What Daboll did in the final seconds of the Giants game (relates to 13 seconds)

[Sherlock Holmes]

9 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Its smart.

Thank you Einstein

[Einstein]

5 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

Einstein - 

 

The rule is designed so that if a team intentionally commits multiple fouls on the same down - it essentially nullifies the down and gives them 15 yards.

 

This means on 1st down - if the Bills had intentionally held both Kelce and Hill to prevent a completion (multiple fouls intentionally on the same down).  The Refs could award a 15 yard penalty and reset the game clock to :13 seconds.

 

So if the Bills had intentionally tackled Hill and Kelce (or held them near the LOS right off the snap and prevented them from their route) on the first play and the NFL chose to use this - which would depend on how blatant it was - it would have gone to 1st and 10 on the KC 40 with :13 seconds left.

 

The bolded does not mean anything.  It is on 1 specific play - if the defense has multiple fouls deemed intentional to manipulate the clock - ie allow the time to run off by preventing the WRs from getting out to a route - the NFL can enforce this.  I believe this was added due to that exact scenario happening several years ago.

 

Just like the NFL addressed the NE manipulation of the clock on punts.  They look for these and address them when possible.

 

Have you ever seen this rule applied or called, ever?

 

I haven’t.

 

And it wasn’t applied yesterday when Daboll did it.

 

I can’t say for sure but I doubt McD was concerned about an obscure rule that was never called when he made his decision to play 10+ yards off the WR’s in the final seconds.

[Putin]

9 hours ago, Draconator said:

Are we still talking about 13 seconds? It's a new season for Christ sakes! Let it die. 

Amen 

[Einstein]

5 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

Ok Einstein - yet the titans did move to well with FG range at a closer range than the Bills KC game.  The difference was the kicker.

 

Yes because their CB got turned around on one play and got beat. And they had 3.5x more clock to burn than the Bills did.

 

 

[Malazan]

Only Einstein could turn a defense unintentionally committing a penalty into a brilliant strategy. 

 

What a brilliant strategy to let the Titans miss a field goal. 

[Einstein]

2 hours ago, Bangarang said:

 

 

 

Perfect example.

 

People can quote obscure rules if they want, but the league doesn’t enforce it and i’ve never seen it called.

 

Brilliant move by the Ravens.

 

There are tons of obscure rules that are never called. For example, if the quarterback is under center and doesn’t catch the snap, and the ball goes between his legs, he has to be the next player to touch the ball. If any other player touches the ball before the quarterback (even the defense) it’s ruled as a false start by the offense. Now, how often do you see that craziness called?

[Draconator]

1 hour ago, FLFan said:

Are you new around here?  

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

As others have noted 

 

It relates to 2 losses last season going for the Win 

 

 

[Einstein]

3 minutes ago, Malazan said:

Only Einstein could turn a defense unintentionally committing a penalty into a brilliant strategy. 

 

What a brilliant strategy to let the Titans miss a field goal. 

 

It was not unintentional. They blatantly held them on every single play of the final drive. It was a clear strategy.

 

The Titans did finally get into field goal range after one of their CB’s got turned around but that has nothing to do with the strategy; it was just bad CB play.

[Wayne Cubed]

1 minute ago, Einstein said:

 

It was not unintentional. They blatantly held them on every single play of the final drive. It was a clear strategy.

 

The Titans did finally get into field goal range after one of their CB’s got turned around but that has nothing to do with the strategy; it was just bad CB play.

 

I think you aren't understanding the rule.

 

If the Titans were intentionally holding, they would only be able to do it to 1 player on the field, on 1 down. They wouldn't be able to hold every WR/TE/RB going out on a route, that would incure a 15 yard penalty. I didn't see anything on the live broadcast showing all the Giants defenders each holding a player on those final plays.

 

The reason you haven't seen it, I would assume, is because teams know you can't do that. Sure, you could hold one player and you would only get a 5 yard penalty. My question is, how would you know which player to hold? How do you know who the play would be designed to go to? So you hold Tyreek Hill and then what happens with Kelce?

[MJS]

26 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

I wouldn't be surprised if McDermott knew this but chose not to do it.  He often talks about not only winning, but winning the right way. McD seems to have a lot of respect for the game and his opponents, I get the sense he would believe if he can't line up and play football and win that way then they don't deserve to win.

 

I think he would probably have been sick to his stomach if he did it and had to resort to winning that way...especially in front of his good friend and mentor Andy Reid.

We'll, it's apparently against the rules now, so they could have been called on that.

[Big Turk]

Just now, MJS said:

We'll, it's apparently against the rules now, so they could have been called on that.

 

Not the first time....they could have gotten away with it once.

[Cray51]

9 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Perfect example.

 

People can quote obscure rules if they want, but the league doesn’t enforce it and i’ve never seen it called.

 

Brilliant move by the Ravens.

 

There are tons of obscure rules that are never called. For example, if the quarterback is under center and doesn’t catch the snap, and the ball goes between his legs, he has to be the next player to touch the ball. If any other player touches the ball before the quarterback (even the defense) it’s ruled as a false start by the offense. Now, how often do you see that craziness called?

Its the perfect example because it was LEGAL during that point in time.  The rule was changed because of the tactic.

 

Are we really trying to say "Rarely called rules shouldnt be followed and dont alleviate an excuse I'm trying to use to point out a Bill's blunder?"  Because I think that's ignorant.

 

Are there things that happen during the game that MIGHT pass the refs eye due to it being a weird rule by nature?  I'm sure it happens.

 

Do you gameplan to purposefully break rules and hope the ref doesn't call it?  That's loser mentality.  Especially when you plan to blatantly break them in a game deciding moment.

 

How about the refs calling unsportsmanlike on the Bears for using a towel to dry the field yesterday.  We could be talking about how the refs called a rarely called rule, some would say obscure, and it had a big impact on the game (cost them a chance at 3 points).

 

Let's not overthink everything for a motive.  Play good football when you need to.

[Royale with Cheese]

50 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Sure. But the point is that the strategy burned block. They just had way more clock to burn than we did and they got beat once.

 

It was a missed 47 yard FG.  

[FireChans]

1 hour ago, FLFan said:

Are you new around here?  People will never let it die. If the Bills win the SB some people will B word that it should have been two in a row. 

Let's test that theory first lol

[Einstein]

44 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

It was a missed 47 yard FG.  

 

Yes?

1 hour ago, Wayne Cubed said:

 

I think you aren't understanding the rule.

 

If the Titans were intentionally holding, they would only be able to do it to 1 player on the field, on 1 down. They wouldn't be able to hold every WR/TE/RB going out on a route, that would incure a 15 yard penalty. I didn't see anything on the live broadcast showing all the Giants defenders each holding a player on those final plays.

 

Except teams have done it. Several times. And the rule has never been called to my knowledge. Someone posted a Ravens team doing it a few years ago.

[1ManRaid]

10 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

I and others brought that up on gameday that the Bills should have done that.  However there is this that changed in 2017

 

"

ARTICLE 3. INTENTIONAL FOULS TO MANIPULATE GAME CLOCK

A team may not commit multiple fouls during the same down in an attempt to manipulate the game clock.

Penalty: For multiple fouls to run off time from the game clock: Loss of 15 yards, and the game clock will be reset to where it was at the snap. After the penalty is enforced, the game clock will start on the next snap."

 

The Bills should have definitely did it on the first play.

 

There's also some sort of rule about "patently unfair acts" or whatever.  It was brought up when there was that rash of coaches (Steelers and Jets) deliberately tripping players on the sidelines to prevent touchdowns or other big plays.

[Royale with Cheese]

17 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Yes?

 

 

This tactic that you're praising put the Giants in a position to lose more than win.  A 47 yard FG is made well more often than it's missed.

This is more about luck than anything.

[Bills2022]

10 hours ago, Billsguy said:

All the Titans had to do was make a fairly routine FG at the end to win the game. The Giants should have lost. Daboll is definitely not a genius.

 

He beat the Titans. Something we haven't done in a while. 

[Albany,n.y.]

I remember on 10/4/98 the Bills played the 49ers & the Bills were getting mugged in the endzone near the end of the 1st half.  The 49ers strategy worked because the Bills had to settle for a FG because they ran out of the time needed to try to go for the TD.  

[Rochesterfan]

2 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Have you ever seen this rule applied or called, ever?

 

I haven’t.

 

And it wasn’t applied yesterday when Daboll did it.

 

I can’t say for sure but I doubt McD was concerned about an obscure rule that was never called when he made his decision to play 10+ yards off the WR’s in the final seconds.

 

2 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Yes because their CB got turned around on one play and got beat. And they had 3.5x more clock to burn than the Bills did.

 

 

 

Because they did not do what you suggested.  

 

They did not have their DBs intentional hold the WRs on each play - so why would it get called.  You had 2 plays where a DB was out of position and held and 1 play where he was out of position and did not hold and gave up a big play.

 

[Rochesterfan]

4 hours ago, Niagara Dude said:

You can only call one penalty won each play,  so they could have done this on first down but not second down.

 

This is incorrect.  You can only enforce 1 penalty on a team on each play - you can call a bunch - off sides, holding, illegal contact, pass interference- they could all be called on a defense on 1 play, but only 1 would get enforced.

 

The rule was implemented so that if at the end of a game a team purposely committed several infractions like defensive holding of all of the WRs say to prevent them from running patters - the referees have the option to assess a 15 yard penalty and reset the clock as if the play did not happen to keep a team from doing exactly what is suggested here.

 

I do not believe the league has ever called it, but the situation would be very rare and most coaches are not going to resort to essentially cheating at that point.  
 

The rule is multiple intentional fouls on 1 play to manipulate the game clock. 

[LeGOATski]

It's clearly not a good strategy because:

 

1. The penalty mentioned

 

2. The CB getting beat, as mentioned

 

The Titans moved the ball fairly easily, but then missed the game winning field goal.

 

The Bills needed to play more aggressively at the end of the Chiefs game, but we all know this. It's been discussed as nauseum. They didn't need to commit penalties.

 

This is a classic case of viewing a situation through a certain lens because you're bitter about the past.

[FilthyBeast]

13 hours ago, Einstein said:

The Daboll lead Giants had a 1 point lead and needed to stop Tennessee from getting into field goal range.

 

With 0:45 seconds left, Daboll had a clear strategy. Just hold their wide receivers. They were holding them every play and got called for it twice on the final drive. Clear and blatant and purposeful holding.

I imagine that Daboll figured: “So what if we get a penalty?” Defensive holding is only 5 yards and the opponents wastes 5-10 seconds off the clock each play that you’re holding them. 

 

It worked really well - at least until a CB got turned around and gave up a long pass. But the technique clearly worked for wasting clock. 

 

I have to wonder whether this technique was something discussed by the Bills coaches in the meetings after the 13 second ending and Daboll brought it with him to the Giants. Blatantly holding Kelce, Hill, etc in those 13 seconds likely would have burned enough clock to win the game.

 

 

 

 

Only problem with this is that Titans still got into position for a very makeable FG attempt despite missing it.

 

I still think the bigger issue with 13 seconds is McD and Fraziers scheme and approach which will no doubt rear it's ugly head again at some point this season. Can't just drop back 10+ yards off the line of scrimage and play prevent defense which will continue to fail in similar situations especially against QB's that can avoid the pass rush like Mahomes.

[Airseven]

Daboll may turn out to be a good head coach, but Daniel Jones will never be a good QB. Therein lies the issue.

[Einstein]

2 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

Because they did not do what you suggested.  

 

They did not have their DBs intentional hold the WRs on each play - so why would it get called.  You had 2 plays where a DB was out of position and held and 1 play where he was out of position and did not hold and gave up a big play.

 

 

No they held every play. They were just called for it only twice. I’ll post the All-22 when it’s available. 

 

1 hour ago, LeGOATski said:

It's clearly not a good strategy because:

 

1. The penalty mentioned

 

2. The CB getting beat, as mentioned

 

The Titans moved the ball fairly easily, but then missed the game winning field goal.

 

The Bills needed to play more aggressively at the end of the Chiefs game, but we all know this. It's been discussed as nauseum. They didn't need to commit penalties.

 

This is a classic case of viewing a situation through a certain lens because you're bitter about the past.

 

You can’t determine that it’s not a good strategy just because one CB got turned around and beat.

The best strategies in the world still rely on the the human running the strategy (the players) to do their job. 

 

It’s like saying “this washing machine doesn’t work” when you kept pressing the “off” button instead of the “on”. Human error, not machine/strategy error.

 

.

Edited September 12, 2022 by Einstein

[LeGOATski]

16 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

No they held every play. They were just called for it only twice. I’ll post the All-22 when it’s available. 

 

 

You can’t determine that it’s not a good strategy just because one CB got turned around and beat.

The best strategies in the world still rely on the the human running the strategy (the players) to do their job. 

 

It’s like saying “this washing machine doesn’t work” when you kept pressing the “off” button instead of the “on”. Human error, not machine/strategy error.

 

.

The Titans were moving the ball regardless and picking up 1st downs on penalties.

 

Even if you employ this strategy of trying to hold, you're not guaranteeing a receiver won't beat the hold and get open deep for a big play.

 

What you are guaranteeing is a first down and a stopped clock.

 

This is not the slam dunk strategy you want to believe it is.