That last time out (Pagano Clock Management)... {[Merge]}

[bluebombers87]

5 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Again, at the 12 yard line with 2 timeouts left, TIME IS NOT AN ISSUE in regards to scoring a TD.

 

At most, with it being second down, a team will run 7 plays from the 12 without scoring.  At 10 seconds a play, that is 70 seconds.  There were 75 on the clock.  And that is at 10 seconds  a play and running all 7 plays.  Odds of that happening?  10,000 to 1.  

 

I just for the life of me cannot understand how anyone who knows football cannot grasp this simple concept.  Have you seen teams run plays inside the 20 at the end of games?  They can run 5-6 plays in 30 seconds.  The Colts had 75 seconds.   And two timeouts.

 

To call a timeout without first running down the play clock was a HUGE error.  An error a NFL (or any coach) should never make.  And then Luck compounded it by snapping the ball after the review when he too could have run the clock down.  Surprising he didn't know better. And surprising that he wasn't told to do that.  

 

I know Manning would have.

You can't assume scoring a touchdown is a given. To think otherwise shows that the Madden coaches here have no grasp on reality. 

 

7 plays at ten seconds? That's assuming the clock stops after each attempt. Also not taking into the fact that you have only 3 plays to move 10 yards. Burn off time on the clock and you remove any type of run play or throw over the middle short of the goal or first.

 

Also the field is considerably shorter and with our wideouts being speed guys with Dorsett and  Hilton that leaves very little room for them to work. Should be no surprise the score went to Doyle.

[coltsva]

I was screaming at the tv "don't call timeout, you are going to leave them time to score!"  Then they kick through the end zone giving the lions the ball at the 25 yard line with no time off the clock! Are you kidding me? 

 

Pagamo needs to learn to play chess or some other game where you have to think several moves ahead. To think "let's just worry about scoring first and then we'll worry about stopping them is flat out wrong. The only way the colts were going to stop the lions was to have the ball or leave them with no time, no timeouts, or both. If Pagano didn't know that then I'm not sure what game he was watching. 

 

Put the game in the hands of your strength, not your weakness. 

 

 

 

 

[threeflight]

18 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

You can't assume scoring a touchdown is a given. To think otherwise shows that the Madden coaches here have no grasp on reality. 

 

7 plays at ten seconds? That's assuming the clock stops after each attempt. Also not taking into the fact that you have only 3 plays to move 10 yards. Burn off time on the clock and you remove any type of run play or throw over the middle short of the goal or first.

 

Also the field is considerably shorter and with our wideouts being speed guys with Dorsett and  Hilton that leaves very little room for them to work. Should be no surprise the score went to Doyle.

No one is assuming the TD would be scored.  The point is there was more then enough time to score given the set of circumstances.  Just about every throw was going to be in the endzone or close to it.  And if you want to run or throw a shorter pass?  So what.  You have two timeouts.

 

To think an NFL team needs 1;15 to score from the 12 with 2 timeouts is crazy.  At most, it may need to use 4-5 downs at around 10 seconds each when accounting for incompletes, out of bounds, and times outs.

 

That leaves 30-40 seconds that are not needed.

 

Or the time left for the Lions to drive down and kick the winning FG.

 

 

[threeflight]

The point is you, as a coach, need to do everything you can to put yourself in the best position to win.  You need to use EVERY resource available to do that.  To give your players every advantage at your disposal.  So by either running the clock down and putting the game in the hands of your best player....Luck, or by making the Lions burn TO's, you are doing that.  

 

NOT burning time off the clock and also leaving the game in the hands of your weakest link...the defense?  Inexcusable.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, threeflight said:

The point is you, as a coach, need to do everything you can to put yourself in the best position to win.  You need to use EVERY resource available to do that.  To give your players every advantage at your disposal.  So by either running the clock down and putting the game in the hands of your best player....Luck, or by making the Lions burn TO's, you are doing that.  

 

NOT burning time off the clock and also leaving the game in the hands of your weakest link...the defense?  Inexcusable.

 

I think you should repeat your stance at least 40 more times, I don't think anyone has a clear understanding of where you stand on this.

[Camio]

33 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

It was brought up by Pagano because they asked him.

 

Also what all of these Madden experts are forgetting is that if you bleed the clock, burn the timeout you remove any possible run or throw over the middle short of the goal line. Edge passes and end zone tosses are your only real bet unless you wanna eat a down by clocking it. Take the timeout, you set up a list of plays to try and get everyone on the same page.  

 

Really it's not the crucifixion worthy move you all want it to be.

 

Lions would've stopped the clock so no need to worry about the time there. It just means Colts would've had 1 more TO left while the Lions would've had 1 less.

 

Its called clock management.

 

Its funny to see the Madden references. It never gets old. Madden or not, you're wrong.

[threeflight]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think you should repeat your stance at least 40 more times, I don't think anyone has a clear understanding of where you stand on this.

Apparently I have to keep repeating myself because some people are clearly not able to grasp this rather simple game strategy concept.  In fact they keep repeating the same thing over and over and over.  That being that getting the right players and packages on the field was so crucial that a TO needed to be called.  They are having trouble understanding that doing that and also burning time off the clock are not mutually exclusive.  

 

You can do both.

[Camio]

1 minute ago, threeflight said:

Apparently I have to keep repeating myself because some people are clearly not able to grasp this rather simple game strategy concept.  In fact they keep repeating the same thing over and over and over.  That being that getting the right players and packages on the field was so crucial that a TO needed to be called.  They are having trouble understanding that doing that and also burning time off the clock are not mutually exclusive.  

 

You can do both.

 

Regardless, clock wouldn't have been milked because the Lions would've called TO.

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Apparently I have to keep repeating myself

 

Not really.

[threeflight]

2 minutes ago, Camio said:

 

Regardless, clock wouldn't have been milked because the Lions would've called TO.

Which would have helped the Colts D when the Lions got the ball back.  They would have been forced to throw more sideline and deeper patterns, which would have helped a very tired and beleaguered Colts D to defend better.

 

It all comes full circle.

 

Again, you have to use every means possible to help your team.  Pagano did not do that.  And then the way he poo poo'd it in the press conference after was even more laughable.

 

 

[bluebombers87]

19 minutes ago, threeflight said:

No one is assuming the TD would be scored.  The point is there was more then enough time to score given the set of circumstances.  Just about every throw was going to be in the endzone or close to it.  And if you want to run or throw a shorter pass?  So what.  You have two timeouts.

 

To think an NFL team needs 1;15 to score from the 12 with 2 timeouts is crazy.  At most, it may need to use 4-5 downs at around 10 seconds each when accounting for incompletes, out of bounds, and times outs.

 

That leaves 30-40 seconds that are not needed.

 

Or the time left for the Lions to drive down and kick the winning FG.

 

 

So you're saying you can eliminate over the middle throws short of the goal and first and eliminate all runs and STILL be able to score on the outside or in the end zone on a short field? He had to play the odds. 

 

And if you think you can run a play in bounds short of the goal and first, get up, call a play, and snap the ball in ten seconds with a cobbled line with rookies without a penalty or mistake then by all means go ahead and say so. I don't think it can be done with a high enough probability.

[bluebombers87]

12 minutes ago, Camio said:

 

Lions would've stopped the clock so no need to worry about the time there. It just means Colts would've had 1 more TO left while the Lions would've had 1 less.

 

Its called clock management.

 

Its funny to see the Madden references. It never gets old. Madden or not, you're wrong.

Why would they? They were winning. Worst case scenario colts score and you have an extra timeout.

[Camio]

Just now, bluebombers87 said:

Why would they? They were winning. Worst case scenario colts score and you have an extra timeout.

 

Why would they? Is this a serious question?

 

Check the NFL. Thats how good clock management works. Every teams do that. You see it almost weekly.

[threeflight]

3 minutes ago, Camio said:

 

Why would they? Is this a serious question?

 

Check the NFL. Thats how good clock management works. Every teams do that. You see it almost weekly.

I am astounded that people watch football and still think the way some do in this thread.

[bluebombers87]

2 minutes ago, threeflight said:

I am astounded that people watch football and still think the way some do in this thread.

Lighten up Francis.

[pizzaman67]

terrible game in all phases except when luck has the reins taken off. can't run, can't block, can't cover, can't tackle, can't rush the passer.   btw am i the only one who see mathis 2-3 steps slower

[Coffeedrinker]

Well, let's see:

 

Oakland down by a TD, moving the ball, 2nd and 7 at the NO 10 yard line 52 seconds left in the game.  Did NO call a time out to abil out Oakland and help them... no.  Oakland called a TO and scored.

 

CAR at DEN - Carolina down by 1, ball at the CAR 39, 3rd and 5,1:19 left in the game, does Denver bail out Carolina and call a TO, no they force Carolina to call a time out.  Next play 8 yards and they keep the drive alive.

 

CIN at NYJ  Cincy down by two, need a FH to win, they are just outside of FG range at the NYJ 40, 1:11 left in the game.  Does NY bail out Cincy and call a TO, no.  Cincy calls a TO, completes an 11 yard pass to get into FG range and then NYJ call a time out.

 

Three situations all very similar to the Colts situation and all coaches in the same situation as Pagano called a TO.  

 

Those people that think Detroit would have called a timeout are delusional, they would not have bailed out the Colts like that.

[dgambill]

I think at this point everyone has an opinion on the subject and not everyone is going to agree. A lot of what ifs and should haves but fact remains we lost that game due to some horrible defense on the Lions running backs and TE mostly. While I do believe we should have tried to run clock and at the very least force Detroit to use their time outs I'm still not sure we would have won that game by doing so. I would have liked to see the ball in Lucks hands at the end with him controlling the clock and win it or lose it in his hands but that didn't happen. Doesn't mean I think the coach should be fired and also doesn't mean I agree with the coaches accessment either. But it would be nice if we can let it go and move on to next week because I'm dang sure our team has already moved on to Denver.

 

 

[bluebombers87]

6 minutes ago, pizzaman67 said:

terrible game in all phases except when luck has the reins taken off. can't run, can't block, can't cover, can't tackle, can't rush the passer.   btw am i the only one who see mathis 2-3 steps slower

I did. It hurt to see. Hoping it's just shaking off the rust.

[aaron11]

this is still going on?

 

the only place i have seen anyone complain about that TO is on this forum. 

[AZColt11]

Apparently Indystar sees it this way:

 

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2016/09/12/colts-pagano-under-fire-timeout-usage/90256408/

 

I would have to agree.

[BOTT]

2 hours ago, threeflight said:

Again, at the 12 yard line with 2 timeouts left, TIME IS NOT AN ISSUE in regards to scoring a TD.

 

At most, with it being second down, a team will run 7 plays from the 12 without scoring.  At 10 seconds a play, that is 70 seconds.  There were 75 on the clock.  And that is at 10 seconds  a play and running all 7 plays.  Odds of that happening?  10,000 to 1.  

 

I just for the life of me cannot understand how anyone who knows football cannot grasp this simple concept.  Have you seen teams run plays inside the 20 at the end of games?  They can run 5-6 plays in 30 seconds.  The Colts had 75 seconds.   And two timeouts.

 

To call a timeout without first running down the play clock was a HUGE error.  An error a NFL (or any coach) should never make.  And then Luck compounded it by snapping the ball after the review when he too could have run the clock down.  Surprising he didn't know better. And surprising that he wasn't told to do that.  

 

I know Manning would have.

yeah man, that Peyton, he flawless.

[cbear]

What if there was a holding penalty or a fumble or sack and we're now back at the 20-25 yard line?  I think we would have wanted the extra time then.  

 

What also hurt was that review of Dante's catch, unless Pagano should have foreseen that as well.  No review, the clock continues to run.

 

This is Monday morning QBing at it's finest.  

 

[bluebombers87]

1 hour ago, cbear said:

What if there was a holding penalty or a fumble or sack and we're now back at the 20-25 yard line?  I think we would have wanted the extra time then.  

 

What also hurt was that review of Dante's catch, unless Pagano should have foreseen that as well.  No review, the clock continues to run.

 

This is Monday morning QBing at it's finest.  

 

Whole-heartedly agree. Better to get everyone collected.

 

Also, the Moncrief review did stall the game momentarily and the clock began afterwards. So in actuality Pagano very well may have told Andrew to bleed it a little but the decision to snap was in Lucks hands. He may have seen something he liked and wanted to hurry to exploit, he may have been told to hurry, or he may have just not thought about it. What I can tell you is that regardless of any of the scenarios, Pagano is going to accept responsibility for it, even if it was Luck's call.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, cbear said:

No review, the clock continues to run.

 

The clock did run after the Moncrief challenge. You could see Hochuli tell Luck that the clock would run on his signal, and it did. Luck ran the play quickly, though.

[bluebombers87]

2 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

Apparently Indystar sees it this way:

 

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2016/09/12/colts-pagano-under-fire-timeout-usage/90256408/

 

I would have to agree.

While I certainly respect the Indy Star's and your opinion, I would have to say given the circumstances, a timeout isn't the reason we lost that game.

 

And with that being said, I do understand why fans are upset. My opinion is that he made a choice. He made a choice where the alternative worst case scenario is the offense makes a mistake in either execution due to nerves, poor positioning, fatigue or whatever. The problem is that the alternative worst case scenario can't be proven or fully realized unless it actually happens. He gambled and lost. Oh well.

[bluebombers87]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

The clock did run after the Moncrief challenge. You could see Hochuli tell Luck that the clock would run on his signal, and it did. Luck ran the play quickly, though.

Good catch. I also mentioned this in an above post. Still don't blame Luck though. He made the move that in his mind gave us the best shot to score.

[BlueShoe]

3 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Well, let's see:

 

Oakland down by a TD, moving the ball, 2nd and 7 at the NO 10 yard line 52 seconds left in the game.  Did NO call a time out to abil out Oakland and help them... no.  Oakland called a TO and scored.

 

CAR at DEN - Carolina down by 1, ball at the CAR 39, 3rd and 5,1:19 left in the game, does Denver bail out Carolina and call a TO, no they force Carolina to call a time out.  Next play 8 yards and they keep the drive alive.

 

CIN at NYJ  Cincy down by two, need a FH to win, they are just outside of FG range at the NYJ 40, 1:11 left in the game.  Does NY bail out Cincy and call a TO, no.  Cincy calls a TO, completes an 11 yard pass to get into FG range and then NYJ call a time out.

 

Three situations all very similar to the Colts situation and all coaches in the same situation as Pagano called a TO.  

 

Those people that think Detroit would have called a timeout are delusional, they would not have bailed out the Colts like that.

 

There is no point in bringing logic into this discussion.

[cbear]

25 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

Whole-heartedly agree. Better to get everyone collected.

 

Also, the Moncrief review did stall the game momentarily and the clock began afterwards. So in actuality Pagano very well may have told Andrew to bleed it a little but the decision to snap was in Lucks hands. He may have seen something he liked and wanted to hurry to exploit, he may have been told to hurry, or he may have just not thought about it. What I can tell you is that regardless of any of the scenarios, Pagano is going to accept responsibility for it, even if it was Luck's call.

 

The problem is that everyone is just assuming we would have continued to move forward and score a TD with 5 seconds left or something!  As I mentioned, what if we got pushed backward and now we needed the extra time to score?

 

I don't care how tired the defense was.  I would take a 1 point lead and give it to them with 37 seconds to play any day.  They just collapsed.  Pagano is just taking his normal place as the whipping boy for frustrated fans and media.  

[cbear]

17 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

The clock did run after the Moncrief challenge. You could see Hochuli tell Luck that the clock would run on his signal, and it did. Luck ran the play quickly, though.

 

Thanks.  I did not catch that.  I don't blame him though.  He wanted to secure the TD as best he could.

 

The way some are reacting, you would have thought we were 1st and goal on the one inch line.

[Superman]

6 minutes ago, cbear said:

 

Thanks.  I did not catch that.  I don't blame him though.  He wanted to secure the TD as best he could.

 

The way some are reacting, you would have thought we were 1st and goal on the one inch line.

 

I agree. I said to begin with, first priority is to score. All things considered, getting the lead with 37 seconds left isn't a bad outcome. I know the defense was thrashed, and I do agree that the offense could have been more savvy with the clock, maybe milking a couple Lions' timeouts, but if you can't get a stop with 37 seconds left, then I don't know what to say.

[Camio]

33 minutes ago, Indy_Mike said:

First of all I'm am really surprised there are so many Pagano fanboys on here...I mean some people are coming up with some really wild scenarios to try to give him a pass on this obvious blunder. I was very disappointed to hear him refuse to admit he was wrong with Lamey tonight...Bob gave him a number of chances to at least admit he might have made a mistake but her refused. I always liked Pagano, but I was disappointed with this lack of humility and willingness to admit he "might" have been wrong.

 

I think he knew he messed up right after the game when he came up with the personnel thing.

 

There's no way he's gonna admit anything now.

[AZColt11]

2 hours ago, bluebombers87 said:

While I certainly respect the Indy Star's and your opinion, I would have to say given the circumstances, a timeout isn't the reason we lost that game.

 

And with that being said, I do understand why fans are upset. My opinion is that he made a choice. He made a choice where the alternative worst case scenario is the offense makes a mistake in either execution due to nerves, poor positioning, fatigue or whatever. The problem is that the alternative worst case scenario can't be proven or fully realized unless it actually happens. He gambled and lost. Oh well.

I wouldn't even say it cost them the game but I do think it would have enhanced their chances.  We will never know.

[GoColts8818]

I like Chuck but I think he screwed up the timeout thing.  I will say firing your coach after one game of 16 is dumb.

 

I also think he's far from the first coach to screw up clock management at some point.  I think it's something you have to learn from (I'll get back to this in a minute) but it happens.

 

What really bothers me is what Chuck said today when asked about the timeout and kickoff he wouldn't do anything different.  Really?  Because you lost the game maybe you should have done something different.  That makes me fear Pagano doesn't really learn from things he has his view on football and he's going to follow that no matter what.

 

that lead to the second thing he said today that bothered me.  He was asked about the running game and if trying it early might be leading to the slow starts and he said we will be a power running team until they run me out of here.  My first response was wait but your not a power running team, you want to be one but you aren't one. Then I kinda looked at it and thought sometimes I think Chuck sees things as he wants them to be not what they really are.  

 

Again, I like Chuck but his presser did more today to make me concerned about him than the game yesterday because it's one thing to make a mistake, every coach will at some point this season, it's another to not learn from it.  Maybe it's all coach speak but I don't think so.

[aaron11]

12 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

What really bothers me is what Chuck said today when asked about the timeout and kickoff he wouldn't do anything different.  Really?  Because you lost the game maybe you should have done something different.  That makes me fear Pagano doesn't really learn from things he has his view on football and he's going to follow that no matter what.

 

 

coaches dont usually admit that they would do things differently if given the chance. 

 

im still on the side that thinks that TO was fine.  what if you run down the clock and then get sacked?

 

you cant take scoring a TD from the 12 for granted.  you just hope your defense can get a stop if you score early

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, aaron11 said:

coaches dont usually admit that they would do things differently if given the chance. 

 

im still on the side that thinks that TO was fine.  what if you run down the clock then get sacked?

 

you cant take scoring a TD from the 12 for granted.  you just hope your defense can get a stop if you score early

You call your timeout when you get sacked.

 

i also think it's highly likely had the Colts let the clock keep running the Lions would have started using their timeouts to save time in case the Colts scored.

 

its not unheard of for teams to bleed the clock in this kind of scenario.  I remember the 4th and 2 game Peyton said after they were moving slow at the end to not leave Brady anytime even though they needed to score to win the game.

[aaron11]

6 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

i also think it's highly likely had the Colts let the clock keep running the Lions would have started using their timeouts to save time in case the Colts scored.

 

i disagree.  i guess we will never know, its in JCs best interest to not comment

 

it makes sense for them to try to win on defense and not call timeouts

[Camio]

31 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

coaches dont usually admit that they would do things differently if given the chance. 

 

im still on the side that thinks that TO was fine.  what if you run down the clock and then get sacked?

 

you cant take scoring a TD from the 12 for granted.  you just hope your defense can get a stop if you score early

 

Lions would've called a TO, thus the clock wouldnt have ran out.

[threeflight]

1 hour ago, GoColts8818 said:

I like Chuck but I think he screwed up the timeout thing.  I will say firing your coach after one game of 16 is dumb.

 

I also think he's far from the first coach to screw up clock management at some point.  I think it's something you have to learn from (I'll get back to this in a minute) but it happens.

 

What really bothers me is what Chuck said today when asked about the timeout and kickoff he wouldn't do anything different.  Really?  Because you lost the game maybe you should have done something different.  That makes me fear Pagano doesn't really learn from things he has his view on football and he's going to follow that no matter what.

 

that lead to the second thing he said today that bothered me.  He was asked about the running game and if trying it early might be leading to the slow starts and he said we will be a power running team until they run me out of here.  My first response was wait but your not a power running team, you want to be one but you aren't one. Then I kinda looked at it and thought sometimes I think Chuck sees things as he wants them to be not what they really are.  

 

Again, I like Chuck but his presser did more today to make me concerned about him than the game yesterday because it's one thing to make a mistake, every coach will at some point this season, it's another to not learn from it.  Maybe it's all coach speak but I don't think so.

I missed the presser but did he really say all of that?  If so, if I am the owner....I fire him now.  Not tomorrow.  Not next week.  Not after the end of the season.  Now.

 

 

Let's see, two events that were the direct result of his play calls helped the Colts to lose the game.  The calling of the time out and the long kick off.  They end up losing....and he still won't do anything differently?

 

And what irks me even more is the power running mantra.  You would think, after 5 years and how many games of slow starts and then scoring in bunches when Luck is allowed to run a no huddle type of offense, that any sane, rational PROFESSIONAL football coach would say to himself "gee, we score when we run the no huddle, and we get killed when we run a slow power game.  Maybe it's time to become a run and gun offense".  

 

The fact that he still cannot see this or at least admit it?  That is a fireable offense and anyone who says otherwise?  I don't even know what to say to you.

[threeflight]

7 hours ago, aaron11 said:

this is still going on?

 

the only place i have seen anyone complain about that TO is on this forum. 

Really?  I posted quotes from 3 different articles a little earlier, and have literally seen at least 10 articles about it today, and to a T they were all calling it a dumb DUMB move on Pagano's part.