Seahawks @ Rams

[BSUSeahawk]

Extend the game as long as possible? Not sure I agree there. What you're trying to do -- especially with a team like the Rams -- is get 2 possessions to their 1. And on their 1, you need to make a stop. It's exactly the way it worked out. It could have certainly not worked out that way (is there a fail safe strategy??), but I think it's awfully tough to say it was mismanagement when it went exactly as planned with us having a decent chance to win the game at the end....and the clock isn't what killed us.

By using 4 minutes of clock, you forced yourself into a scenario where you HAVE to prevent LA from getting a single first down, while using every timeout. And if you happen to succeed at that (which is no easy task), then you have to go 75 yards down the field in 1:24 with no timeouts. Just because the game was lost due to a turnover on downs doesn't mean that time wasn't a factor - it absolutely was. They burned the 1st down play on a spike and were limited in the field they could use because of the lack of timeouts.

They have to get one defensive stop no matter what. By scoring sooner the first time around, you give your offense a much better chance the next time.

 

[JMR]

By using 4 minutes of clock, you forced yourself into a scenario where you HAVE to prevent LA from getting a single first down, while using every timeout. And if you happen to succeed at that (which is no easy task), then you have to go 75 yards down the field in 1:24 with no timeouts. Just because the game was lost due to a turnover on downs doesn't mean that time wasn't a factor - it absolutely was. They burned the 1st down play on a spike and were limited in the field they could use because of the lack of timeouts.

They have to get one defensive stop no matter what. By scoring sooner the first time around, you give your offense a much better chance the next time.

I didn't mean to imply that time wasn't a factor. Sure it was, just like it is on nearly every final come from behind attempt at the end of a game. However, I just don't agree that "clock management" is what lost us that game. I don't think it was the proximate cause is maybe a better way to say it. We had 3 plays from around the LAR 35 that went nowhere and resulted in a turnover on downs. When the offensive coaches deconstructed that loss, I think the first thing they tried to figure out is why we couldn't execute on that final series. After they solve that one, then maybe they go back and think about how they handled the previous possession. It didn't keep them from being in position to win the game, so I still have a hard time agreeing it was poor clock management.

 

[BSUSeahawk]

I didn't mean to imply that time wasn't a factor. Sure it was, just like it is on nearly every final come from behind attempt at the end of a game. However, I just don't agree that "clock management" is what lost us that game. I don't think it was the proximate cause is maybe a better way to say it. We had 3 plays from around the LAR 35 that went nowhere and resulted in a turnover on downs. When the offensive coaches deconstructed that loss, I think the first thing they tried to figure out is why we couldn't execute on that final series. After they solve that one, then maybe they go back and think about how they handled the previous possession. It didn't keep them from being in position to win the game, so I still have a hard time agreeing it was poor clock management.

I guess my point is that if you have the means to protect the clock, when you're down 2 scores near the end of the game, it's smart to do so. In that circumstance, a designed run should not have even been an option, let alone 3 of them. It gave the defense zero margin for error and impacted what the offense could do on the final drive. Maybe it doesn't change anything, but if Russ has 2+ minutes, instead of 1:25 with no timeouts, things may have turned out differently.

 

[JMR]

I guess my point is that if you have the means to protect the clock, when you're down 2 scores near the end of the game, it's smart to do so. In that circumstance, a designed run should not have even been an option, let alone 3 of them. It gave the defense zero margin for error and impacted what the offense could do on the final drive. Maybe it doesn't change anything, but if Russ has 2+ minutes, instead of 1:25 with no timeouts, things may have turned out differently.

But you also have to score and not just exclusively pass because that's what the Chiefs or Saints would do. RW and Penny were getting 9+ ypc each in that game. For as good as we were on the ground in the first matchup, we were better in this one. And sometimes when the defense thinks you'll do one thing, it's smart to do something different. We ran the offense that we thought gave us the best chance to get a score, IMO.

And when the Rams had the sandwich possession, the time remaining pretty much drove them to do what they did -- just hand it off 3 times and have us use our TOs in trade for getting the ball back. Did the D have zero margin for error? Maybe, but we also expected them to run it, and that's exactly what they did....so it was much easier to stop them. If they would have had 3:30 left instead of under 2 min, do you think they would have approached it the exact same way? I don't. You change one thing, and you change others too.

Now would things have turned out another way if we had 2+ minutes instead of 1:25? Sure, they could have. Maybe we would have ended up scoring with enough time to allow the Rams to kick a FG and win the game. Or maybe things turn out pretty much exactly as they did. We will never know....but the version of history that actually did happen had us with a decent shot at it until the final series fizzled with plenty of time left on the clock.

I didn't listen to any of the post game presser stuff, but I guess it would be interesting to hear the answers if anyone asked them about the clock management piece.

 

[Anointed One]

With that Rams pass rush, I don't think passing every down was an option to be honest... A sack would've been worse than a 6 yard M. Davis run... I don't have any problem with how the Hawks managed the clock down the stretch... Rams were putting a lot of pressure two drives prior to our last two of the game... I felt we would've taken some sacks plus our receiving core isn't playing that well right now or RW isn't finding them at the right time...

 

[BSUSeahawk]

But you also have to score and not just exclusively pass because that's what the Chiefs or Saints would do. RW and Penny were getting 9+ ypc each in that game. For as good as we were on the ground in the first matchup, we were better in this one. And sometimes when the defense thinks you'll do one thing, it's smart to do something different. We ran the offense that we thought gave us the best chance to get a score, IMO.

And when the Rams had the sandwich possession, the time remaining pretty much drove them to do what they did -- just hand it off 3 times and have us use our TOs in trade for getting the ball back. Did the D have zero margin for error? Maybe, but we also expected them to run it, and that's exactly what they did....so it was much easier to stop them. If they would have had 3:30 left instead of under 2 min, do you think they would have approached it the exact same way? I don't. You change one thing, and you change others too.

Now would things have turned out another way if we had 2+ minutes instead of 1:25? Sure, they could have. Maybe we would have ended up scoring with enough time to allow the Rams to kick a FG and win the game. Or maybe things turn out pretty much exactly as they did. We will never know....but the version of history that actually did happen had us with a decent shot at it until the final series fizzled with plenty of time left on the clock.

I didn't listen to any of the post game presser stuff, but I guess it would be interesting to hear the answers if anyone asked them about the clock management piece.

I didn't have any problem with Russell taking off and running, and to be honest, that offset the pass rush and kept the defense honest more than handing it off. Plus, Russell's 9 YPC was a lot more predictable than Penny's, considering Penny's was skewed by a couple long runs.

As far as the 2nd paragraph, I don't agree with the process of trying to put the other team in a position where they have to run the ball because there's so little time left. And to be honest, that would go against everything Carroll preaches in terms of competing and believing in your defense. For one, I think the Seahawks were very fortunate that they stopped them. Even with the predictability in play, I would venture to guess that the Rams convert a first down far more often than not in that scenario. Again, I acknowledge that it worked, but this is more of a process vs. results discussion than a "did it work". Secondly, even if there's 3-4 minutes left in the game, I don't think LA's gameplan changes a whole lot. They're probably more willing to pass since it would take more than one first down to end the game, but they're still going to be conservative and they're still trying to milk the clock and not make an unnecessary mistake.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this, because I feel that the time played a significant role in how that final drive ended. Clearly it did by losing the first down, but even beyond that, it clearly dictated the routes they were able to run and what they could do with the ball. It eliminated Russ's ability to run anywhere other than towards the sideline which really takes away from his late game magic. I think back to the Houston game (among others) during the SB year where his legs helped win that game even moreso than his arm. That's out of the picture with no timeouts and < 40 seconds.

 

[MKHawk]

My biggest problem with the last 2 offensive drives of the Rams game was that the 2nd to last drive of the Chargers game was basically clock management malpractice, and I didn't see much evidence that they learned anything from it and acted appreciably differently. The execution was better, but the general philosophy didn't change much, and like BSU I'm very skeptical they are maximizing their chances to win in those situations with that philosophy.