rter-spike-vs-green-bay-packers-kill-nfl-2017

I don't know how much weight we put into this, but they claim the win probability is the same for running the play and spiking the ball.

 

[AzorAhai]

running a play without taking a timeout or spiking the ball means playing for a tie

No it doesn't. That extra down is worth far more when trying to score a TD than the extra 5-7 seconds it takes to run a play.

 

[Eric_Boyer]

No it doesn't. That extra down is worth far more when trying to score a TD than the extra 5-7 seconds it takes to run a play.

assuming we could of gotten a first in two plays, running a play would result in the least amount of snaps before the clock expired. if you argue that, you are arguing 1+1 <> 2

 

[Shuff]

Zeke lead the league in rushing and had 125+ yards and the GB D was gassed and you spike the ball and throw the ball. Brilliant!!!

 

[mldardy]

I would have handed the ball off to Zeke to see if he could bust one like he did in PIT.

With the way that defense was gassed, I bet he would have at least gotten 10 yards there.

For the record. The Spike was the right call if they were looking to score a TD, which they were.

Handing the ball to Zeke is the absolute best call in that situation. It's first down, you know he's going to get positive yardage and you keep the clock moving while not burning a timeout and your already in FG range at least.

 

[wormser]

the risk reward for spiking the ball makes no sense. we gave up a down to save a timeout. now we are going to run the ball and let the clock move? it would make no sense.

In that situation I would with Rogers on the other sideline. If you don't get the first down you can drain the clock so Rogers doesn't get the ball back or make GB burn one of their timeouts. Would GB take a timeout up by 3 or let the clock go knowing Dallas could only tie it? If you get the first down, you take the timeout, take a few shots and if no luck, kick the field goal with seconds remaining.

But hey, I'm just a guy sitting at a keyboard second guessing. And a guy screaming at the TV the entire game to give the dang ball to Zeke.

 

[AzorAhai]

assuming we could of gotten a first in two plays, running a play would result in the least amount of snaps before the clock expired. if you argue that, you are arguing 1+1 <> 2

As I said, you are trying to score a TD while killing the clock at the same time. 3 plays is better than 2. It gives you the best opportunity to get in FG range, get the 1st down and put yourself closer to TD range while simultaneously killing the clock.

Let's not act like the extra down is wasted time. Calling the play can be done as they are getting to the line and getting set. The extra time off the clock is time used while running the play. That means you're attempting to exchange time used during the actual play for yards which is the actual goal.

If we're playing this game of wasting time, how much time was wasted running down the field to get set and spike the ball vs calling the TO immediately? Especially if the very next play to Dez is converted and they use the TO then.

All of the time they spent running down the field, getting set and spiking the ball could have been used to set up a play and run it while saving a down. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be convinced the spike was the best use of time or the down there. Thats what you do when you are out of TOs. Have a good day.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

No, it was not a mistake of time management in regards to giving Green Bay the ball back because that is not the thought process there. You did not WANT to take more time off the clock, you still needed yards to get in FG range or to get a TD. The mistake was wasting a down IMO which had the effect of 1) not getting another first down and 2) giving them the ball with more time left if you did not get the first down.

IMO the only time you waste a down is when you have NO other choice or you only have time remaining to run 2-3 plays. Once you have lined up, you might as well take the 5-10 seconds more to rin the play given the time they had left!

Saying this over and over doesn't make it true.

The math days all 3 decisions (spike, timeout and run a play) were all within a percent point or 3 in expected positive outcome for the Cowboys.

Anyone saying they definitively know what the right play was is simply ignorant to probability, game situation and process vs outcomes.

 

[CWR]

I would have handed the ball off to Zeke to see if he could bust one like he did in PIT.

With the way that defense was gassed, I bet he would have at least gotten 10 yards there.

For the record. The Spike was the right call if they were looking to score a TD, which they were.

I dont believe wasting a down was the right call if they were looking for a TD. Youd think thed have a couple preloaded quick outs in the bag.

 

[Nova]

I dont believe wasting a down was the right call if they were looking for a TD. Youd think thed have a couple preloaded quick outs in the bag.

I thought it was a smart move to make sure you have the right call in for your rookie QB

 

[Toruk_Makto]

As I said, you are trying to score a TD while killing the clock at the same time. 3 plays is better than 2. It gives you the best opportunity to get in FG range, get the 1st down and put yourself closer to TD range while simultaneously killing the clock.

Let's not act like the extra down is wasted time. Calling the play can be done as they are getting to the line and getting set. The extra time off the clock is time used while running the play. That means you're attempting to exchange time used during the actual play for yards which is the actual goal.

If we're playing this game of wasting time, how much time was wasted running down the field to get set and spike the ball vs calling the TO immediately? Especially if the very next play to Dez is converted and they use the TO then.

All of the time they spent running down the field, getting set and spiking the ball could have been used to set up a play and run it while saving a down. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be convinced the spike was the best use of time or the down there. Thats what you do when you are out of TOs. Have a good day.

This is where you don't understand game situation.

The Packers are playing to prevent the TD once we are essentially in field goal range. Preserving the timeout preserves the middle of the field while going for the win. We'd just gotten some 40 yards on two plays because green Bay is protecting the sideline and deep down the field. In that situation our expectation is that we should be able to gain 10 yards against soft coverage over two plays. And indeed we got 7 on the first play. Unfortunately their guys made a play on 3rd and short. And we didn't make a play on 3rd and 20.

Saying we should have definitively done x or y or Z when they are all essentially equal in terms of us winning the game after objective statistical analysis makes you look foolish.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

I dont believe wasting a down was the right call if they were looking for a TD. Youd think thed have a couple preloaded quick outs in the bag.

The other team is protecting the sideline in that down and distance and game situation.

Just as the offense practices the two minute drill the defense is doing the same. Sometimes the other team understands football also.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

We were kinda cooking at the time it made some sense. In a way it's the most aggressive decision to spike there. Bc it's a clear play for 7 points.


But if you're gonna be aggressive like that you should've thrown to dez in the end zone. At least let that guy prove he can stop it once before you go away from that matchup.


I really feel like if dak just lined up and pointed to dez like go deep it would've been a score. And if not the clock stops anyway

 

[AzorAhai]

The other team is protecting the sideline in that down and distance and game situation.

Just as the offense practices the two minute drill the defense is doing the same. Sometimes the other team understands football also.

And yet Beasley got a quick out for 7 yards the very next play. You just look for any excuse to throw out one of your typical narcissistic comments every chance you get.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

And yet Beasley got a quick out for 7 yards the very next play. You just look for any excuse to throw out one of your typical narcissistic comments every chance you get.

Yes. Because we preserved the timeout. That's part of the point.

If we run a play or use our timeout. Then we run the risk of Greenbay forcing us to the middle of the field and maybe you don't get a clean field goal attempt. Maybe it's rushed.

Spiking left the offense with the most flexibility.

And in any case can we remember that all three choices are virtually identical to win probability?

Can we remember it took a 36 yard pass with time expiring into a prevent defense for us to lose? Oh but they wouldn't have had time if we ran the ball! OK. What are the lottery numbers for tonight?

And if we ran and got minimal yards and Bailey misses the kick from range... Then we have people calling Garrett a coward. Guarantee it.

 

[loublue22]

you wrote a lot of stuff, but I stopped here because this was a critical error showing anything else you wrote is meaningless.

it was not critical that we scored a touchdown - as shown by how the game ended. what was critical is for the defense to stop giving up points in the second half.

It's always critical to take advantage of red zone opportunities, what an asinine comment.

 

[Eric_Boyer]

It's always critical to take advantage of red zone opportunities, what an asinine comment.

always?

up by 2, 3 seconds on the clock. scoring in the redone is critical?

you keep digging a deeper hole. absolutes are always wrong! /sarcasm