Not Effectively Utilizing Your Resources - Timeouts

[savvyman]

There has been a lot of discussion about whether Pete effectively used the timeout effectively during the 49ers game last Sunday.

While the end of the game use is certainly debatable - I saw another example at the end of the first half (not the first time this season) of the Seahawks not using their timeouts in an effective manner.

The 49ers were inside the 10 and with a minute to go were held to a yard on a running play. At this time the Seahawks had three timeouts remaining - facing second and long (goal) we could have stopped the clock with 57 seconds remaining. For some strange reason the hawks let the time continue and by the time the 49ers scored the TD on third down there were six seconds remaining.

Why did Pete not use the timeouts to stop the clock on second down and at most one more time on third down? Whatever points that would have resulted from the 49ers the hawks would have gotten the ball back with around 40 seconds and either one or two timeouts to work with - plenty of time to make a score of some type.

Instead the hawks got scored on - sitting on all 3 timeouts unused - and with no time remaining in the half

This type of clock management would be unacceptable and exploited in Madden 25 - this was very poor use of your resources by the Seahawks coaching staff - and of note this is not the first time this season that the Hawks have not effectively utilized their timeouts to get another opportunity on offense

[NorthHawk]

Is this a continuation of the thread on the 'Blue'?

Trying out the Edit function:

I suggested in that thread that it is a mistake to call a TO when on your own 30 yd line (or thereabouts) instead of taking a 5 yard penalty. I believe it was 2nd and 20 at the time and my contention is that 5 yards is worth keeping a TO. You can make up 5 yards in many ways, but you can never make up a timeout.
The responses were along the lines of every team does it so it must be right and you can't prove statistically that the chance from 20 yards is not significantly greater than from 25 yards.

To me it comes from the same coaches handbook that says QBs have to be 6-2 to be successful.
Being a contrarian by nature I think you should question everything.

[4XPIPS]

I think Pete has it in his mind that he Defense will always make the play. Which he gambled in the Rams Game right at the end by not using Timeouts...and rolled the dice to make the Defense win that game. Debatable but again it's his gut call.

I see what you are saying, however I think Pete has it his mind to let the half run out, and I would think most coaches would burn them to try get a chance to score.

However Tough Team on the Road
We a Run First Team, so getting into a quick 2 Min Drill with less than a minute on the game clock before half against a really Good Defense may have been the thought process for Pete.

Keep in mind 49ers have never had an issue getting pressure on RW... so it could have been a disaster to have to try and score on long passing plays with a short clock right before half and suffer a sack fumble or INT

Did he play it too safe? Possibly.. however it would have been different at CLINK

[RiverDog]

Is this a continuation of the thread on the 'Blue'?

Trying out the Edit function:

I suggested in that thread that it is a mistake to call a TO when on your own 30 yd line (or thereabouts) instead of taking a 5 yard penalty. I believe it was 2nd and 20 at the time and my contention is that 5 yards is worth keeping a TO. You can make up 5 yards in many ways, but you can never make up a timeout.
The responses were along the lines of every team does it so it must be right and you can't prove statistically that the chance from 20 yards is not significantly greater than from 25 yards.

To me it comes from the same coaches handbook that says QBs have to be 6-2 to be successful.
Being a contrarian by nature I think you should question everything.

Yea, I started the thread over at the Blue, and I'm about as popular as a bumble bee in a nudist colony for having the gall to question such decisions. Some people just can't handle even the slightest criticism of Pete or Russell.

It was 2nd and 25 at our own 23. Not calling a timeout would have made it 2nd and 30. Most plays against the types of defenses employed in passing situations like that can reasonably be expected to gain between 10 and 12 yards. That's why I felt it was unwise, as it meant that even if you converted on two of them, you'd still be short. Timeouts, especially those in the 2nd half of a close game, are like gold, as we found out the hard way.

I'm not blaming Russell. It was a bang-bang decision and if it was indeed a mistake, it's completely forgivable. 9 times out of 10, Russell is going to make the right decision and my trust in him to guide our team is absolute. And who knows, it might have been someone like Bevell screaming into his helmet at him. But on this occasion, who ever's decision it was, I think it was wrong.

[NorthHawk]

Then again, he should be able to see the play clock at the end of the stadium. That should give him enough time to figure out it's going to be tight.
Naturally any competitive player will try to get the ball off and that adds to the pressure, but if it is coached into them that in those types of situations it's better to keep the TO and take the penalty, it should become easier to make quick decisions like that in later games.
That's if you think a TO is worth more than 5 yards in those types of situations.

[savvyman]

No i did not see this discussion at Seahawk Blue - Never joined - would probably had joined at some point but thought I would give a little more time for the Shack to come on-line.

A primary reason why I did not join the Blue was other peoples comments that at Seahawk blue the moderators did not like anyone "being negative" towards the team and would not tolerate that.

I think that If we all just sit around only thinking and posting "Postive Rah Rah Comments" and stroking each other then the community will become a very boring place - well at least for me anyway.

I also agree with Riverdog comments about Russell Wilson timeout on 2nd and 25 - I thought immediately when he called it that it should not have been called. And Like RD on Wilson - Russell Wilson has been so outstanding this year that even if he placed some large bets in Las Vegas against the Hawks and then proceeded to throw so many pick sixes that it would cost us the next three games - I would still forgive him - he has been that great this year.

[RiverDog]

No i did not see this discussion at Seahawk Blue - Never joined - would probably had joined at some point but thought I would give a little more time for the Shack to come on-line.

A primary reason why I did not join the Blue was other peoples comments that at Seahawk blue the moderators did not like anyone "being negative" towards the team and would not tolerate that.

I think that If we all just sit around only thinking and posting "Postive Rah Rah Comments" and stroking each other then the community will become a very boring place - well at least for me anyway.

I also agree with Riverdog comments about Russell Wilson timeout on 2nd and 25 - I thought immediately when he called it that it should not have been called. And Like RD on Wilson - Russell Wilson has been so outstanding this year that even if he placed some large bets in Las Vegas against the Hawks and then proceeded to throw so many pick sixes that it would cost us the next three games - I would still forgive him - he has been that great this year.

That's the major drawback of The Blue. It's more of a club than it is a true forum where all points of view are treated equally by the adminstrators. The forum adminstrator of the Blue actually came on last week and threatened to "give those a break" for their "negative" remarks, yet they allow other members of their "club" to get away with telling posters like me to STFU. I've earned quite a reputation over there, so having a new forum will help me get out of their faces for a little while. I'm sure those guys are getting tired of me as well.

The one thing that I do like about The Blue is that you get an almost immediate response. I'll post over at Seahawks.net and never get a reply.

Back to the OP. IMO Pete has a real blind spot when it comes to clock management. I didn't like the failure to use timeouts at the end of the Rams game and preserve a fall back option had the Rams scored, nor did I like how he used his timeouts in the Niners game. That does not mean that I don't like his overall management of the team.

[savvyman]

Yes there is no conflict in offering an assessment that Pete could be using his timeouts more effectively and also thinking that Pete has done an outstanding job over the past 4 years and should be a top candidate\winner for coach of the year this year.

I also did not mean to take a shot at the people at Seahawk Blue though my comments could be interpreted that way - I looked at Blue a couple times and the people there seemed fine.

[Eaglehawk]

The timeout question is a legit one. And although I think we all can do a bit of Mon Morning qb, however its a toss up either way.
More time on the clock at the end of the half would have been preferable. PC has had problems with the clock since he arrived to the Seahawks.

I don't know why. It would seem to me as if someone would prep PC for a couple of hours prior to each game or during the week on drills involving the clock. I think there should be some software programs out there that might test this. IMO. Outside of Madden of course.

[XpertDBA]

I think the more interesting question is, once Kaepernick makes the first down, should the Hawks have let the 49ers waltz into the endzone.

I would rather have 2:30 to go with no timeouts and a chance to win the game on a drive, than being down 2 points with 30 seconds to play to try and get into FG position. Atlanta did the 30 second thing to us, I realize......but just seems like the odds are better with more time, and 4 downs to play with going down the field with Russell.

[NorthHawk]

Giving up a TD on purpose might be a good strategic move, but it could be seen by the D as giving up.
I'm not sure that in the long run it is a good strategy especially for a group that prides itself on stopping the opponent.
You don't want to get into that mindset when you have an aggressive Defense.

[RiverDog]

The timeout question is a legit one. And although I think we all can do a bit of Mon Morning qb, however its a toss up either way.
More time on the clock at the end of the half would have been preferable. PC has had problems with the clock since he arrived to the Seahawks.

I don't know why. It would seem to me as if someone would prep PC for a couple of hours prior to each game or during the week on drills involving the clock. I think there should be some software programs out there that might test this. IMO. Outside of Madden of course.

It wasn't a Monday morning quarterback issue with me. I complained as soon as we called that timeout that it was unwise. I also complained about Pete's non use of timeouts in the Rams game, to which the retort was "we won the game, didn't we?" or "Pete was right because we won." It was fine to note the end result when we won, but when I try to do the same thing when we lost, I get accused of being a Monday Morning quarterback. I'm not pointing a finger at you, Eagle, but just in general.

I thought the idea of giving up a TD intentionally was silly. Had we managed our timeouts properly, we could have gotten the ball back with 50 seconds or so left, plenty of time to make a reasonable attempt to get into FG range, and that's assuming that the Niners just fell on the ball and didn't attempt a pass or commit some sort of penalty such as too many men in the huddle that would have stopped the clock on a penalty.

[Hawkstar]

I think the more interesting question is, once Kaepernick makes the first down, should the Hawks have let the 49ers waltz into the endzone.

I would rather have 2:30 to go with no timeouts and a chance to win the game on a drive, than being down 2 points with 30 seconds to play to try and get into FG position. Atlanta did the 30 second thing to us, I realize......but just seems like the odds are better with more time, and 4 downs to play with going down the field with Russell.

I doubt the Niners take the bait. I think they take a knee near the goal line.

[savvyman]

I think the more interesting question is, once Kaepernick makes the first down, should the Hawks have let the 49ers waltz into the endzone.

The Answer is yes.

[XpertDBA]

Hawkstar.....

It sure seemed to me like Frank Gore was trying to score on the very next play, if you watch the replay. I think the 49ers take the TD there and take their chances. I think we let them score there and take our own chances with Russell and 2:30 left to win it.....that's what Russell wants.

[Seahawker]

RiverDog has been spot on about Pete's mis-use of time-outs.
Having 2 in our back pocket may not have won the game, but it sure woulda gave us a chance.

Yes the ball hit the ground, no time to get SBXL teary eyed.

Koudo's to the Cardinal's for a well played game & heart for the playoffs.

Any questions on Shermans 2 INT game and our piss poor pass protection concerning future salary cap implications?