This so called "Timeout" Fad

[Shuttemdown41]

I say leave the rule as is. If it were to be changed, what happens when the defensive team only has 10 men on the field or has 12 men on the field and needs to call a timeout at the last moment? The first instance a team loses a game because they couldn't call a timeout to get the right number of players on the field we'll be right back to square one.

As a matter of fact, if the rule were to be changed and I was a head coach in this very position, I'd INTENTIONALLY get either too many or too few players on the field the first time I was in this position, have them not allow me to call my timeout, and scream bloody murder about it after the game were I to lose. Leave it as is. Teams need to start game planning for the last second freeze timeout so that they intentionally line up way in advance and pretend to be snapping the ball so the other team uses their timeout and they get it out of the way - the other team can't call another timeout. Isn't that what makes the NFL so great - the adjustments?

 

[Tusan_Homichi]

Don't worry...all the crap will stop once a kicker misses the game winner, only to nail it on the second attempt because some yahoo coach called a timeout a split second before the snap of the ball.

I for one will laugh my butt off too.

You ever see Phillips doing this bush league stuff?

BBQ

Can't see Wade doing it. I especially can't see it after he basically said it was complete and total crap in his postgame conference.

 

[adamknite]

So if we do it to Vinatieri next week and it works will you change your mind?

I won't even if it costs us a game. It's part of the chess match.

Vinateiri plays for the Colts

 

[Hostile]

Vinateiri plays for the Colts

Holy crap, I forgot that.

Stephen Gostkowski then?

 

[MapleLeaf]

I agree Rack. Teams have been icing the sawed off midgets chain smokers for years. I think it's smart strategy and applaud Jauron or any other coach for doing everything in their power to win for their team.

...wouldn't be celebrating this win if it wasn't for Nick Folk's efforts.

I think it is disingenuous of you to habitually denigrate a member of this team who position you despise. I believe you once told us that you coached football. I can't imagine what the other coaches thought of how you viewed kickers.

By the way talking about using everything to win. Do you agree with the "bounty" that was supposedly set by Buddy Ryan to motivate his players to win the game?

There's many ways to attempt to win a game. Some don't seem to be in the arena of good sportsmanship.

If calling a TO during a kick is good for football, then as Jauron I would have delayed the game with an injury first, then had some second string player hop off the field with a shoe loose, then called the timeout.

If the competition committee hadn't changed the rule I would have used all (3) of my timeouts at the last second stretching the last few seconds of the game into possibly 7- 10 minutes of a delayed, and ridiculous affair announcing to the American public and the youth of America that's how you win games!

My version may be excessive in it;s outlook, but it serves a purpose to view what a competition committee looks at when trying to determine these types of rulings. Is what has happened this year really competition and why of all things has it taken the coaches of the past 50 years of football to begin this ploy?

Haven't they been trying to win games the past few decades? Or is it just something they don't feel is part of their repertoir to win games?

 

[adamknite]

Holy crap, I forgot that.

Stephen Gostkowski then?

I think that's it. I'm not sure how to spell it, though.

No worries, everybody messes up sometimes Hos, just gives us normal people hope seeing that you make humanly mistakes too.

 

[Tusan_Homichi]

It just feels like it's against the spirit of the game. I understand icing the kicker, but this isn't doing that. It's not making him think about it more, it's making him kick it twice in hopes of disaster.

I mean, you're basically ruining the game-winning kick. Everyone goes running out onto the field excited and cheering and then everyone stops and stares at a ref who tells everyone that a timeout was called a split second before the snap that no one but the ref standing next to the head coach has seen/heard. It's bush league.

 

[MapleLeaf]

So if we do it to Vinatieri next week and it works will you change your mind?

I won't even if it costs us a game. It's part of the chess match.

...or is it football? How do you market a game where the game are not won or lost on the plays, but rather in the time in between plays?

 

[dogunwo]

Like I've said in a few previous threads, I have no problem with it.


It separates the men from the boys. A good team or player will kick it through the uprights regardless.


Let the rule remain just like it is.

 

[Hostile]

...wouldn't be celebrating this win if it wasn't for Nick Folk's efforts.

I think it is disingenuous of you to habitually denigrate a member of this team who position you despise. I believe you once told us that you coached football. I can't imagine what the other coaches thought of how you viewed kickers.

They laughed. Usually pretty hearty laughter too.

By the way talking about using everything to win. Do you agree with the "bounty" that was supposedly set by Buddy Ryan to motivate his players to win the game?

No, and I never said do everything to win, even cheat. I said this is part of the chess match. There is a huge chasm of difference.

There's many ways to attempt to win a game. Some don't seem to be in the arena of good sportsmanship.

Agreed, but I don't hapen to think icing a kicker is unsportsmanlike.

If calling a TO during a kick is good for football, then as Jauron I would have delayed the game with an injury first, then had some second string player hop off the field with a shoe loose, then called the timeout.

I wouldn't. I would have tried to ice the kicker though.

If the competition committee hadn't changed the rule I would have used all (3) of my timeouts at the last second stretching the last few seconds of the game into possibly 7- 10 minutes of a delayed, and ridiculous affair announcing to the American public and the youth of America that's how you win games!

He could have. But the odds say his best shot is to ice him one time. Keep doing it it settles him down.

My version may be excessive in it;s outlook, but it serves a purpose to view what a competition committee looks at when trying to determine these types of rulings. Is what has happened this year really competition and why of all things has it taken the coaches of the past 50 years of football to begin this ploy?

Haven't they been trying to win games the past few decades? Or is it just something they don't feel is part of their repertoir to win games?

I've seen this ploy for many years. I have no idea what you're watching.

 

[Hostile]

...or is it football? How do you market a game where the game are not won or lost on the plays, but rather in the time in between plays?

It is human chess. Strategy. point. Counter point. Parry. Thrust.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I agree. It's bush league. It's against what I consider the spirit of the game. Ok, freeze a kicker, but don't let them call it a half second before the snap. Make timeouts with less than 5 seconds in the playclock impossible to call on field goals. Problem solved.

Yeah its nonsense. How do you erase points like that? Its a game error.

 

[Ren]

its definitely the in thing to do...but karma will come around soon on it

It kinda did, would have been a bit sweeter if Folk had missed the first kick but folk will never miss

 

[DallasInDC]

I say leave the rule as is. If it were to be changed, what happens when the defensive team only has 10 men on the field or has 12 men on the field and needs to call a timeout at the last moment? The first instance a team loses a game because they couldn't call a timeout to get the right number of players on the field we'll be right back to square one.

As a matter of fact, if the rule were to be changed and I was a head coach in this very position, I'd INTENTIONALLY get either too many or too few players on the field the first time I was in this position, have them not allow me to call my timeout, and scream bloody murder about it after the game were I to lose. Leave it as is. Teams need to start game planning for the last second freeze timeout so that they intentionally line up way in advance and pretend to be snapping the ball so the other team uses their timeout and they get it out of the way - the other team can't call another timeout. Isn't that what makes the NFL so great - the adjustments?

The D should be counting the players before a fraction of a sec before the kick. How many times have you seen a TO called on a regular play when the defense realized they didn't have enough players on the field and did so a fraction of a sec before the play is called so that the play is actually executed?

 

[MapleLeaf]

I say leave the rule as is. If it were to be changed, what happens when the defensive team only has 10 men on the field or has 12 men on the field and needs to call a timeout at the last moment? The first instance a team loses a game because they couldn't call a timeout to get the right number of players on the field we'll be right back to square one.

As a matter of fact, if the rule were to be changed and I was a head coach in this very position, I'd INTENTIONALLY get either too many or too few players on the field the first time I was in this position, have them not allow me to call my timeout, and scream bloody murder about it after the game were I to lose. Leave it as is. Teams need to start game planning for the last second freeze timeout so that they intentionally line up way in advance and pretend to be snapping the ball so the other team uses their timeout and they get it out of the way - the other team can't call another timeout. Isn't that what makes the NFL so great - the adjustments?

...action inside the lines. What we are really starting to pose is the game outside the sidelines.

A game orchestrated specifically by a coach in conjunction with the referees. Is that the game you want to participate in as a fan?

If that was the case I would have no need for the other 59 minutes, 55 seconds. Just give me the game winning kick at the start and let me shut off the TV 10 seconds later.

Excessive strategy refs and timeouts to influence a final play is not football in my opinion. When the timeouts were first granted in football they opportunities for coaches to talk to their players about specific plays and then in the 70s for stopping the clock.

It was never used to interrupt a play.

 

[SkinsandTerps]

It is part of the game.
And not a part that upsets me to the point where I believe it should be changed.

IMO, its like the guy gets a practice kick.

Same as Peyton's random gesturing and posturing, every freakin' play.

 

[zeromaster]

I agree Rack. Teams have been icing the sawed off midgets chain smokers for years. I think it's smart strategy and applaud Jauron or any other coach for doing everything in their power to win for their team.

Ah, the old 'end justifies the means'.

You surprise me...

 

[Hostile]

We don't need any more stinking rules.

 

[dogunwo]

Don't worry...all the crap will stop once a kicker misses the game winner, only to nail it on the second attempt because some yahoo coach called a timeout a split second before the snap of the ball.

I for one will laugh my butt off too.

You ever see Phillips doing this bush league stuff?

BBQ

Dont give Wade too much credit, he will do it, if he thinks it would help him. Why wouldnt he?

 

[Tusan_Homichi]

...action inside the lines. What we are really starting to pose is the game outside the sidelines.

A game orchestrated specifically by a coach in conjunction with the referees. Is that the game you want to participate in as a fan?

If that was the case I would have no need for the other 59 minutes, 55 seconds. Just give me the game winning kick at the start and let me shut off the TV 10 seconds later.

Excessive strategy refs and timeouts to influence a final play is not football in my opinion. When the timeouts were first granted in football they opportunities for coaches to talk to their players about specific plays and then in the 70s for stopping the clock.

It was never used to interrupt a play.

Summed up perfectly and better than I could. Thank you sir.