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

[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.