Twitter: McCarthy on letting the clock run down to :03

McKDaddy

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,571
Reaction score
10,253
Wait...so if Jerry wanted to take a shot, but they didn't take a shot, and nobody does anything without Jerry's permission...

Mind...blown
Jerry didn't think it necessary to explicitly tell his HC that trying to score a TD is preferable to a FG. He will clear that up this week.
 

Runwildboys

Confused about stuff
Messages
51,451
Reaction score
96,485
CowboysZone DIEHARD Fan
Okay, here's another thought. If MM hadn't told the official to run the clock down, and tried another play, they probably would have reset it to 3 seconds just before the snap, and when we didn't score a TD, time would have expired and they would have told him he never called a TO.
 

ESisback

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,147
Reaction score
14,029
A SMART coach looks at how a game is going and reacts to it. We were getting a lot of flags; and the D was playing well and Dak was playing well but not lighting it up and our Running game was frankly the pits.

PUT that all together and I really do not have a problem with that decision
I agree, but that’s not the popular answer. Too many people need something to ***** about.
 

ESisback

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,147
Reaction score
14,029
I didn't like the conservative approach but I understand the logic, the team wasn't playing disciplined football and he didn't want to risk a turnover or a negative play/flag that could have taken them out of field goal position.
Plus, a little nervous remembering the game ending Dak run against SF?
 

OmerV

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,122
Reaction score
22,616
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan

I don't have a problem with this. If there had been 12-14 seconds I would have a different opinion because that clearly allows enough time give the receivers route options and time for Dak to make a read before throwing the ball. 8 seconds is a tighter window. Obviously it can work, but there is less room for error and adjustment.
 
Last edited:

DallasInDC

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,105
Reaction score
4,985
He did not want to take the chance of the ball bouncing around and being picked. We were getting flags. But I would have took the shot or even run it. 8 seconds you could have done what you wanted and had 2 time outs left. We won by 3.
Which is the result of playing it safe, so in the end it was the right call. There is no difference between winning by 3 or 7... unless you had money on the spread.
 

Captain-Crash

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,542
Reaction score
33,804
if Garrett had MIke's eyes he would have been unstoppable. He could see the whole field at the same time. Another guy could use that too.
 

john van brocklin

Captain Comeback
Messages
39,619
Reaction score
44,841
I didn't like the conservative approach but I understand the logic, the team wasn't playing disciplined football and he didn't want to risk a turnover or a negative play/flag that could have taken them out of field goal position.
Playing not to lose is not good!
 

sacase

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,260
Reaction score
2,496
A SMART coach looks at how a game is going and reacts to it. We were getting a lot of flags; and the D was playing well and Dak was playing well but not lighting it up and our Running game was frankly the pits.

PUT that all together and I really do not have a problem with that decision
Look how much crazy stuff that happened in that game. It's the right call and is the reason we won.
 

Cowboys5217

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,325
Reaction score
11,579
Reviewing the thread, got many on here defending a scared coach.

Coaching to not lose rather than coaching to win is never going to work out long term.
 

Cowboys5217

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,325
Reaction score
11,579
Look how much crazy stuff that happened in that game. It's the right call and is the reason we won.
It was not the right call, and an entire second half of football makes it impossible to extrapolate that this cowardly decision was the reason we won the game.
 
Top