Josh Allen's TO at beginning of second half

[dave mcbride]

Where do folks stand on that? I'll go on record and say that the TO is pretty much always more important than the five yards in a close game (as this one was). That TO would have been extremely valuable on the Bills final possession, and it would have given the Bills more options and forced the Jets D to defend differently. I'm generally always opposed to burning TOs to save five yards in the second half unless it's something like 3rd and 1 at an important moment.

[John from Riverside]

Where were they at the time of the time out was it red zone?

[LeGOATski]

I agree. Always save your TOs. I can't stand insignificant challenges and wasted TO's early in the half.

[TheFunPolice]

I don't think I've ever seen this, but IMO it's the next "thing" the young creative minds in the game will be doing soon.

 

With offense the way it is, just take the 5 yard penalty and save the timeout, unless you're right on the goal line or something similar. 90% of the time you are better off just taking the penalty, so that if you are down 2 scores late you always have a chance to come back.

[dave mcbride]

4 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Where were they at the time of the time out was it red zone?

I think the 13 yard line. Regardless, they had a ways to go (10 yds, I think). I'd of course rather not give up the five yards, but there's a big price to pay when you decide to avoid the loss by burning a TO. I happen to think that the TO is a lot more valuable than the 5 yards, even in a situation like that. 

Edited December 10, 2018 by dave mcbride

[BillsMafia13]

3 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I think the 13 yard line. Regardless, they had a ways to go (10 yds, I think). I'd of course rather not give up the five yards, but there's a big price to pay when you decide to avoid the loss by burning a TO. I happen to think that the TO is a lot more valuable than the 5 yards, even in a situation like that. 

Especially when we lost a TO to Milanos injury late too.

[skibum]

Hardly the reason they lost the game. Probably not even in the top 5 or 10 reasons. 

[John from Riverside]

So they were in the red zone and you don’t understand the importance of that part of the field

[MDH]

21 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said:

I don't think I've ever seen this, but IMO it's the next "thing" the young creative minds in the game will be doing soon.

 

They certainly aren’t doing it now. McVay ate time outs last night like they were candy. Just horrible clock management.

 

As for the original question, yeah, I’d rather eat the 5 yards, even in that situation.

 

Ideally I’d like to see Daboll get the damn play in and Allen get the team out of the huddle on time so neither the TO or penalty is necessary. This team has so many pre-snap penalties, it’s infuriating. 

[Bangarang]

Not a big deal, or even a little deal.

[LeGOATski]

6 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

So they were in the red zone and you don’t understand the importance of that part of the field

Eat the 5 yards and they're still the the RZ. 

 

Either way, they're getting a TD or attempting a FG. It's a fine line.

 

At the end of the game, you always want an extra TO. Even if you have all your TOs, you'd like an extra one. It's better to have more than not enough.

[Phil The Thrill]

I never understand why teams do that.  I think you should just take the 5 yard loss and save the timeout for later in the game

[TheFunPolice]

12 minutes ago, MDH said:

 

They certainly aren’t doing it now. McVay ate time outs last night like they were candy. Just horrible clock management.

 

As for the original question, yeah, I’d rather eat the 5 yards, even in that situation.

 

Ideally I’d like to see Daboll get the damn play in and Allen get the team out of the huddle on time so neither the TO or penalty is necessary. This team has so many pre-snap penalties, it’s infuriating. 

 

True.. McVay and Goff totally blew through timeouts last night...

 

I don't see the Rams getting far in the playoffs... just a gut feeling. One and done against a hungry team with depth like the Bears or even Seahawks.

[eSJayDee]

You bring up a valid point & in the past have often thought that way.  Basically, it comes down to maybe 1/2 the time, that TO is basically worthless & the other 1/2 the time, it's potentially VERY valuable.  The earlier you take it, the less uncertain those percentages are.  I don't recall the exact situation, but I was quite perturbed they took it at that time, primarily cuz at that time, the need to is largely attributed to incompetence.

[John from Riverside]

14 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

Eat the 5 yards and they're still the the RZ. 

 

Either way, they're getting a TD or attempting a FG. It's a fine line.

 

At the end of the game, you always want an extra TO. Even if you have all your TOs, you'd like an extra one. It's better to have more than not enough.

Or it could be the difference between 7 or 3

 

josh Allen does not like field goals

[Alphadawg7]

Accidentally deleted my reply, meant to edit a typo lol.  

 

Anyway, what I had said was that the most important thing to do on the field is score points, especially in a close game.  And many games end with teams still having at least 1 time out remaining.  So if you are in a situation where the choice is take a potentially drive stalling penalty or a time out, you take the time out.  You also have no idea if that TO will be needed, if the game will end in a close score, etc.  There was almost a whole half to play.  The only thing you do know is that if you don't take the timeout you hurt your chances significantly to continue the drive and score points.  

 

Ironically, your close game part of your post furthers the need to take the timeout.  In a close game, every point matters, so you need to do everything you an to try and score when you have the ball.  Taking a penalty there is not a smart move, especially in a close game.  

 

100% of the time, you take the timeout not the penalty.  I don't believe there is a coach in the NFL that will take the penalty in that situation yesterday instead of using a timeout.  

[dave mcbride]

31 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Accidentally deleted my reply, meant to edit a typo lol.  

 

Anyway, what I had said was that the most important thing to do on the field is score points, especially in a close game.  And many games end with teams still having at least 1 time out remaining.  So if you are in a situation where the choice is take a potentially drive stalling penalty or a time out, you take the time out.  You also have no idea if that TO will be needed, if the game will end in a close score, etc.  There was almost a whole half to play.  The only thing you do know is that if you don't take the timeout you hurt your chances significantly to continue the drive and score points.  

 

Ironically, your close game part of your post furthers the need to take the timeout.  In a close game, every point matters, so you need to do everything you an to try and score when you have the ball.  Taking a penalty there is not a smart move, especially in a close game.  

 

100% of the time, you take the timeout not the penalty.  I don't believe there is a coach in the NFL that will take the penalty in that situation yesterday instead of using a timeout.  

I respectfully disagree. I just think a TO is worth more than 5 yards in most situations (again, if it's 3rd and 1 on, say, the opponent's 30 yard line, you take the TO). And for a team that commits pre-snap penalties like there's no tomorrow, what's another five yards? Timeouts, however, are genuinely precious, and a team like the Bills should never assume they're going to win walking away. They should assume that any victory scenario will probably be in a close game, and that timeouts will be absolutely crucial. 

Edited December 10, 2018 by dave mcbride

[NewEra]

2 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Where do folks stand on that? I'll go on record and say that the TO is pretty much always more important than the five yards in a close game (as this one was). That TO would have been extremely valuable on the Bills final possession, and it would have given the Bills more options and forced the Jets D to defend differently. I'm generally always opposed to burning TOs to save five yards in the second half unless it's something like 3rd and 1 at an important moment.

Just another thing for you to be angry about.  

[WhoTom]

I can see both sides of the argument, but my instinct is to take the TO instead of the penalty. Saving the TO assumes that you'll need it, but there's a chance that you won't. There's never a time when you don't need points, unless the game is so out of hand that it doesn't matter, in which case the TO is also irrelevant.

 

Anyone catch the announcer saying, "Allen called a time-out. He got to the line and saw something he didn't like."

Yeah, he saw the play clock approaching zero.

 

 

[dave mcbride]

12 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Just another thing for you to be angry about.  

I'm not angry. I'm wondering where people stand and why. 

9 minutes ago, WhoTom said:

I can see both sides of the argument, but my instinct is to take the TO instead of the penalty. Saving the TO assumes that you'll need it, but there's a chance that you won't. There's never a time when you don't need points, unless the game is so out of hand that it doesn't matter, in which case the TO is also irrelevant.

 

Anyone catch the announcer saying, "Allen called a time-out. He got to the line and saw something he didn't like."

Yeah, he saw the play clock approaching zero.

 

 

I think if you're the Rams or KC or NO, most of the time you won't need it. Teams like the Bills, though ...