JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 We get the ball with 56 seconds left and a timeout on our own 35. Only 40 yards to go to get into FG range. Drew takes an awful sack. THEN THEY DON'T CALL TIMEOUT! By the time the next play is over there are what, 15 seconds left??? All the throws are in the middle of the field, not a sideline in sight. Bad.
Thailog80 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Very bad I agree. But not out of character for the woeful Bills.
IBTG81 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Uhhhhhhh, we used our last timeout. Right before the hail mary.
Guest Guest Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 They needed the timeout to get Lindell on the field....
cåblelady Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Uhhhhhhh, we used our last timeout. Right before the hail mary. 64141[/snapback] ....with 2 seconds left. I see Jåy's point.
Thailog80 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 They let waaay to much time elapse of the clock.
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted October 11, 2004 Author Posted October 11, 2004 Uhhhhhhh, we used our last timeout. Right before the hail mary. 64141[/snapback] Oh yeah, it did so much good i forgot.
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted October 11, 2004 Author Posted October 11, 2004 Very bad I agree. But not out of character for the woeful Bills. 64138[/snapback] Congrats on passing me to be the most prolific poster on TSW! It's about friggin time someone did that.
IBTG81 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Oh yeah, it did so much good i forgot. 64148[/snapback] We were saving it for when/if we got into field goal range.
MDH Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 We get the ball with 56 seconds left and a timeout on our own 35. Only 40 yards to go to get into FG range. Drew takes an awful sack. THEN THEY DON'T CALL TIMEOUT! By the time the next play is over there are what, 15 seconds left??? All the throws are in the middle of the field, not a sideline in sight. Bad. 64136[/snapback] Agreed. I was screaming for a TO too. I understand they'd "like" to have one left to set up the FG, but you can't let 25 seconds run off the clock after a sack when you've only got 55 seconds left.
cåblelady Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 We were saving it for when/if we got into field goal range. 64154[/snapback] That may have been the original intention, however.......you have to improvise as the game dictates. With the sack.....the TO should have been called immediately, thus saving many precious seconds.
nodnarb Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 It was some of the worst clock management/situational management I've ever seen, and you have to put it on MM's head, because he's ultimately responsible. I hate to say that cuz I really like Mike, but he hasn't shown me anything yet. He's shown me what Gilbride and Williams showed us. Is anyone going to argue that? Bledsoe really screwed that up by taking that sack. Be prepared for the situation. Be ready to move and shuffle and buy yourself time. Oh, he can't do that? WELL THEN WHY DON'T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT BLEDSOE IS A LIABILITY? Because he made a couple nice throws?! HELLOOOO...every QB DOES! And most of them do it more often than he does! That's his job! That's what's EXPECTED of him. Mental mistakes like that from a 12 year veteran? UNACCEPTABLE. ANyone here think Brady would have done that? Bledsoe: Belichick's Trojan Horse
IBTG81 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 That may have been the original intention, however.......you have to improvise as the game dictates. With the sack.....the TO should have been called immediately, thus saving many precious seconds. 64160[/snapback] And what would have happened had we completed a pass to put us in fg range, only not to have our timeout. Then people would be bitching that we used it then. I don't see a problem with it.
cåblelady Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 And what would have happened had we completed a pass to put us in fg range, only not to have our timeout. Then people would be bitching that we used it then. I don't see a problem with it. 64165[/snapback] More time for passes to the sideline or endzone.
MDH Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 And what would have happened had we completed a pass to put us in fg range, only not to have our timeout. Then people would be bitching that we used it then. I don't see a problem with it. 64165[/snapback] Umm, because if we had "needed" the TO to stop the clock when we were in FG range and had already used it after the sack it would have been obvious to us that they never would have gotten into FG range had they not called the TO after the sack...
stuckincincy Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Agreed. I was screaming for a TO too. I understand they'd "like" to have one left to set up the FG, but you can't let 25 seconds run off the clock after a sack when you've only got 55 seconds left. 64157[/snapback] True, but I (sarcasticaly) think they figured that if they got into FG range, it would take DB 5 seconds after the snap to concentrate on one patch of turf and then spike the ball...
IBTG81 Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Umm, because if we had "needed" the TO to stop the clock when we were in FG range and had already used it after the sack it would have been obvious to us that they never would have gotten into FG range had they not called the TO after the sack... 64171[/snapback] Are you drinking?
MDH Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 Are you drinking? 64173[/snapback] Why, because I make sense and you can't understand it?
cåblelady Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 True, but I (sarcasticaly) think they figured that if they got into FG range, it would take DB 5 seconds after the snap to concentrate on one patch of turf and then spike the ball... 64172[/snapback] Ouch.
bluenews Posted October 11, 2004 Posted October 11, 2004 they had to save the TO for a FG.........the sack was a huge mistake!!!
Recommended Posts