OT:Caldwell cites many factors in Colts calling late timeout

[tobias funke]

I can sit here and say that there was no definite and tangible gain for the Jets as a result of that timeout. Any benefits are speculative.

If you really want to make that a debatable issue, it can be, because the Jets still could have possibly won the game without the TO call.

On the other hand, that still doesn't make it anything close to "a good idea". In fact, some might even call it a "bad idea", regardless of what happened afterwards.

A 12-year veteran QB who is considered the premier student of the game apparently agrees, giving it 9 out of 10 'bitter-beer faces'.

 

[VJCPatriot]

I think he just had a brain fart. The problem is that with only 1 timeout the Colts couldn't prevent the Jets from killing the clock anyways. If they hadn't called the TO, the Jets would have had to either scramble to run a play without getting the benefits of discussing it first or would have been forced to use all their timeouts. I think you've got to leave the pressure on the other team in that situation.

 

[jbb9s]

Another issue falls on Rex. I have always heard that it is a good idea to kick the field goal, assuming its not 4th down, with 8 or so seconds on the clock. If it is a bad snap, the holder can stand up and throw an intentional incomplete pass or better yet, just kneel and call an immediate timeout (if the team has one). It would seem like this strategy would far outweigh the downside of kicking off with only a few seconds left on the clock.

Also, has anyone else seen huge disparity on how the scoreboard operators running the clock out end of game field goals. I would think the clock should stop when the ball passes through the uprights, but often I see 3+ seconds additionally run off (Rams SB for example).


By the way, why is the spike not intentional grounding?

 

[tobias funke]

By the way, why is the spike not intentional grounding?

For two reasons:

- There is always running back or a tight end within 5 yards on a spike play.

- Intentional grounding is only called when there is an imminent loss of yardage based on defensive pressure. That does not apply on a spike play because the QB is not throwing the ball in the face of pressure.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

For two reasons:

- There is always running back or a tight end within 5 yards on a spike play.

- Intentional grounding is only called when there is an imminent loss of yardage based on defensive pressure. That does not apply on a spike play because the QB is not throwing the ball in the face of pressure.

I think the more technically correct answer, for what it's worth, is that clocking the ball is expressly an exception from the intentional grounding rule. In other words, even if there were no running back or tight end in the area, and even if it could be said that the qb faced pressure from the defense, it still wouldn't be intentional grounding to spike the ball because that's what the rule says.

Reference: Rule 8, Sec. 2, Art. 1 ("Intentional Grounding"): "Item 3: Stopping Clock. A player under center is permitted to stop the game clock legally to save time if, immediately upon receiving the snap, he begins a continuous throwing motion and throws the ball directly into the ground."

 

[tobias funke]

That's too bad. Having it specifically designated in the rulebook kind of cheapens it for me.

 

[cupofjoe1962]

Could we call this a "Rooney Rule - Monent" ?

 

[Wolfpack]

As a head coach, Jim Caldwell is an absolute moron, pure and simple. But the media is afraid to call him out because of sensitivity to issues of coaching and race. He made one of the most boneheaded coaching decisions I have ever seen, he's too stupid to understand why it was boneheaded, and the media gave sparse mention of it today on the national shows.

I hope to high heaven the Colts never fire him.

 

[Wolfpack]

Why does Arkansas bounce on a blocked kick when it is completely irrelevant who gains possession on a 4th down?

Whuh huh? You're criticizing Arkansas because a guy recovered a blocked kick by falling on it?!? I don't see how that isn't a smart thing to do. First of all, deliberately batting or kicking it is illegal. So that option is out the window. Secondly, a kick that is blocked backwards (as the Ohio State punt was in the Sugar Bowl) can be recovered by the kicking team and advanced - and yes, it can be advanced by any offensive player since it isn't a fumble. Third of all, if the AK guy tries to scoop it up but instead pushes it back into the end zone (where an OSU player might recover or it could go out the back of the end zone), it could easily result in a safety. Arguably, in that situation, you're better off with the ball on the 20 than in getting the safety.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

I can sit here and say that there was no definite and tangible gain for the Jets as a result of that timeout. Any benefits are speculative.

We can't say one way or another whether Folk makes the longer kick.

But we can say throughout his career, he's 89% from 30 to 39 yards, which is the range of the kick due to Caldwell's blunder. And he's 64% from 40+ yards, 69% if you look between 40-49 only. So at the very least, his odds of making the kick increased by 20% due to this blunder.

That's a pretty significant error, and though we can't know for certain the end result if he hadn't made such a huge mistake, we can tell that the time-out wasn't taken for any logical reasons or for anything that really benefited the Colts other than a moment of rest. They were not confused or have the wrong personnel or anything like that. They simply gave a free time-out to the Jets when the Jets were trying to manage their two-minute drill.

We can argue whether the time-out cost them the game or not, but there's really no logical argument for the time-out being made. It's only potential negatives, with no real positives.

 

[Wolfpack]

This thread is making me think that we've been misinterpreting, Suggs comment re Brady/Manning:
>>>“Nobody studies like him,” Ryan said of Manning. “I know Brady thinks he does and all that stuff. I think there’s probably a little more help from Belichick with Brady than there is with Peyton Manning.”<<<<

Could he have been dissing Caldwell, meaning that Brady has a better coaching staff to work with than Manning????

Here's something that will frighten the you-know-what out of you: That's exactly what I thought when I read that quote, but before all the mediots (and paranoid Patriots fans) told me how I was supposed to interpret it. I even made a post in the thread which talked about that quote.

 

[Wolfpack]

One more thought just came to mind.

Lets just assume Caldwell could come up with a valid reason for calling the time out. Why call it so quickly? Why not let as much time as possible tick off first? Call it just as Sanchez gets to the line.

That's something I've seen before and would consider a perfectly fine timeout. If you think your defense needs a breather or you need to substitute personnel, you let the clock run down 5 or 6 seconds until the offense is at the line, then you call the TO.

 

[Wolfpack]

I can sit here and say that there was no definite and tangible gain for the Jets as a result of that timeout. Any benefits are speculative.

Yeah. Sure. After, what good of a gain is saving 6 seconds when there's only 35 seconds left and you're trailing by 2 and driving the ball on the cusp of FG range?

 

[Wolfpack]

The reality is that keeping the clock running was percentage move, and I think Caldwell and the rest of the world understands that this morning.

I think you, me, Peyton Manning, and the rest of the world understands that but I honestly don't think Caldwell does.

I would love to give Manning some truth serum and then ask him (on camera) what he thinks about his HC. :rocker:

 

[Wolfpack]

I think he just had a brain fart. The problem is that with only 1 timeout the Colts couldn't prevent the Jets from killing the clock anyways. If they hadn't called the TO, the Jets would have had to either scramble to run a play without getting the benefits of discussing it first or would have been forced to use all their timeouts. I think you've got to leave the pressure on the other team in that situation.

IMHO, when the TO was called, it looked like the Jets were running to the line of scimmage to spike the ball. So Caldwell generously saved them 5 to 7 seconds, which is a pretty darn big amount considering the situation.

 

[alamo]

IMHO, when the TO was called, it looked like the Jets were running to the line of scimmage to spike the ball. So Caldwell generously saved them 5 to 7 seconds, which is a pretty darn big amount considering the situation.

Plus, it was 2nd down, so a spike makes it 3rd down (and 8). So they would have had only one play to improve their position before trying the FG. Giviing the Jets an extra down gives them a lot more options on the next play. As it was, they took a shot downfield and made it.

 

[Wolfpack]

Plus, it was 2nd down, so a spike makes it 3rd down (and 8). So they would have had only one play to improve their position before trying the FG. Giviing the Jets an extra down gives them a lot more options on the next play. As it was, they took a shot downfield and made it.

+1. In fact, I gladly admit I may have been mistaken that NY was going to spike the ball. They may have called and run an actual play. But aside from stopping the clock, Caldwell's TO gave the Jets a chance to regroup and get everything in order.

 

[signbabybrady]

+1. In fact, I gladly admit I may have been mistaken that NY was going to spike the ball. They may have called and run an actual play. But aside from stopping the clock, Caldwell's TO gave the Jets a chance to regroup and get everything in order.

I have no idea whether they were going to spike it or not but that is one option. Another option would be they rush up and call a play. A third much less likely option would be they wind up using their last time out and with the clock stopped they try a few sideline routes. Lastly and probably not even a real option they could have just let the clock tisk out use the time out and kick from where they were deciding not to risk one more play with clock ticking away.

No other options and in all instances except the last one which the Jets would never have done there is something to gain for the Jets by the Colts calling a TO. Whether it is a few seconds or a play they would have lost something had the Colts not called one.

 

[mgteich]

There is no secret with regard to what Manning thinks of his head coach.

Tom Moore or Manning should be calling plays and timeouts not the cognitively impaired Caldwell. Certainly after 4 minutes are left, the offense should be below to Manning.

Of course, this is fine for the patriots.

I think you, me, Peyton Manning, and the rest of the world understands that but I honestly don't think Caldwell does.

I would love to give Manning some truth serum and then ask him (on camera) what he thinks about his HC. :rocker:

 

[Titanium Coate Hanger]

I'd have to invoke the "Scott Norwood Rule" for this one.

It should never, ideally, get down to a kicker at the end of the game. Colts had plenty of chances to put this game away earlier. It was one thing I found super interesting in a Peyton Manning interview several years back, about the value of QBs who can "come back" in the 4th quarter. He said, and I agree, that if you are doing your job as a team, you don't get into that position in the first place. You don't get yourself stuck in a position to make a last minute stop or hope your kicker can pull it out for you.

People really blamed Scott Norwood for missing that SuperBowl kick, but Buffalo had almost four full quarters of football to have made a difference for themselves before it got to that point. Steve Bartman didn't lose that series for the Cubs on his own.

I think it was a bad call personally, but I think it overshadows nearly 4 full quarters of bad calls by Caldwell, Moore and Manning and Co to be honest.

The failures of the Colts in this game was IMHO rooted back to it's ineffective O line and it's inability to sustain a potent rushing attack. The year Peyton Manning won a Superbowl, their line was playing well, their D was tough and they had an actual running game. You win playoff football in the NFL with a power rushing attack and stingy violent defense.

Manning is a great QB, but as QBs get older, you surround them with a power rushing game so they are asked to do more with fewer opportunities instead of more with less capability. Elway won rings when he finally had a bell cow back in Davis.

On Caldwell's end, he just doesn't strike me, from the games that I've seen, as a good time management coach during high stakes situations. To be fair, many many coaches are not, Andy Reid is not very good late in the game. Herm Edwards was kind of comical honestly with his late game adjustments. Dan Reeves, for all this skill and talent, would regularly lose it in the 4th quarter. The Patriots are super lucky to have Belichick, the guy is ice cold in the 4th quarter. He never panics. He has a plan and he sticks to it.

Jeff Saturday, the center, of the Colts has clearly been hurting/declining and I think that has a real ripple effect on Manning and that offense. I truly believe a team that did not rely so much on the pass and could grind the clock wouldn't leave it to their kicker to win it. Also the Colts D was simply not hitting Sanchez enough. It's a lot easier to not leave it in the hands of your time management challenged coach when you can lay some hurt on the opposing QB.