• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Tomlin correct on saving a timeout?

papillon said:
OTOH, should the Bengals pass and fail then the Steelers get 2:20, 1 TO and the 2 minute warning. If Lewis would throw it before the 2 minute warning to win the game then why wouldn't he throw it after the 2 minute warning and win the game? I don't see the Bengals strategy changing because the Steelers stop the clock 3 times prior to the 2 minute warning. If Lewis wanted to try and win the game on offense he would have tried in either scenario, IMO.

Papillon
Click to expand...

It's certainly an easier decision to "risk" a pass with 2:10 on the clock than with 1:50 on the clock. An incompletion barely hurts you in the first case.

I certainly see your side, but I would still do it the way Tomlin did it (I was at the game and was telling the guy next to me that I liked it at the time). This is far from the "no-brainer" decision that some people feel it is. We got the ball and had plenty of time to score. Then on our first offensive play, our QB held the ball for 6 seconds (I'm exaggerating here) before taking a needless sack that cost us yards and a ton of time --- our receivers were all running verticals and it took forever for them to jog back to the LOS and get set for the next snap. So I'm much more comfortable blaming Ben for a lack of awareness or Haley for the playcall or Tomlin for not telling Ben "throw the ball away if it's not there, we can't afford a sack."
 
Steel G said:
There's still no guarantee at all that they pass because that hasn't been Lewis's tendency.
Click to expand...

I don't buy it. Each situation is unique, until Marvin has been coaching for 78 years the sample size of opportunities that are truly comparable is far too small to say with any conviction that Marvin has a tendency that he will likely follow. This year he certainly has the weapons and successful track record on offense to think the reward justifies the risk.
 
And if Ben decided to throw that last ball to Miller, we could have won the game and this would have been moot...
 
SteelerAl said:
I don't buy it. Each situation is unique, until Marvin has been coaching for 78 years the sample size of opportunities that are truly comparable is far too small to say with any conviction that Marvin has a tendency that he will likely follow. This year he certainly has the weapons and successful track record on offense to think the reward justifies the risk.
Click to expand...

78 years? Nah, the man's been head coach of the Bengals for 13 seasons, that's plenty of a sample size especially given the average stay for an NFL coach is about 4 years. And again, I say, he's not risking what he believes to be the sure FG and a 6 point lead to force the Steelers to march the length of the field. I don't care what players he has on the roster. The killer mentality has never been Marvin's MO, it's partly why he's 0-6 in the playoffs.
 
The only argument for saving a TO that I can see is it potentially saves you from wasting a down by spiking the ball to kill the clock. I don't see that as a strong argument as if you can't pick up 10 yards in 3 downs against a prevent defense, you don't deserve to win.

The bottom line is you take the extra 38 seconds.
 
Coach Cool Shade's clock management is consistently below the line. IMO, you take the time outs before the 2 min warning in the Cinci game.

Heres whats even worse from last week: Raiders have no time outs left and we have one, with the ball deep in their territory. Logic says you take a knee, run the clock down to about 2 seconds and kick the field goal. If you miss, its OT. Instead Tomlin/Haley run two more run plays. Two more opportunities for a bad snap, bad exchange at the hand off, fumble when tackled or penalties. When they did take the time out and kicked it, they STILL left too much time on the clock where we had to kickoff, which left another opportunity (however unlikely) for something bad to happen.
 
Didn't read all the posts here, but no, it's ******* stupid to waste that much time. Score first and worry about how much time you leave the other team later.
 
This article basically proves nothing, because the clock stoppage at the 2-minute warning was essentially equivalent to having one timeout remaining, in this particular situation. As it was, the Steelers' offense simply ended up with 35+ seconds less to work with.
 
topseed said:
This article basically proves nothing, because the clock stoppage at the 2-minute warning was essentially equivalent to having one timeout remaining, in this particular situation. As it was, the Steelers' offense simply ended up with 35+ seconds less to work with.
Click to expand...

Not it's not. Having a timeout in your pocket means you can work the middle of the field (and force the defense to protect the middle) as long as you still have a timeout. If you get the ball with 2:04 and your first pass goes incomplete, then the 2-minute warning is completely worthless to you.
 
SteelerAl said:
Not it's not. Having a timeout in your pocket means you can work the middle of the field (and force the defense to protect the middle) as long as you still have a timeout. If you get the ball with 2:04 and your first pass goes incomplete, then the 2-minute warning is completely worthless to you.
Click to expand...

No! Having an extra 38 seconds on the clock allows you to work the middle of the field more than having one TO does.

What you're arguing is that the average play, running a hurry-up offense, takes more than 38 seconds.
 
SteelerAl said:
Not it's not. Having a timeout in your pocket means you can work the middle of the field (and force the defense to protect the middle) as long as you still have a timeout. If you get the ball with 2:04 and your first pass goes incomplete, then the 2-minute warning is completely worthless to you.
Click to expand...

It's definitely more advantageous for the offense. 35+ seconds are much more valuable, because you can still run several plays to the middle of the field without that much time elapsing. Plus you get the additional bonus of a clock stoppage at the two-minute warning..
 
topseed said:
It's definitely more advantageous for the offense. 35+ seconds are much more valuable, because you can still run several plays to the middle of the field without that much time elapsing. Plus you get the additional bonus of a clock stoppage at the two-minute warning..
Click to expand...

While this is all true the 2 minute warning isn't something that the offense controls while a TO can be used at the discretion of the offense, so the two minute warning while it is a stoppage of the clock it comes at a specific time and not necessarily when the offense may need it most. That being said, I would prefer a quarterback of Ben's caliber to have 2:20, grounding the ball and the two minute warning at his disposal over 1:47, grounding the ball and a TO.

Papillon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top