McDermott decision making

[GunnerBill]

36 minutes ago, mikemac2001 said:

Yes you are the fins are not going to burn their own clock once it gets in the 30 sec range they will use there time outs . You then can use them depending on down and distance to save time or keep them to attempt to get a FG.
 

Having three gives you a chance to save clock once you use one you lose all clock control power because they can run it down no matter what 

 

 

 

Except that is exactly what they were doing. They didn't start using their time outs until right at the end. They wanted to acheive Josh not touching it again. The only way to avoid that was for your defense to make a stop. 

[TH3]

This thread…JFC

[BananaB]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Miami still had one timeout in its pocket. They were playing to score right at the end of the half. That was their entire strategy on that drive. Had the Bills not used timeouts they'd have used theirs differently. But there is zero doubt in my mind they'd have still bled the clock. Might they have had to settle for 3 instead of 7? Possibly but there is no reason to believe that would have been the case. 

 

The problem on that drive was NOT clock management. It was the defenses inability to make a stop. 

Sorry I was confused about the number of timeouts. Still doesn’t change my opinion. You can say they were playing to score but if the D puts them in a bad situation they will settle for the FG. It’s just the way it is. Miami had 3 3rd and long completions on that drive, they really weren’t moving the ball in a fashion that you can guarantee they are gonna get in the endzone so any timeout taking works to their advantage. If they are playing to score, McD still should have been playing to force a FG…. Like I said before this is a different situation then the Ravens game where we were playing catchup going into half down two scores, we were in the lead and getting the ball back.

Edited September 21 by BananaB

[GunnerBill]

39 minutes ago, BananaB said:

Sorry I was confused about the number of timeouts. Still doesn’t change my opinion. You can say they were playing to score but if the D puts them in a bad situation they will settle for the FG. It’s just the way it is. Miami had 3 3rd and long completions on that drive, they really weren’t moving the ball in a fashion that you can guarantee they are gonna get in the endzone so any timeout taking works to their advantage. If they are playing to score, McD still should have been playing to force a FG…. Like I said before this is a different situation then the Ravens game where we were playing catchup going into half down two scores, we were in the lead and getting the ball back.

 

Key words highlighted. It was the D not making a play not the use of time outs that was the issue.

[DJB]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Key words highlighted. It was the D not making a play not the use of time outs that was the issue.

Either way McDermott is largely responsible for both of them 

[GunnerBill]

Just now, DJB said:

Either way McDermott is largely responsible for both of them 

 

If people want to criticise the defense on that drive no argument.

[Thrivefourfive]

…. sucks. Just finishing the thread title. How is this even debatable. He sucks at calling timeouts and he sucks at challenges. Oh, and he sucks at everything that involves defense against the Chiefs in the playoffs. And he sucks at defense in a handful of other games during the season, like opening week. If it wasn’t for Josh, he’d struggle to take any team to the playoffs. All the things he’s successful at is for another thread. I think this is what the OP wanted to hear. 
 

I was promised by some here that he’s grown as a head coach when it comes to the areas he’s sucked at so far this season. Baltimore kicked our defense’s *** any way you look at it. Failure to challenge on multiple crucial plays so far in multiple games. And the timeouts at the end of the half vs Miami were ridiculous.
 

Where are the positives in these three areas?? Oh yeah, injuries and suspensions on defense. But once those are behind us, we’ll be a reckoning ball on defense! (Even though that has never ever happened before, so there’s zero precedent to give any ration person the kind of hope that would make this season anything other than a Hold your breath that the timeouts, challenges, and defensive collapses don’t send us home early. Again.) 

[BananaB]

1 hour ago, DJB said:

Either way McDermott is largely responsible for both of them 

Exactly 

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If people want to criticise the defense on that drive no argument.

We all seen what was going on, McD had a front row seat as well. His timeouts in that situation benefited their offense, not the Bills. 

[PromoTheRobot]

People need to watch other games with the same jaundiced eye.

[mikemac2001]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Except that is exactly what they were doing. They didn't start using their time outs until right at the end. They wanted to acheive Josh not touching it again. The only way to avoid that was for your defense to make a stop. 

Well I understand the defense needs to make a stop that’s not my argument 

 

I’m talking about timeout usage and if McDermott didn’t use one so early the bills would have had more control to get Josh the ball 

 

once he called it he lost any way to control it even if it’s 20 secs we lost that ability with the early timeout 

 

I would rather they be first and goal and we have all three timeouts then save the 40 secs when there on the 20-30 yard line 

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, mikemac2001 said:

Well I understand the defense needs to make a stop that’s not my argument 

 

I’m talking about timeout usage and if McDermott didn’t use one so early the bills would have had more control to get Josh the ball 

 

once he called it he lost any way to control it even if it’s 20 secs we lost that ability with the early timeout 

 

I would rather they be first and goal and we have all three timeouts then save the 40 secs when there on the 20-30 yard line 

 

If they'd done that there would have been not time to conserve. You'd have walked off the field with timeouts still in your pocket.

[mikemac2001]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If they'd done that there would have been not time to conserve. You'd have walked off the field with timeouts still in your pocket.

No I wouldn’t have they either score because they know the bills have timeouts or you get some time likely with 1 timeout at least 

 

you can disagree but the plays don’t take 10 secs it’s probably 5 at most maybe less leaves you with a play and timeout better then nothing 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

24 minutes ago, mikemac2001 said:

No I wouldn’t have they either score because they know the bills have timeouts or you get some time likely with 1 timeout at least 

 

you can disagree but the plays don’t take 10 secs it’s probably 5 at most maybe less leaves you with a play and timeout better then nothing 

 

 

 

They call the drive differently though. They were playing for dual purpose. They were not leaving time for Josh UNLESS the Bills D made a play

[mikemac2001]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

They call the drive differently though. They were playing for dual purpose. They were not leaving time for Josh UNLESS the Bills D made a play

Exactly which means they likely don’t get a TD It goes both ways they try to run clock and waste their own time. Then once the time is low and the yardage is close you give yourself a chance anyways or they force plays they wouldn’t have run because they are avoiding giving the bills the ball 

 

your gonna X all my posts because you don’t like people making points and I know I’m right about the clock. 
 

you save the timeouts you have more control then taking it early. Once you take a timeout you lose the advantage it’s day one time management that’s why they always blame coaches for using them early 

[GunnerBill]

6 hours ago, mikemac2001 said:

Exactly which means they likely don’t get a TD It goes both ways they try to run clock and waste their own time. Then once the time is low and the yardage is close you give yourself a chance anyways or they force plays they wouldn’t have run because they are avoiding giving the bills the ball 

 

your gonna X all my posts because you don’t like people making points and I know I’m right about the clock. 
 

you save the timeouts you have more control then taking it early. Once you take a timeout you lose the advantage it’s day one time management that’s why they always blame coaches for using them early 

 

You are not right. You are wrong. Is there a chance they end with 3 instead of 7? Sure. There is a chance. But it is no more than a chance. Even that required the Bills D to make a play. They didn't make a play. That was the problem NOT the time outs.

[Mike in Horseheads]

if you take a timeout in the first/third quarter with the clock running it adds that time to the end of half or game which changes the whole scenario at the end.

[Rochesterfan]

7 hours ago, mikemac2001 said:

Exactly which means they likely don’t get a TD It goes both ways they try to run clock and waste their own time. Then once the time is low and the yardage is close you give yourself a chance anyways or they force plays they wouldn’t have run because they are avoiding giving the bills the ball 

 

your gonna X all my posts because you don’t like people making points and I know I’m right about the clock. 
 

you save the timeouts you have more control then taking it early. Once you take a timeout you lose the advantage it’s day one time management that’s why they always blame coaches for using them early 

 

 

No way is this correct.  The Bills called a timeout with 55 seconds left and 2nd and 5 already in scoring range.  If they let clock run it is already under 30 seconds and the Dolphins still have 3 timeouts.

 

Then you get a stop for -2 yards - so it will be 3rd and 7 - they stop it again with 47 seconds.  Now you force Miami into a decision - which is what you want - Do I run and run time and kick the FG or risk throwing and an incomplete pass risks giving the Bills the ball back with 35-40 seconds.

 

If the Bills don’t call timeout - you give the Dolphins complete control on both the time and play calls.  Would that have lead to a FG - maybe, but so would a stop on 3rd and 7 where they got pressure, but the players let Tua escape and scramble for a first down.  The Bills timeouts then become useless if they were not used then - with a running clock and a 2nd and 5 at the 23 - the Dolphins control all of the plays.

 

The coaches called plays that should have worked on that drive and the Bills players did not make the plays.  They forced Tua out of the pocket multiple times with pressure and let him pick up yards and first downs via both air and scrambles, they had Hill stopped 4 yards short on 3rd down and Bernard took a bad angle and missed a tackle, etc.

 

 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

No way is this correct.  The Bills called a timeout with 55 seconds left and 2nd and 5 already in scoring range.  If they let clock run it is already under 30 seconds and the Dolphins still have 3 timeouts.

 

Then you get a stop for -2 yards - so it will be 3rd and 7 - they stop it again with 47 seconds.  Now you force Miami into a decision - which is what you want - Do I run and run time and kick the FG or risk throwing and an incomplete pass risks giving the Bills the ball back with 35-40 seconds.

 

If the Bills don’t call timeout - you give the Dolphins complete control on both the time and play calls.  Would that have lead to a FG - maybe, but so would a stop on 3rd and 7 where they got pressure, but the players let Tua escape and scramble for a first down.  The Bills timeouts then become useless if they were not used then - with a running clock and a 2nd and 5 at the 23 - the Dolphins control all of the plays.

 

The coaches called plays that should have worked on that drive and the Bills players did not make the plays.  They forced Tua out of the pocket multiple times with pressure and let him pick up yards and first downs via both air and scrambles, they had Hill stopped 4 yards short on 3rd down and Bernard took a bad angle and missed a tackle, etc.

 

 

This. End of debate.

[GaryPinC]

48 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

No way is this correct.  The Bills called a timeout with 55 seconds left and 2nd and 5 already in scoring range.  If they let clock run it is already under 30 seconds and the Dolphins still have 3 timeouts.

 

Then you get a stop for -2 yards - so it will be 3rd and 7 - they stop it again with 47 seconds.  Now you force Miami into a decision - which is what you want - Do I run and run time and kick the FG or risk throwing and an incomplete pass risks giving the Bills the ball back with 35-40 seconds.

 

If the Bills don’t call timeout - you give the Dolphins complete control on both the time and play calls.  Would that have lead to a FG - maybe, but so would a stop on 3rd and 7 where they got pressure, but the players let Tua escape and scramble for a first down.  The Bills timeouts then become useless if they were not used then - with a running clock and a 2nd and 5 at the 23 - the Dolphins control all of the plays.

 

The coaches called plays that should have worked on that drive and the Bills players did not make the plays.  They forced Tua out of the pocket multiple times with pressure and let him pick up yards and first downs via both air and scrambles, they had Hill stopped 4 yards short on 3rd down and Bernard took a bad angle and missed a tackle, etc.

 

 

 

 

Sheesh.  Of course there is a way it's correct.  Functionally Miami has 2 timeouts with one saved to kick the FG.

I don't give a crap if we end the half with extra timeouts, this is a nonsensical factor when you're trying to avoid surrendering the TD at all costs in a tight game.

 

If the Bills let the clock run it either forces Miami to burn those two timeouts instead of us, or let the clock run.

 

Dolphins don't want to give Josh time, so they let the clock run on second and 5.  The play takes 8 seconds so probably it's third and seven and the clock has 25 or so seconds left If Miami takes the TO it leaves them with one more disposable timeout.  

 

With one timeout we gifted them around 20 seconds of game time and disrespected them when even McD admits our D will be suspect at times with all the youth and injuries. We took all the pressure of the clock off of them.  After this, the scenarios are too variable to debate but the bottom line is Miami got the TD with 8 seconds remaining.

[Rochesterfan]

6 minutes ago, GaryPinC said:

Sheesh.  Of course there is a way it's correct.  Functionally Miami has 2 timeouts with one saved to kick the FG.

I don't give a crap if we end the half with extra timeouts, this is a nonsensical factor when you're trying to avoid surrendering the TD at all costs in a tight game.

 

If the Bills let the clock run it either forces Miami to burn those two timeouts instead of us, or let the clock run.

 

Dolphins don't want to give Josh time, so they let the clock run on second and 5.  The play takes 8 seconds so probably it's third and seven and the clock has 25 or so seconds left If Miami takes the TO it leaves them with one more disposable timeout.  

 

With one timeout we gifted them around 20 seconds of game time and disrespected them when even McD admits our D will be suspect at times with all the youth and injuries. We took all the pressure of the clock off of them.  After this, the scenarios are too variable to debate but the bottom line is Miami got the TD with 8 seconds remaining.

 

Yes and therefore - you cede all control on the drive to the Dolphins.

 

In your situation- you basically give up any chance for the Bills to get the ball back and you allow the Dolphins to dictate what they want to run. 

 

You also free them up to take endzone shots and let the half end exactly as it did.  By using the timeouts - the Bills gave themselves a shot at control and if Bosa keeps contain on the pressure on 3rd down - you get both scenarios.  The Dolphins have to kick the FG and the Bills get the ball back with 20 seconds.

 

Both scenarios have played out numerous times in history - one - you are ceding the points and allowing your opponent to dictate and one you are trying to dictate plays, but both require your defense to make a stop.

 

In this case - the Bills didn’t and that drove the narrative, but I would still prefer McD to be aggressive and try to dictate even on defense - rather than be passive and allow your opponent to dictate down, distance, and time.