Romo Letting the Play Clock Always Run Down

[Proximo]

Do you? Where did I ever say what I said was 100% a fact about the other QB's snapping the ball at random? I stated an opinion based on watching them throughout their careers.

Whether Tony Romo lets the play clock run down to the very last moment more or less than those other QB's is not a matter of opinion. He either does, or he doesn't.

So saying he does, as you did, without any actual numbers to support that claim, is pure speculation on your part. That is my point. You have no leg to stand on in backing up your initial statement, which was:

"I watch players Like Brady, Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, etc play and they RARELY let the clock wind down to zero. Peyton tries all the time to snap the ball fast when the defense isn't paying attention. A

Romo snapping the ball at zero seconds is dumb because it gives the defense a jump. He does it so often that there is no surprise."

What you stated above is not an opinion. You're making the claim that those other QB's "rarely" let the clock wind down, and that Romo "does it so often that there is no surprise". These are absolutes. You're stating them as if they are truths. When asked to provide some type of evidence to justify your claim, you could only muster up - "I watch tons of football".

I think we'd have a much more interesting discussion if we had some data to look at to see where Romo stands versus the other QB's in the league over the course of a season.

 

[Proximo]

...you stated that the defence is looking at the offence and not the clock.

That is clearly not the singular case in all defences.

I would argue that defences who played against Romo this past year knew they could rely on Tony running the clock down to the last few seconds and primed themselves on full blitz assignments for the DC to focus primarily on a line of sight path at Romo, but watching the center and the clock in order to time their blitz.

If the call from the DC is for me to dial up a blitz assignment, then I am going to use every advantage to do so. Whether I am a corner on the slot, one of the LBs or a safety who is decoying man or dropping down with Romo the clock is my friend.

For a dialed blitz there is no reason to look at the offence. You look at the center for the snap and the clock to prime yourself for a jump. At 6 or 7 seconds you look away from the clock and zero in on the snap.

This is the problem with Romo. No defender has to worry about a snap at the 15 to 10 second mark. He isn't going to call for the ball. So you move and decoy and then pin your ears back at 6 or 7.

The Dallas offence has been too predictable in this regard and they have not been successful in setting tempo and creating randomness outside of Tony going into "no huddle".

This is the rhythm of their regular offence and at times it has sucked.

You ask for data, well I'm sorry, but I would be happy to chart a game just to end the argument once and for all, but I'm not certain if some of the members who have "all 22" can see the playclock at the intervals prior to the snap.

This is clearly my impression, but if you have followed game threads on this board you will find many frustrated fans screaming for the team to snap the stupid ball.

You are correct - defenders looking at the offense and not the clock is not the singular case in all defenses. I do agree with that. My initial statement was too broad of a generalization.

The part of your above post that I do not 100% agree with is that defenses actually relied on Romo letting the clock run down to the last moment. You state that no defender has to worry about Romo calling for the ball at the 10-15 second mark. The data in post #73 seems to refute that. I'd like to see a larger sample size but after reading Hairic's post I was surprised to see how many times the ball was snapped with more than 5 seconds left on the play clock, and even more surprised to see how often it was snapped with more than 9 seconds left.

 

[percyhoward]

To someone who has the time and is willing to go back and watch the games--

What are the results of the plays that are run at the last second vs. the results of the plays that are run with more than 3 seconds left?

 

[ufcrules1]

Whether Tony Romo lets the play clock run down to the very last moment more or less than those other QB's is not a matter of opinion. He either does, or he doesn't.

My opinion is that he does let the clock run down a lot. I'm sorry that you don't know the difference between an absolute fact and an opinion. What I have stated was my opinion based on watching all the QB's I mentioned for several years.

It seems funny to me that when asked by reporters why Romo lets the clock wind down so much the Cowboys themselves have directly said that he purposely lets the play clock wind down a lot so he get the best read on what scheme the defense is going to use.

So you are right in one sense, he either does or he doesn't. My opinion is that he does let it wind down a lot and MORE than the other QB's I mentioned. Now, if you want to get all geeky on me and ask for off the wall statistics, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[fairviewfarmer]

Romo does let the play clock run down too far, too often....FACT! Anyone that disagrees hasn't been watching the games.

 

[ufcrules1]

Romo does let the play clock run down too far, too often....FACT! Anyone that disagrees hasn't been watching the games.

Fact police will be here in 3....2....1.......

 

[Little Jr]

My OPINION is anyone who watches enough football know that the Cowboys let the playclock run down more than other teams.I really don't see how anyone can argue they don't. Again this is my OPINION.

 

[CATCH17]

Do you really need stats to show you that Dallas plays better with more tempo in the offense than they do when they are letting the playclock run down to the last second?


When we play slow lethargic football we are an average at best offense.

 

[Dodger12]

Whether Tony Romo lets the play clock run down to the very last moment more or less than those other QB's is not a matter of opinion. He either does, or he doesn't.

So saying he does, as you did, without any actual numbers to support that claim, is pure speculation on your part. That is my point. You have no leg to stand on in backing up your initial statement, which was:

"I watch players Like Brady, Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, etc play and they RARELY let the clock wind down to zero. Peyton tries all the time to snap the ball fast when the defense isn't paying attention. A

Romo snapping the ball at zero seconds is dumb because it gives the defense a jump. He does it so often that there is no surprise."

What you stated above is not an opinion. You're making the claim that those other QB's "rarely" let the clock wind down, and that Romo "does it so often that there is no surprise". These are absolutes. You're stating them as if they are truths. When asked to provide some type of evidence to justify your claim, you could only muster up - "I watch tons of football".

I think we'd have a much more interesting discussion if we had some data to look at to see where Romo stands versus the other QB's in the league over the course of a season.

Do you even watch the games? I don't know how anyone who watches football can even dispute the "issue" with the play clock. It's not an attack on Romo, it's just reality and yes, even a "fact." We call two plays in the huddle and if Romo sees something he doesn't like, he "kills" the play which takes more time off the clock; it's the nature of our offense.

http://cowboysblog.***BANNED-URL***...are-cowboys-play-clock-issues-a-problem.html/

Over the past few seasons, it seems the Cowboys have trouble with the play clock nearly every game. Whether they get penalized for delay of game or they’re forced to quick-snap the ball with just a second remaining on the play clock, it has long been an issue in Dallas.

The primary reason for the lack of timeliness is the Cowboys’ audible system. On many occasions, offensive coordinator Jason Garrett calls two plays for quarterback Tony Romo, who must relay both of those plays to the offense in the huddle. The offense’s intent is to run the first play called unless Romo issues a “Kill” call. If Romo “kills” the initial play, the offense runs the second one that was called.

Other folks see it, even folks that report on the team. Have we become so sensitive to anything remotely negative that we can't even admit something that's plain as day for several seasons now?

 

[hairic]

What part is bias?

Perhaps fans exaggerate the extent but I don't think there's anything bias in saying that Dallas snaps the ball late in the play clock often.

That would be a bias (confirmation, maybe selection/sampling). The bias is that whenever it happens, it gets reinforced (confirmation). The times where the play clock is within 5 seconds or not displayed at all doesn't get noticed/reinforced (selection/sampling bias).

I'd also be hesitant to just assume there are certain amounts of time on the clock because Fox typically shows the clock at some certain point. I've been looking at CBS and they show the play clock basically from the time the team hits the line of scrimmage. I think I've missed 1 play clock and I've now watched 1 game from Manning, 1 game from Brees and 1 game from Romo.

NBC in week 1 only showed the play clock within 5 seconds. TB and BAL were on FOX which didn't show the play clock until it was within 8 seconds. CBS didn't show the play clock until it's within 20 seconds. And I don't know NFLN or ESPN, I'd have to look on game rewind/condensed.

I wish I would have saved Manning's game but didn't think I would actually care to. It was the CBS game against Cincy. I tracked every snap except special teams snaps regardless of game situation. Penalties included. I don't think the negation of a play actually matters in measuring this because a false start at 5 seconds doesn't change the fact that the team couldn't have gotten the snap off any earlier than that and it still shows trends in the clock.

The times I posted only include snaps, even snaps cancelled out by penalties. I didn't care to judge anything else because it's impossible to know what caused the play to not start or if they even intended to run a play. If the OC is late getting the play in, and the offense is only set for 6 seconds with 5 seconds left on the play clock, is that false start due to the OC being late, play clock being low, the OL being set for too long, or just players screwing up? I don't know how to attribute/correlate/if it's relevant at all.

The amount of time that was left on the clock for Peyton was a little over 12 seconds, I believe. They had 6 snaps where 5 seconds or less are showing.

For Brees, I watched the KC game (CBS game) and the Saints averaged 10.77 seconds on the clock at the time of the snap. They had 9 plays with 5 seconds or less on the clock. This was the game where I couldn't see the clock at all so I just excluded that snap.

For Romo, I watched the game against Pittsburgh. Dallas had 32 plays where the play clock hit 5 seconds or less either before the snap or a penalty occurred. 1 was a delay of game, 2 more were false starts. Average time on the clock remaining was 6.43 seconds.

This isn't an issue of running the play clock down, there are other factors introduced, like how fast subs/huddles/playcalls are handled and how long the QB is waiting with the formation set before they call for the snap. It's almost an entirely different issue/thread to judge the average play clock vs when it's just run down really low, where it could be either the OC or QB's fault, and whether it's even indicative of a problem at all. Other teams could handle subs/huddles/playcalls quicker, but the QB looks at the defense for 10 seconds before snapping the ball at 10 seconds on the play clock. Whereas Dallas could be slower at those things, but Romo looks at the defense for 10 seconds before snapping the ball with 5 seconds on the play clock. Which QB is letting the play clock run out? Just by looking at only where the play clock is at given above, perception Romo, reality neither. You have to go back and count how many seconds each QB has a formation ready to go before they snap the ball if you wanted to do a QB-specific comparison, and also include results for it to figure if it's causing problems or causing solutions.

BTW, Dallas at the minimum doesn't have a problem going from huddle to set, I already checked sometime mid-season (Bryant is usually the last to get set though, he lines up pretty casually). Broadcasts don't show teams making subs or getting into/out of huddles, you'd have to be at the games timing that stuff to know it.

Here's times vs Cleveland (a CBS game), incomplete as it's what I used to make a vid for review purposes (no replays, no ref announcements, no false starts (I don't think Dallas had a false start); just run plays and pass plays). This video should be in the news zone, split in two if you want to go check. My youtube accounts were done for by the time week 15 came along so there is no PIT game uploaded.

18
17
14
13
5
18
13
15
12
20+ (CBS only shows play clock when it reaches 20)
20+/unknown
20+/unknown
3 (QB wasn't under center until 12)
7
3
11
10
11
14
14
7
9
20+/unknown
11
1 (3rd down, still huddled at 15, formation not set until ~8, Dez Bryant last set as usual)
11
21 (play clock appeared after snap)
3
9
20+/unknown (hurry up, so probably closer to 30)
14
8
6
10
10
9
9
15
8
4
9
3
8
15
13
6
2
12
20+/unknown
11
5
15
14
12
9
1
Play clocks inoperable... start back up at 5:45 4th Q
7
1
7
7
3
10
9
13
2
20+/unknown (hurry up, guessing 30-31)
13
1 (formation not set until 5)
0 (delay of game, not set until 5)
2
10
9
2
9
7
8
11
11
15
16
14
3
3
15

Don't care to organize it at this moment, also said I wasn't going to and I'm not. Just bolded the 0-1. Average looks to be like 8-12ish seconds on cursory calc. Also, Romo was sacked 8 times this game if you want to try to correlate play clock to sacks. There should be a sacks vid over there for the Cleveland game too.

It's a single game for each player so it is what it is, just a small sample. That said, I doubt the game-by-game variance is that great. I wonder if Dallas has some significant differences between halves simply because they were forced to run the hurry-up in the 2nd half so much. It would be interesting to see if that would show up but it would be a lot of work for little reward in tracking all those plays.

I would bet there is a good variance as you are facing a defense dependent variable weekly. If a defense usually lines up and plays teams straight up, there's no need to hard count getting a defender to show that they're blitzing or run the clock down waiting to see if they bail out of the box/off press into a coverage. If the defense is multiple look zone blitz (e.g. Pitt), you can be screwed if you see it wrong. This can happen (I believe they bring 4 or 5 initially on this play):
http://i.minus.com/iNXLAtETP0JZn.gif

Going back to the games you mentioned, KC/Crennel ran two gap 3-4. That's going to look the same a lot, no need to wait for them to show much; they aren't hiding.

Cinci/Zimmer. I am not familiar with his defense since he left Dallas. I don't think he tries to confuse offenses unless it's 3rd down, and plays more man coverage with corners. Did get sacks (Geno Atkins DT) though, but it's not necessarily from pre-snap confusion.

Pitt/Lebeau. He's been around so long and been successful, should be self-evident what kind of defense he runs by now with all kinds of articles to cite.

Also, the team has said that they use the clock for a reason. If you're saying they don't snap the ball late in the count, what are they talking about? I don't think there's any bias or fabrication, I think Dallas typically uses the clock more than other teams. They've given reasons why they do it.

That's not the bias (an unstated claim that it doesn't happen), the bias is that it happens more than it does and when it gets recognized. Plus, the information to make some of these claims is just not there, nor have people looked for it; they just assume stuff happens (more bias).

This is what teams use the clock to get defenses to do:
http://i.minus.com/ijmFFsONd4TWm.gif

The defense responds to Romo's snap action. They reveal it's a 0 blitz (blitzing 6 vs 5 in protection). By waiting until later in the play clock, the defense can't risk that it's a fake snap call and hold the disguise anymore. If that had been the call for the snap and they stayed in that alignment, the blitzers would have been a little further away (though a well-timed blitz), a safety in the middle of the field would be covering Austin in the slot, and Pacman in press position vs Dez with no safety help. It's pre-snap intel gained about the defense.

 

[landryscorner]

Getting the play out by Garrett had something to do with this also

 

[Idgit]

Getting the play out by Garrett had something to do with this also

How slow is Garrett in getting the plays out compared to other OCs?

 

[Doomsday101]

So many people get really irked by Romo always seeming to let the play clock run down to a second or two before getting the ball snapped.

What does this accomplish in his favor?

Does it really give the defense an edge because they know that now the snap is coming?

Is it more on Romo or Red J?

Making changes at the line helps Romo, you guys make way too much out of this non sense. I have never seen such trival fans in my life. I watch a lot of games and Romo and the Cowboys are not the only one who runs the clock down to 1 or 2 seconds but of course many Cowboy fans have to complain about every thing under the sun.

 

[Hoofbite]

That would be a bias (confirmation, maybe selection/sampling). The bias is that whenever it happens, it gets reinforced (confirmation). The times where the play clock is within 5 seconds or not displayed at all doesn't get noticed/reinforced (selection/sampling bias).

I don't think it is bias. It's just blowing things out of proportion. Perhaps if they said every single snap was late then it might be confirmation bias in that they are only looking at the times when the team does snap late and they are using that as a broad paint brush of the situation.

Bias or not, not really something I'm all that interested in. I think the gist the argument boils down to Dallas snapping the ball late in the clock more often than is really necessary.

NBC in week 1 only showed the play clock within 5 seconds. TB and BAL were on FOX which didn't show the play clock until it was within 8 seconds. CBS didn't show the play clock until it's within 20 seconds. And I don't know NFLN or ESPN, I'd have to look on game rewind/condensed.

The times I posted only include snaps, even snaps cancelled out by penalties. I didn't care to judge anything else because it's impossible to know what caused the play to not start or if they even intended to run a play. If the OC is late getting the play in, and the offense is only set for 6 seconds with 5 seconds left on the play clock, is that false start due to the OC being late, play clock being low, the OL being set for too long, or just players screwing up? I don't know how to attribute/correlate/if it's relevant at all.

I'm on board with that. Why I didn't care to get rid of penalties either, it doesn't matter when you couldn't have snapped it any earlier.

This isn't an issue of running the play clock down, there are other factors introduced, like how fast subs/huddles/playcalls are handled and how long the QB is waiting with the formation set before they call for the snap. It's almost an entirely different issue/thread to judge the average play clock vs when it's just run down really low, where it could be either the OC or QB's fault, and whether it's even indicative of a problem at all. Other teams could handle subs/huddles/playcalls quicker, but the QB looks at the defense for 10 seconds before snapping the ball at 10 seconds on the play clock. Whereas Dallas could be slower at those things, but Romo looks at the defense for 10 seconds before snapping the ball with 5 seconds on the play clock. Which QB is letting the play clock run out? Just by looking at only where the play clock is at given above, perception Romo, reality neither. You have to go back and count how many seconds each QB has a formation ready to go before they snap the ball if you wanted to do a QB-specific comparison, and also include results for it to figure if it's causing problems or causing solutions.

I really don't think people care why it happens, it happens. OCs fault, QB fault, not sure it makes a difference unless we're looking for reasons to change the guilty party or look for them to make a change that fixes the problem.

It happens and that's pretty much it. Why it happens is information that doesn't change the outcome. It shouldn't happen all that frequently yet the team says it gives them an advantage.

I would bet there is a good variance as you are facing a defense dependent variable weekly. If a defense usually lines up and plays teams straight up, there's no need to hard count getting a defender to show that they're blitzing or run the clock down waiting to see if they bail out of the box/off press into a coverage. If the defense is multiple look zone blitz (e.g. Pitt), you can be screwed if you see it wrong. This can happen (I believe they bring 4 or 5 initially on this play):
http://i.minus.com/iNXLAtETP0JZn.gif

That can happen. I guess the 10 or so second at the line that were used presnap didn't pay off and the Pittsburgh defense basically timed it perfectly. It's not like that was a rushed snap.

This is what teams use the clock to get defenses to do:
http://i.minus.com/ijmFFsONd4TWm.gif

The defense responds to Romo's snap action. They reveal it's a 0 blitz (blitzing 6 vs 5 in protection). By waiting until later in the play clock, the defense can't risk that it's a fake snap call and hold the disguise anymore. If that had been the call for the snap and they stayed in that alignment, the blitzers would have been a little further away (though a well-timed blitz), a safety in the middle of the field would be covering Austin in the slot, and Pacman in press position vs Dez with no safety help. It's pre-snap intel gained about the defense.

Obviously that would be a reason why but that doesn't change the fact that the defense doesn't have to do that. You don't see defenses get sucked in like that on every play so obviously there's some discretion on the defense's behalf.

That said, you could just be lining up and doing all that for nothing and even if you get the defense to show what they are going to do there's nothing that says that the defense has to stay in that setup. They could audible out of it if they feel they have been caught or maybe they don't even have to audible because they were yanking your chain in the first place.

There's really no question that Dallas utilizes the clock. The debatable aspect might be whether or not they actually gain their perceived benefit.