Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

WHAT were they thinking, burning that last timeout?

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
  • I was flabbergasted when we used that last timeout. It seemed pretty obvious that the reason the Rams didn't go for it initially was because we'd be in a good position to win the game with a timeout left and a buck 39 on the clock. Once we burned that, it changed everything; they only had to get a few inches on one play to end the game.

    OF COURSE they decided to go for it at that point!

    What in the HELL were we thinking burning that timeout then?! It cost us a good chance at winning the game!

    I'm still not over it. Absolutely livid.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 29962
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


  • Yeah, the only reason I can think of is because Hekker has a good track record of fake punt trickery. Pete may have called that last timeout to get the return unit ready for it.

    I don't even know how to feel about this, honestly. All I know is as soon as I saw Goff put his helmet back on and trot back out there, I knew it was over. They weren't going for a hard count to draw the Hawks offsides. McVay called that for the win. And he got it. God I hate the Rams.
    User avatar
    Thepeelsessions
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1415
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 10:05 am
    Location: Out here


  • I know why he did it. He didn’t want them to run the clock down on the punt but I’m with you. I was so mad at Pete for calling it there. I was already surprised they were punting given how close hey were to a 1st down. Let them punt that ball and see what we can do on offense with only a minute on the clock and one timeout.
    Image

    “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”

    :les: Check your PM's....We miss you :les:
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 19480
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • It was to stop the clock and preserve time. Without the timeout, Rams would have run the clock down to under a minute before punting or going for it on 4th down.

    Had they managed to stop the 4th down, they would have had a minute and a half to get into game-winning FG range.
    Last edited by hawknation2018 on Sun Oct 07, 2018 9:01 pm, edited 3 times in total.
    User avatar
    hawknation2018
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2244
    Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:04 pm


  • I get the outrage, I was pretty mad too. Most coaches are gonna call the TO because they want the full 1:39 or whatever we had and are willing to trade the TO for the extra time. That line of thinking makes sense, it just didn't work out for us.

    One person on twitter put it well: "What did the Rams want us to do?" and my answer to that is take the TO, so perhaps you're right in that we played into their hands. They couldn't stop the clock either so they HAD to punt it once they lined up. The worse thing is wasting a timeout earlier in the 4th with around 11 minutes left. That is and has been unacceptable and hasn't improved a bit under Pete.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


  • Last play rams ran was a run...once they reset ball clock was gonna run...if we dont call it there we get the ball with 30 something seconds and one time out. Was the right call rams coach just let his testes hang on that one.
    " I don't come to bow, I come to conquer." Bob Marley
    User avatar
    HommyHawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 307
    Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:41 pm


  • I'm confused about the anger over this timeout.

    The Rams had a lead, they just ran the ball, the clock was running after the measurement and they brought out the punt team. Wouldn't they have run the clock down, possibly all the way down and taken a delay of game?

    I assume Pete called the timeout because they wanted those 30-something seconds for the offense.

    Is the problem that it gave Goff time to talk them into going for it?

    What am I missing?
    User avatar
    minormillikin
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2852
    Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 12:32 pm
    Location: East Oly


  • I was yelling you don't take a time out there as the dog was running LOL. The obvious then followed, laying the game on the line they could pick up 1/2 yard. :pukeface:

    Team played well, but Crazy Pete got in his own way again. :roll:
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5288
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • It was the right call. But they had a timeout as well I believe and they would milk the clock then call timeout and send in the offense
    poly1274
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 230
    Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 5:13 pm


  • Actually, the play clock would have set to 25 seconds and run. Wasted timeout anyways and gave the Rams a chance to think about things. I have watched the offense burn way more than 25 seconds between plays in hurry up with no timeouts. Let the Rams burn the 25 seconds, punt it and then operate on offense with the timeout in your pocket and ~1 minute left to go.
    I used to be Bitter.
    User avatar
    JustTheTip
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1396
    Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:38 pm


  • poly1274 wrote:It was the right call. But they had a timeout as well I believe and they would milk the clock then call timeout and send in the offense


    They didn't have a timeout left. They would either have to punt it or take the delay of game. Either way they wouldn't be able to go for it unless McVay was feeling good enough to try a 4th and 6
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


  • poly1274 wrote:It was the right call. But they had a timeout as well I believe and they would milk the clock then call timeout and send in the offense


    Rams were out of timeouts.
    I used to be Bitter.
    User avatar
    JustTheTip
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1396
    Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:38 pm


  • minormillikin wrote:I'm confused about the anger over this timeout.

    The Rams had a lead, they just ran the ball, the clock was running after the measurement and they brought out the punt team. Wouldn't they have run the clock down, possibly all the way down and taken a delay of game?

    I assume Pete called the timeout because they wanted those 30-something seconds for the offense.

    Is the problem that it gave Goff time to talk them into going for it?

    What am I missing?


    I think that’s why people are upset. It ignores the fact that the Rams could have brought the offense back out even without the timeout (or even ran a fake punt). Either way, Rams were going to run the clock down to under a minute if the timeout wasn’t called.
    User avatar
    hawknation2018
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2244
    Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:04 pm


  • I don't care if it is what most coaches would or should do to save the time on the clock... It also gives the other team a chance to discuss things and decide to push it across for the 1st down... Too risky at that moment to take the time out. Put the ball back in the hands of the Russel to see what he can do with a minute, a time out, and the a possibility of having a quick drive as experience has shown can happen, and then go for the Field Goal with no time left on the clock... It would have given us a much better chance than what happened. Our Defense had a struggle stopping them all day other than inside the 20... Middle of the field, not so much.... Don't like the explanation! :141847_bnono:
    Looking For That One Particular Harbor....
    User avatar
    Hawkboi
    * Class Act Hawk Fan *
     
    Posts: 841
    Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:00 am
    Location: Boise, Idaho


  • Could they bring the offense out after bringing the punt team on the field with the clock running? I doubt it. The only way for them to get the offense back on the field without us taking a TO was to take the delay of game.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


  • adeltaY wrote:I get the outrage, I was pretty mad too. Most coaches are gonna call the TO because they want the full 1:39 or whatever we had and are willing to trade the TO for the extra time. That line of thinking makes sense, it just didn't work out for us.

    One person on twitter put it well: "What did the Rams want us to do?" and my answer to that is take the TO, so perhaps you're right in that we played into their hands. They couldn't stop the clock either so they HAD to punt it once they lined up. The worse thing is wasting a timeout earlier in the 4th with around 11 minutes left. That is and has been unacceptable and hasn't improved a bit under Pete.


    Agreed-The 2nd and 11 time-out call earlier in the 4th was very costly.

    And you’re right about Pete’s TO call at the end allowed McVay to call the sneak and discuss the play with Goff. I just wish for once Pete would keep all 2nd half TOs till the end.
    User avatar
    West TX Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1862
    Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 8:24 am


  • I have no idea what some of you guys are talking about.

    EVERY NFL coach calls a timeout there. You don't let them run another chunk of time off the clock. Weren't we just yelling at Pete a week or two ago for this very reason?

    Rams got ballsy during the timeout and did something insanely stupid. Blaming Pete for effective clock management? cmon guys.
    Hawkpower
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2105
    Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:53 am
    Location: Phoenix az


  • adeltaY wrote:Could they bring the offense out after bringing the punt team on the field with the clock running? I doubt it. The only way for them to get the offense back on the field without us taking a TO was to take the delay of game.


    There were over 30 seconds left on the play clock. That’s plenty of time to bring the offense back out had they wanted to.
    User avatar
    hawknation2018
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2244
    Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:04 pm


  • hawknation2018 wrote:
    adeltaY wrote:Could they bring the offense out after bringing the punt team on the field with the clock running? I doubt it. The only way for them to get the offense back on the field without us taking a TO was to take the delay of game.


    There were over 30 seconds left on the play clock. That’s plenty of time to bring the offense back out had they wanted to.



    They stopped the clock to measure. The play clock would have been set 25 and then the clock run. The Seahawks would have gotten the ball back with around a minute left and a timeout to use on offense after the punt the play. Like I said, I have watched this team waste more the 25 seconds after a long pickup in hurry up offense more than once.
    I used to be Bitter.
    User avatar
    JustTheTip
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1396
    Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:38 pm


  • hawknation2018 wrote:
    adeltaY wrote:Could they bring the offense out after bringing the punt team on the field with the clock running? I doubt it. The only way for them to get the offense back on the field without us taking a TO was to take the delay of game.


    There were over 30 seconds left on the play clock. That’s plenty of time to bring the offense back out had they wanted to.


    I honestly think there's a rule against that. You have to give the defense time to substitute or something. Anyway, I highly doubt that McVay would do that, they'd have just lined up their offense in the first place. It's the extra time afforded by the TO that solidified their decision to go for it.

    Which, by the way, Hawkpower, is not a stupid decision at all. By win probability, it was absolutely the right move and teams don't do it enough (going for it on 4th and 1 regardless of where you are on the field). It makes even more sense for the Rams because they are an offensive team. I think that's going to do a lot for their team confidence. Goff was absolutely fired up after it.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


  • It wasnt dumb. It was ballsy by rams. Crushing blow for us.
    Shanegotyou11
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1276
    Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:08 pm


  • 100% of football coaches at any level use a timeout there. When you're running out of time, and the clock is running, they have these things called timeouts that are available to you so that you can stop the clock.
    I'm fly
    I should be in the sky with birds
    User avatar
    Tical21
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3745
    Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:37 pm


  • minormillikin wrote:I'm confused about the anger over this timeout.

    The Rams had a lead, they just ran the ball, the clock was running after the measurement and they brought out the punt team. Wouldn't they have run the clock down, possibly all the way down and taken a delay of game?

    I assume Pete called the timeout because they wanted those 30-something seconds for the offense.

    Is the problem that it gave Goff time to talk them into going for it?

    What am I missing?

    Um, you're missing the fact that they had decided not to go for it - and that was primarily BECAUSE we had the timeout, their offense left the field - and then we STUPIDLY burned that timeout. With 1:39 left on the clock, all of a sudden the entire situation changed - if they could pick up just a few inches, they could ice the game. With a timeout left, we'd have been able to get the ball back needing only a field goal to win if our defense could stop them on the next series.

    The ONLY reason they sent their offense back out on the field was because we burned that damn timeout. I was also just on the phone with a Rams fan who completely agrees and can't believe we called that timeout.

    Ugh...the pain.....it hurts.

    Tical21 wrote:100% of football coaches at any level use a timeout there. When you're running out of time, and the clock is running, they have these things called timeouts that are available to you so that you can stop the clock.

    *rolls eyes* - see above. We HAD them stopped and they were going to punt. This isn't the same Jeff Fisher team that saves a great trick play specifically for the Seahawks every year.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 29962
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


  • I think the Rams tried a fake punt last week. It’s not out of the question that McVay tries to win the game that way.

    Preserving time was more important than the risk that a timeout would cause the Rams to change their mind about going for it on 4th down (and that they would actually make it). If Wagner times it right, Seahawks could have had that stop (with plenty of time to move into game-winning FG range because they used the timeout).
    User avatar
    hawknation2018
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2244
    Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 1:04 pm


  • You have one of the best long field goal kickers in the game and a time out of you don't call it, you don't worry about the return you go for the block and make the punter hurry it, if the kick goes to the sideline you have Lockett go as far as he can before stepping out before contact. You have about a minute left, the run game is still an option because of the time out.


    Throw a quick hitter somewhere and then a counter, use the time out and then see what you have left. We should be able to get 30 yards in a minute against a prevent defense.


    At least you have a chance then.


    They had the lead and a foot to go, they were going to punt as they got lined up, we gave them a chance to think about it.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24703
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Yeah, thought it was dumb at the time, and all the justifications I've been hearing have not changed my mind.

    They were out of time outs. They put the punt team out there. It sucked.
    Talent can get you to the playoffs.
    It takes character to win when you get there.

    SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS
    User avatar
    sutz
    USMC 1970-77
     
    Posts: 15190
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
    Location: Kent, WA


  • Like others have touched on ... the bottom line is which gives us the better option to win:

    1. Our offense gets the ball with just under a minute left, with a timeout, and has get into Janikowski’s range. He probably can hit in the 55-60yd range at home, so even if fair caught at the 10(ish), the offense would have to march about 50 yards.

    2. Our defense, which had given up 33 points so far, stops them from gaining half a yard.

    Once Hekker came out, I thought McVay made a mistake and was giving our offense a chance ... but it was too late for him to rethink with no timeouts left ... he couldn’t call an offensive play last moment - probably would’ve got a delay of game. Our timeout gave McVay the time to realize that it’s better to trust his high powered offense to gain 36 inches than to give Russell and Co. a chance for a game winning drive. Trading 40 seconds for a timeout is typically the right call, especially if it’s like 4th and 3+ ... but when it’s 4th and inches and you catch their coach in a mistake, you don’t give him a do-over.
    User avatar
    Wolfepack
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 97
    Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 11:50 pm
    Location: Kahalu'u, Hawai'i


  • I don’t think there is a coach in the NFL who would have kept a timeout in pocket while 40 of 100 seconds clicked off. I guarantee you if Pete had let the clock run down and they’d have punted that this board would be going nuts the other way. He made the right call, but the McVay has giant balls and they decided to try to win outright. I have no problem with using it.
    User avatar
    endzorn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2646
    Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 6:14 pm


  • Ya its a no brainer to take that TO. That wasnt what cost us the game.The Rams made the plays down the stretch to win.
    justafan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1033
    Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:37 am


  • I thought it was needless to call a TO there, especially when they sent their punt team on the field. They were up 2 points with inches to go for a first at mid field. They were going to punt or take the delay of game. Pete let them off the hook to reconsider and get things set up. Bad call by Pete, but I dont blame the loss on that call.
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1009
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


  • 100 out of 100 coaches call a timeout there.
    getnasty
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2864
    Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 8:22 pm


  • getnasty wrote:100 out of 100 coaches call a timeout there.

    Don't think so. It was extremely bad situational football. I was following the general NFL reddit during the game, and fans of every team were confused with the decision before the sneak even occurred. Especially since McVay was trotting out the punting team. Getting outcoached is becoming a trend with Carroll.
    Spin Doctor
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2626
    Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:31 am


  • Maybe our defense could have stopped them??? Lets not put all blame on Pete here. it was not unreasonable to do what he did. A lot of armchair coaches think they know best watching replays from the comfort of there living room.
    User avatar
    Year of The Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1042
    Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:18 am


  • There's the difference between an old coach and a young coach. Using the timeout was "old school" correct ;but it gave the ballsy young coach time to plan. Hey Pete ....let them punt!!!!
    User avatar
    xray
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 159
    Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2018 5:29 am
    Location: AZ


  • getnasty wrote:100 out of 100 coaches call a timeout there.


    I dont believe that at all. In the context of the game, you roll with whats going on as soon as you see their punt team run on the field. If 100 of the coaches call a timeout there then why is this such a huge topic with the fans, media, and NFL analysts?
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1009
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


  • Spin Doctor wrote:
    getnasty wrote:100 out of 100 coaches call a timeout there.

    Don't think so. It was extremely bad situational football. I was following the general NFL reddit during the game, and fans of every team were confused with the decision before the sneak even occurred. Especially since McVay was trotting out the punting team. Getting outcoached is becoming a trend with Carroll.



    I completely agree with the argument that 100 out of 100 coaches call a timeout in this situation. Fans were confused about the call on NFL reddit? Are you trying to tell me that fans know more about the game than coaches at the highest level of football? :roll: Maybe there is a reason that fans are fans and coaches are coaches.
    Go Hawks!
    oldhawkfan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1732
    Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 12:06 pm
    Location: Spokane


  • People there on the sidelines said the timeout was called by Pete immediately after the Gurley run. The officials did not announce a timeout had been called until after the measurement.

    It looked like Pete called a timeout after the clock had stopped, a measurement happened, and the Rams had their Punt team on the field, but that is not the case.

    The timeout was called immediately after the run play, like any coach would do, and then not announced on the field until they sorted out the field position.

    It makes a lot more sense when you know that.
    Image
    Radish and Cheinhill — Gone, but not forgotten
    User avatar
    HawkFan72
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 16347
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Antioch, CA


  • JustTheTip wrote:
    poly1274 wrote:It was the right call. But they had a timeout as well I believe and they would milk the clock then call timeout and send in the offense


    Rams were out of timeouts.


    Until Pete came through for them! :roll:
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5288
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • HawkFan72 wrote:People there on the sidelines said the timeout was called by Pete immediately after the Gurley run. The officials did not announce a timeout had been called until after the measurement.

    It looked like Pete called a timeout after the clock had stopped, a measurement happened, and the Rams had their Punt team on the field, but that is not the case.

    The timeout was called immediately after the run play, like any coach would do, and then not announced on the field until they sorted out the field position.

    It makes a lot more sense when you know that.


    I also read that the ref asked Pete again after the measurement to reassure he wanted the timeout. That was going on when the punt team was already on the field. Will be interesting to see what others say about it on the sports shows as its one of the main topics.
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1009
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


  • hawknation2018 wrote:I think the Rams tried a fake punt last week. It’s not out of the question that McVay tries to win the game that way.

    Preserving time was more important than the risk that a timeout would cause the Rams to change their mind about going for it on 4th down (and that they would actually make it). If Wagner times it right, Seahawks could have had that stop (with plenty of time to move into game-winning FG range because they used the timeout).


    The fake punt is MUCH easier to stop than the qb sneak on that distance. I'd take the chances on faking the punt 100% of the time in that situation.

    As far as preserving the time goes, I'd agree if we were down by 4 or more, but we weren't. All we needed was a field goal. Even on bad days the odds are good Wilson can pull that off. The way our offense was working today, we had a very high chance to get into position and having that timeout in our pocket to get set for the field goal was worth more than the 25 seconds the Rams could have burned.
    Image

    “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”

    :les: Check your PM's....We miss you :les:
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 19480
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • I think everyone's hyper-focusing on the wrong thing.

    If it wasn't for Dickson's horrible punt giving the Rams the ball at the 21 instead of where it should have been, inside the 10, if not the 5..............then we're not having this conversation because there's no way McVay goes for it on his own 30.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13316
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • RolandDeschain wrote:I was flabbergasted when we used that last timeout. It seemed pretty obvious that the reason the Rams didn't go for it initially was because we'd be in a good position to win the game with a timeout left and a buck 39 on the clock. Once we burned that, it changed everything; they only had to get a few inches on one play to end the game.

    OF COURSE they decided to go for it at that point!

    What in the HELL were we thinking burning that timeout then?! It cost us a good chance at winning the game!

    I'm still not over it. Absolutely livid.


    I have to comment now, I’ll read the thread after this post.

    #metoo

    I was absolutely FREAKING OUT.
    to me it felt like that TO gave the Rams time to get their shit together, and change their mind.

    I almost broke another TV by throwing the remote. Only thing that stopped me was the $1500 I spent last year after breaking one.
    ITS A GREAT TIME TO BE A SEAHAWK FAN !
    User avatar
    pmedic920
    * .NET Official Stache *
     
    Posts: 16908
    Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:37 am
    Location: On the lake, Livingston Texas


  • pmedic920 wrote:to me it felt like that TO gave the Rams time to get their shit together, and change their mind. .


    The Rams already had TWO official measurements and all that time to get their shit together.

    You're thinking they're punting and you're getting the ball back to try and win the game, why on earth wouldn't you want an extra 40 seconds?

    This take and anger makes ZERO sense to me.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13316
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • adeltaY wrote:
    hawknation2018 wrote:
    adeltaY wrote:Could they bring the offense out after bringing the punt team on the field with the clock running? I doubt it. The only way for them to get the offense back on the field without us taking a TO was to take the delay of game.


    There were over 30 seconds left on the play clock. That’s plenty of time to bring the offense back out had they wanted to.


    I honestly think there's a rule against that. You have to give the defense time to substitute or something. Anyway, I highly doubt that McVay would do that, they'd have just lined up their offense in the first place. It's the extra time afforded by the TO that solidified their decision to go for it.

    Which, by the way, Hawkpower, is not a stupid decision at all. By win probability, it was absolutely the right move and teams don't do it enough (going for it on 4th and 1 regardless of where you are on the field). It makes even more sense for the Rams because they are an offensive team. I think that's going to do a lot for their team confidence. Goff was absolutely fired up after it.


    McVay is a gamer, Pete a coach.
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3059
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    pmedic920 wrote:to me it felt like that TO gave the Rams time to get their shit together, and change their mind. .


    The Rams already had TWO official measurements and all that time to get their shit together.

    You're thinking they're punting and you're getting the ball back to try and win the game, why on earth wouldn't you want an extra 40 seconds?

    This take and anger makes ZERO sense to me.


    Problem is, it's not 40 seconds, it's 25 tops and that's only if they took a delay of game penalty. We'd still have had over a minute to get into field goal range and had a timeout to boot.

    I get Pete's thought that he wanted to stop the clock, but sometimes you need to work within the situation you're actually in, and not just do what you always do. Giving the rams the extra incentive to go for it was a bad idea. Letting them punt increases our odds of victory even with 25 less seconds on the clock.
    Image

    “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”

    :les: Check your PM's....We miss you :les:
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 19480
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • I initially was pissed at what happened then I went back and ran the play and realized I had an incorrect understanding

    1) Rams 3rd down is a play down the middle
    2) The only reason the clock is stopped is because of measurement
    3) As soon as the ball is spotted the clock will run
    4) It felt like a wasted timeout because the clock had been stopped, but it would have started running again
    5) It was completely the right call to stop the clock - it is what should be done

    Now lets discuss NOT taking a timeout at 2.37 and let the clock go down to 2 minutes. That my friends is horrible clock management
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7303
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:I think everyone's hyper-focusing on the wrong thing.

    If it wasn't for Dickson's horrible punt giving the Rams the ball at the 21 instead of where it should have been, inside the 10, if not the 5..............then we're not having this conversation because there's no way McVay goes for it on his own 30.


    Also correct - this was key
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7303
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • kidhawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    pmedic920 wrote:to me it felt like that TO gave the Rams time to get their shit together, and change their mind. .


    The Rams already had TWO official measurements and all that time to get their shit together.

    You're thinking they're punting and you're getting the ball back to try and win the game, why on earth wouldn't you want an extra 40 seconds?

    This take and anger makes ZERO sense to me.


    Problem is, it's not 40 seconds, it's 25 tops and that's only if they took a delay of game penalty. We'd still have had over a minute to get into field goal range and had a timeout to boot..


    1. The NFL playclock is 40 seconds, not 25. As soon as the ref winds the clock, McVay is taking all 40 seconds.

    2. We couldn't get into FG range from the 50 yards like the previous series with five minutes left, what confidence did you have that we could do it from inside our 20 with just a minute.

    Again, people are focusing on the wrong thing IMO, if Dickson (who we spent a 5th round pick and did nothing during the preseason except punt the ball out inside the 5) doesn't get cute and try to roll a punt giving the Rams the ball at the 21, this conversation doesn't happen. McVay has to punt.

    Dickson is the one who gave the Rams an extra 10-15 yards giving McVay the chance to go for it.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 13316
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


  • Meh... one call did not lose a game.
    User avatar
    Jazzhawk
    * NET News Scoop *
     
    Posts: 9764
    Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:16 pm


  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    kidhawk wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    pmedic920 wrote:to me it felt like that TO gave the Rams time to get their shit together, and change their mind. .


    The Rams already had TWO official measurements and all that time to get their shit together.

    You're thinking they're punting and you're getting the ball back to try and win the game, why on earth wouldn't you want an extra 40 seconds?

    This take and anger makes ZERO sense to me.


    Problem is, it's not 40 seconds, it's 25 tops and that's only if they took a delay of game penalty. We'd still have had over a minute to get into field goal range and had a timeout to boot..


    1. The NFL playclock is 40 seconds, not 25. As soon as the ref winds the clock, McVay is taking all 40 seconds.

    2. We couldn't get into FG range from the 50 yards like the previous series with five minutes left, what confidence did you have that we could do it from inside our 20 with just a minute.

    Again, people are focusing on the wrong thing IMO, if Dickson (who we spent a 5th round pick and did nothing during the preseason except punt the ball out inside the 5) doesn't get cute and try to roll a punt giving the Rams the ball at the 21, this conversation doesn't happen. McVay has to punt.

    Dickson is the one who gave the Rams an extra 10-15 yards giving McVay the chance to go for it.


    40 or 25 is still inconsequential. The fact remains we'd have gotten the ball with about a minute left on the clock and a timeout to get into field goal range. The timeout was unnecessary. As I said, I understand it's the "normal" thing to do in the vast majority of situations. This just wasn't one of the vast majority of situations. Sometimes you have to coach within the situation you are in. This time we didn't do that.

    is this the one single thing that cost us the game? No it's not, but it is the one thing that happened that I disagreed with before it happened.

    We can go back to the holding call that took us out of field goal range. We can talk about the bad punt by Dickson, and i'm sure there's a litany of other plays throughout the game that could have changed the outcome. I'm not saying that the timeout call was the sole reason for us losing, it was just the final nail in the coffin.
    Image

    “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”

    :les: Check your PM's....We miss you :les:
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 19480
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Next


It is currently Tue Oct 16, 2018 10:33 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information