No time out at the end of the first half?

[brdmaverick]

Scenario:
After driving for a touchdown to take a 10-7 lead, the Bengals ran the ball for no gain on 2 and 10 from their own 25 yards line with 51 seconds left in the first half.

Now it's 3rd-and-10 from the same 25 yard line but the Pats defense/coaches elect NOT to take a time out and instead let the Bengals bleed the clock to the 15 second mark before running their 3rd down play (incompletion).

I've been very vocal about the Patriots time out usage (or lack there-of) in previous games. As such, I figured I'd start a thread on a situation in which I actually AGREED with the coaching staff.

Normally I'm all about aggressive play, but yesterday I agreed with this safe play. Even though it was third and long the Bengals had been effective at third down conversions to that point. It was a tough, hard-fought first hafl in which I thought 'just going in with the lead' was a victory in itself. Why mess with fate and allow teh Bengals a chance to convert thrid down and get points?

What did you guys think?

 

[brdmaverick]

Scenario:
After driving for a touchdown to take a 10-7 lead, the Bengals ran the ball for no gain on 2 and 10 from their own 25 yards line with 51 seconds left in the first half.

Now it's 3rd-and-10 from the same 25 yard line but the Pats defense/coaches elect NOT to take a time out and instead let the Bengals bleed the clock to the 15 second mark before running their 3rd down play (incompletion).

I've been very vocal about the Patriots time out usage (or lack there-of) in previous games. As such, I figured I'd start a thread on a situation in which I actually AGREED with the coaching staff.

Normally I'm all about aggressive play, but yesterday I agreed with this safe play. Even though it was third and long the Bengals had been effective at third down conversions to that point. It was a tough, hard-fought first hafl in which I thought 'just going in with the lead' was a victory in itself. Why mess with fate and allow teh Bengals a chance to convert thrid down and get points?

I figured I'd show you guys that I don't just disagree for the sake of being disagreeable.

What did you guys think?

 

[Adam Seward]

Keep the momentum up into the half, no need to get over aggressive on this one after a big score by White.

 

[cstjohn17]

I was ok with "No", part of a coaches job is to get a feel for the team. They were not in a groove. Take the lead into the locker and go make adjustments.

 

[varjao]

I agree with your agreeing, agreed?

 

[Ring 6]

I was asking for the TO because I was greedy for more points.
I think there wasn't enough left for a stop, a punt and a reasonable drive, where on the other hand they coud run a screen, break a tackle and have a shot at 3 with time outs left.
I have never been big on calling time out when the other team has the ball, unless you are behind at the end of the game.

 

[ALP]

the TD drive right before that was made in ~60 seconds

we could have had another scoring drive with the ~60 seconds left on the clock after that 2nd down...

i'd called a TO

 

[Joey007]

No.

With how the game was going in the first half, I wanted to simply have the lead going into halftime. Our record with the lead going into half at home is 80-1 at Gillete or something crazy like that.

 

[Joker]

I think you're too thin skinned. You don't have to "show" anybody anything on a sports message board.

 

[bbobbo]

No.

With how the game was going in the first half, I wanted to simply have the lead going into halftime. Our record with the lead going into half at home is 80-1 at Gillete or something crazy like that.

78-0

 

[brdmaverick]

I agree with your agreeing, agreed?

I felt obligated to hit the 'agree' button to that statement.

 

[Joey007]

78-0

Close, so they haven't even lost one. Only further to my point.

 

[brdmaverick]

I think you're too thin skinned. You don't have to "show" anybody anything on a sports message board.

Honestly was just curious how the masses felt on this one. (But maybe it's both, perhaps I am thin skinned).

 

[pwes]

I think some of you worry too much about Timeouts when they dont matter. This isn't the first time this season I have seen complaints about the team not taking timeouts before the half and largely taking them wont make a difference anyway. The offense was largely out of sync the first half and they had one good drive to score a TD. You have Cinci on the ropes, why are you going to stop them and let them regroup on 3rd and 10? The extra 10 seconds doesn't matter if you are giving them time to think about what their next move is going to be, and as a result convert the ball. We really didn't need to score right then, we just needed the ball back (in essence keep them from scoring). If they had converted then I do believe they would have then started taking timeouts to stop the clock. But on 3rd and 10 with 50 seconds and a chance to stop, no.

 

[jmt57]

My initial reaction was to call a timeout, but after a few seconds I agree with you. The number of risks - that Cincy converts, an injury, Pats commit a turnover trying to be too aggressive - outweighs what would have been a very slim possibility of scoring with that small an amount of time remaining.

 

[cstjohn17]

I was more concerned with the timeout they did call at 2:15 of the 4th. They just got a 1st down and could have let the clock run down and then take kneel downs. I liked the Blount TD as much as anyone but what if Gronk or Brady gets their ankle rolled up.

Didn't like it.

 

[Froob]

I do unless they get the first down, then I'm going to ***** that they shouldn't have called the timeout.

 

[mikey m]

Agree with no timeout for reasons pretty much stated already. It was clear we needed to make adjustments on both sides of the ball at that point, and honestly I didn't feel very comfortable with either our defense or offense out on the field in that situation. Just get into the locker room with that lead we were fairly lucky to have.

 

[brdmaverick]

I think some of you worry too much about Timeouts when they dont matter.

I can see people having different opinions on when to use time outs, but I didn't expect to have to debate their importance. It factors heavily into the gamemanship and strategy during crunch time each game. Being able to save up to 40 seconds during a crucial part of the game most certainly matters.

 

[supafly]

I was more concerned with the timeout they did call at 2:15 of the 4th. They just got a 1st down and could have let the clock run down and then take kneel downs. I liked the Blount TD as much as anyone but what if Gronk or Brady gets their ankle rolled up.

Didn't like it.

I think something happened there that forced them to take that timeout. I don't think you'll see that again too often. Belichick was visibly upset, as was Brady to a lesser extent.