Is Jason Garrett's job security the greatest among NFC East coaches?

[ThoughtExperiment]

Right, think about all the times when a team has the ball and a one-score lead at the end of the game right before the two-minute warning. If the defense (losing team) is out of timeouts, all the offense has to is get a first down and the defense can't stop the clock again, Three consecutive knees and game over.

In my head live I actually was thinking we couldn't run it all the way out and the Skins might have a few to several seconds or so after we kicked the FG -- so we'd have to kick off, but there's no way they could get in FG range with no timeouts. But I guess we could have run it all the way out, which makes scoring there even more inexcusable.

BTW I've seen a few people around mention the opening week Giants snafu when Eli told the RB not to score. But that was totally different because they couldn't run it all the way out anyway, and they already had a FG lead. So the TD would have made it a two-score lead, which is basically insurmountable in a minute or so. In our game the first concern was to make them burn their timeouts and eat as much clock as possible before you score so they have no time to do anything. If Lucky Whitehead hadn't saved Garrett's ass and we'd lost that game in overtime, it would have been truly an almost impossible loss.

Red is seriously the most incompetent clock manager I've ever seen. Has to be the worst in the modern football era.

 

[yimyammer]

That 40 second clock starts immediately after the previous play is whistled dead. Only the 25 second clock is started by the official by announcing the ball ready for play.

So wouldn't that mean a scenario like the following could occur:

Play ends, 40 second clock starts, ref sets the ball in 5 seconds and starts the 25 second clock only allowing a maximum of 29.99999 seconds to be run off before the offense gets a delay of game penalty.

 

[Doomsday]

Play ends, 40 second clock starts, ref sets the ball in 5 seconds and starts the 25 second clock only allowing a maximum of 29.99999 seconds to be run off before the offense gets a delay of game penalty.

Noooo.... There is no 25 second clock if the 40 second one is already running. I don't understand what you're asking here.

 

[Doomsday]

When the play ends in the field of play and isn't a incomplete pass, the play is whistled dead the ref spots the ball and the 40 second play clock starts, the game clock never stops. UNLESS there is a stoppage via timeout or penalty. If either, then it is the 25 second clock with the game clock stopped and the 25 second play clock starts on the umpire's signal.

 

[yimyammer]

Noooo.... There is no 25 second clock if the 40 second one is already running. I don't understand what you're asking here.

I guess I'm confused by this explanation:

In the NFL teams have 40 seconds timed from the end of the previous down, or 25 seconds after the ball is declared ready for play after certain administrative stoppages and game delays.

That makes it sound like the play clock is sometimes 40 seconds and sometimes 25 seconds

I guess what it means and you are saying is that the play clock is always 40 seconds unless a team calls a time out or the refs stop the clock for some reason, in that case, the play clock is only 25 seconds.

Does this dumbass finally get it?

 

[Doomsday]

At any rate had this all been done right, McFadden stays in bounds, and we run off max time after each knee, then after either we make or miss the FG, there should have been anywhere between 18 and 14 seconds left when we kick the ball off. From there all bets are off because we don't know if it's a touchback, fair catch, or some stupid return with laterals. Either way, Washington should NOT have had any timeouts left and should have had a MAXIMUM of 18 seconds to work with. NOT over a fucking minute and a timeout.

 

[Doomsday]

I guess what it means and you are saying is that the play clock is always 40 seconds unless a team calls a time out or the refs stop the clock for some reason, in that case, the play clock is only 25 seconds.

That's it. That is the "or" in the rule you quoted. It's not two clocks, it is one clock that starts with either 40 seconds or 25 seconds on it.

 

[peplaw06]

yim, why do you have us calling a timeout after 24 seconds on 3rd down? (Edit, Dooms beat me to it.)

And yes, the problem was running in for the score. The only way they have a chance barring a huge TD return is if we run it right in and give them the minute plus to tie us.

Also, I think we all knew what he meant by "playing football", but what a ridiculous phrase. It's like him talking about "executing ball plays" or having "ball practice" or calling us the "Dallas Football Cowboys." Just absurd attempts to make himself sound like an authority.

I could even see that maybe asking McFadden to get 2 yards from the 4 yard line and fall down would be a difficult thing to do. Go full bore for those two yards, but fall over...? Gotta have that first down at least...

But how in the world does McFadden let that get outside and run out of bounds? I'll tell you. Garrett didn't tell him to stay in bounds. He probably assumed that McFadden knew not to go out of bounds, but he didn't say it. And now he gets thrown under the bus. There's no excuse for not telling him to keep it in bounds.

And yes on the "play football" bullshit. It's ludicrous that his answer to question about strategy in clock management is we wanted to play football.

 

[Doomsday]

But how in the world does McFadden let that get outside and run out of bounds? I'll tell you. Garrett didn't tell him to stay in bounds. He probably assumed that McFadden knew not to go out of bounds, but he didn't say it. And now he gets thrown under the bus. There's no excuse for not telling him to keep it in bounds.

DING! And all this is if, and that's a BIG if - Garrett even realized McFadden needed to stay in bounds. I somehow doubt it. Like I said earlier, he probably had to be told that was a screw up. You don't fucking run a weak side sweep if you want the play to end, in bounds.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

I could even see that maybe asking McFadden to get 2 yards from the 4 yard line and fall down would be a difficult thing to do. Go full bore for those two yards, but fall over...? Gotta have that first down at least...

But how in the world does McFadden let that get outside and run out of bounds? I'll tell you. Garrett didn't tell him to stay in bounds. He probably assumed that McFadden knew not to go out of bounds, but he didn't say it. And now he gets thrown under the bus. There's no excuse for not telling him to keep it in bounds.

No doubt going OB was terrible, and a well-coached team would know that, but I won't even put that on Garrett. I think McFadden just brainfarted. The QB should be reminding the back to not go OB on that, but maybe he didn't, or McFadden thought he had the first, or whatever.

But after that, when a bad mistake has just been made, the coach absolutely tells the QB to tell the RB to just fall forward and not score. If you just sort of plunge forward even at full speed you aren't going to run those 10 yards or whatever, but just get a few. And yeah, at that point the head coach has to be in the QB's ear making sure the QB instructs the RB to do just that. It obviously didn't happen. Because we were playing football instead.

 

[Doomsday]

But after that, when a bad mistake has just been made, the coach absolutely tells the QB to tell the RB to just fall forward and not score. If you just sort of plunge forward even at full speed you aren't going to run those 10 yards or whatever, but just get a few. And yeah, at that point the head coach has to be in the QB's ear making sure the QB instructs the RB to do just that. It obviously didn't happen. Because we were playing football instead.

And when you watch that scoring play it's clear they weren't laying down and letting us score, and we just simply blew them out of there. So there was never any intent on our part, to not score the TD.

 

[UVAwahoos]

Basically the only time Garrett's offense can get you a TD is when you don't need one.

 

[Scot]

Basically the only time Garrett's offense can get you a TD is when you don't need one.

Apparently the same thing with a win!

 

[ZeroClub]

Also, this Tom Gribble who is with the Ticket and ESPN Dallas was there at the game getting audio from the Jerry interview, so they asked him what Jerry's demeanor was like -- did he seem as negative as those comments sounded, etc.

Gribble said yes, Jerry didn't seem like his usual upbeat self after a win, but almost somber. Which he said surprised him because he'd never Jerry like that right after a win. Maybe there is something there, although I'd never get my hopes up.

I watched Jerry's post-game interview on dallascowboys.com. It was telling.

To me, it is clear that Jerry thinks the final minutes of the game were mismanaged. Jerry didn't call out Garrett publicly, of course. But it seems obvious that Jerry believes that the outcome of the game was jeopardized by questionable game management.

I don't think that Garrett is going anywhere at least until Romo retires, but I think Jerry realizes Garrett's shortcomings as a game day manager.

As I was watched the final minutes of the game unfold, I couldn't help thinking just how differently Parcells would have handled that situation. Parcells would have done it correctly.