The Bengals won, but..... (1 Viewer)

[Yellow Line is Unoffcial]

Can someone tell me what the Bengals were doing on their last drive.

With less than 45 seconds to go in the game, the Bengals spiked the ball on first down to stop the clock, losing a down. They convert on 4th down and again "Clock it" on first down. The whole time they had 2 timeouts in their back pocket.

It had to be some of the poorest clock management I have ever seen.

 

[meanjoegreen]

All teams make mistakes sometimes, especially under pressure. In the end the Bengals won the game so can't criticize them that much.

 

[GoBirds]

Whatever it was, it worked.

 

[PahtyTom]

There is no reasoning behind doing that. That falls on the coaches first and Carson second.

 

[LadyBeBop]

Time management has always been a problem with the Bengals. In the past, several times, the Bengals have either let the clock run down too low and had to settle for a field goal (or worst, nothing) or they've allowed too much time on the clock, and the opponents come back to score.

 

[gregjcross]

All teams make mistakes sometimes, especially under pressure. In the end the Bengals won the game so can't criticize them that much.

sure you still can critique it. If they are not doing things that are obvious. It all depends how many seconds were on the clock and what the down distance and position on the field was. Sounds like they took a huge chance not burning one of the time outs; but by having them, they kept the middle of the field open and positively affected alignment of Steelers coverage.

 

[jafo]

Steelers were moving the ball, had there been enough time they could have kicked a field goal. Marvin was going for the win.

 

[Pipes]

I agree. It makes no sense to spike the ball when you have 2 timeouts left. Had Leonard not made a steeler defender miss on that 4th down catch we'd be ripping Lewis a new one right now.

 

[Rushmore]

Time management has always been a problem with the Bengals. In the past, several times, the Bengals have either let the clock run down too low and had to settle for a field goal (or worst, nothing) or they've allowed too much time on the clock, and the opponents come back to score.

Clock management and use of the challenge are both 2 of my biggest criticisms of Marvin Lewis. Third would be his giggling at press conferences.

 

[R Dizzle]

They were just playing head games with Pittsburgh.

 

[gonzobill5]

i missed the game, but going for two with 9 minutes left down 5 was a little curious as well.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

Can someone tell me what the Bengals were doing on their last drive.With less than 45 seconds to go in the game, the Bengals spiked the ball on first down to stop the clock, losing a down. They convert on 4th down and again "Clock it" on first down. The whole time they had 2 timeouts in their back pocket.It had to be some of the poorest clock management I have ever seen.

I was preaching about this to my friends yesterday. It was nuts.The 2 worst parts about it were:1) They actually did burn one of their time outs on the 4th down, I guess to think about the play. But they couldn't have done that on 1st down and saved one more shot into the end zone?2) They did it AGAIN once they converted! They had about 16-18 seconds left; they could have conceivably used all 4 of those downs on quick snaps and shots into the end zone.But then the Steelers return guy decided to return the favor.When he caught the ball, there was 14 seconds left. Instead of just calling for the fair catch (which was the heads-up play by the 49ers receiver in the SF/MN game), he tries to scramble, and then when he's going down, he laterals, and then that guy shimmies on the field for 3-4 seconds before getting tackled. Result? The Steelers take over the ball at the 30 yard line (the ball not having been advanced more than 2-3 yards) with 2 seconds left AND A TIME OUT!If the return guy had just called for the fair catch they would've had time for about 3 shots to move the ball about 35 yards (since they just needed a FG to tie, not a TD to win).It was really unbelievable.

It really wasn't all that horrible. They ran 10 plays in the last 80 seconds. Ten. You could argue that you want to burn one time out, but you like to save one. By saving your time outs, you allow yourself to attack all part of the field. You could also audible to a run, if it looks good- and they had run ball well. They were on the 4 yard line. With no timeouts, you cannot get tackled in bounds. You cannot take a sack. You must only attack the sidelines or the end zone. They scored with 14 seconds left against the defending champs. People need to lighten up a bit.

 

[Chase Stuart]

i missed the game, but going for two with 9 minutes left down 5 was a little curious as well.

Going for 2 down 5 is the right call there.

 

[derek245583]

I think for the low price of $100/ game I would be a clock management consultant for any team. And for the same price would also be a challenge expert. Sit up in the booth and watch the game on a TV with replay capabilites. Seriously coaches cannot be this poor at both clock management and challenges.

I think both NFL and College teams could afford that and I think I would single handidly be responsible for at least 1 win every couple of seasons...

 

[Stillers Jr.]

They were just playing head games with Pittsburgh.

This :X

 

[gonzobill5]

i missed the game, but going for two with 9 minutes left down 5 was a little curious as well.

Going for 2 down 5 is the right call there.

I've seen the "charts" but I think there is just too much time left in the game.

 

[The Jerk]

i missed the game, but going for two with 9 minutes left down 5 was a little curious as well.

Going for 2 down 5 is the right call there.

I've seen the "charts" but I think there is just too much time left in the game.

I don't need to see a chart to tell me what to do, and that wasn't what Chase said.With 9:00 left, it's realistic to expect one more possession, and that possession may come with very little time left on the clock. Really, the only way that cutting the margin to 4 makes sense is if you expect your team to score a TD, and with the extra point end up ahead by 3.Going for 2 gives you the possibility of tying with a field goal, and if the opposition scores a field goal of their own, you're still a TD & 2 pt conversion away from a tie.Anywhere before the 4th quarter, I can agree with taking the point, but nine minutes left means a good possibility of only one more possession -- and that is exactly what the Bengals got.Ironically, if the Bengals had converted on the two to cut the lead to 20-17, there's an excellent chance the Bengals settle for a field goal and overtime instead of winning the game outright at the end of regulation.

 

[gonzobill5]

i missed the game, but going for two with 9 minutes left down 5 was a little curious as well.

Going for 2 down 5 is the right call there.

I've seen the "charts" but I think there is just too much time left in the game.

I don't need to see a chart to tell me what to do, and that wasn't what Chase said.With 9:00 left, it's realistic to expect one more possession, and that possession may come with very little time left on the clock. Really, the only way that cutting the margin to 4 makes sense is if you expect your team to score a TD, and with the extra point end up ahead by 3.Going for 2 gives you the possibility of tying with a field goal, and if the opposition scores a field goal of their own, you're still a TD & 2 pt conversion away from a tie.Anywhere before the 4th quarter, I can agree with taking the point, but nine minutes left means a good possibility of only one more possession -- and that is exactly what the Bengals got.Ironically, if the Bengals had converted on the two to cut the lead to 20-17, there's an excellent chance the Bengals settle for a field goal and overtime instead of winning the game outright at the end of regulation.

You're right, I wasn't thinking a two point conversion to tie if the opponent kicks a FG.

 

[Chase Stuart]

i missed the game, but going for two with 9 minutes left down 5 was a little curious as well.

Going for 2 down 5 is the right call there.

I've seen the "charts" but I think there is just too much time left in the game.

I don't need to see a chart to tell me what to do, and that wasn't what Chase said.With 9:00 left, it's realistic to expect one more possession, and that possession may come with very little time left on the clock. Really, the only way that cutting the margin to 4 makes sense is if you expect your team to score a TD, and with the extra point end up ahead by 3.Going for 2 gives you the possibility of tying with a field goal, and if the opposition scores a field goal of their own, you're still a TD & 2 pt conversion away from a tie.Anywhere before the 4th quarter, I can agree with taking the point, but nine minutes left means a good possibility of only one more possession -- and that is exactly what the Bengals got.Ironically, if the Bengals had converted on the two to cut the lead to 20-17, there's an excellent chance the Bengals settle for a field goal and overtime instead of winning the game outright at the end of regulation.

I think at just about any point in the game, going for 2 down by 5 is the right call.It's a funny point about being down by 4 vs. being down by 3, though. Peyton Manning said something similar last week - it's a lot easier to score a TD when you're losing by four instead of three on those last minute drives. Being down by 4 forces teams to be more aggressive, which is often the optimal strategy.

 

[Yellow Line is Unoffcial]

Steelers were moving the ball, had there been enough time they could have kicked a field goal. Marvin was going for the win.

You totally missed the point. They stopped the clock either way.

 

[bengalbuck]

I completely agree with the original poster. It was poor coaching by Marvin and a poor decision by Carson. When you are that far down there, I think it makes sense to value the down more than you value the timeout.

I do think it inadvertently gave the Bengals an advantage though. A timeout would have really stopped the flow of the game and allowed the Steelers defense to regroup. For whatever reason, in those situations it always seems like a team is more likely to score if they just keep moving fast. The D's tendency seems to be to give too much cushion when there is a rush situation.

 

[Ghost Rider]

It's a funny point about being down by 4 vs. being down by 3, though. Peyton Manning said something similar last week - it's a lot easier to score a TD when you're losing by four instead of three on those last minute drives. Being down by 4 forces teams to be more aggressive, which is often the optimal strategy.

Plus, when teams get inside the 30, trailing by 3 late, they often get too conservative, as they don't want to botch being able to at least tie the game up with a FG.

 

[jafo]

Steelers were moving the ball, had there been enough time they could have kicked a field goal. Marvin was going for the win.

You totally missed the point. They stopped the clock either way.

I really think they were trying to catch the Steelers defense off guard here. Had they called a timeout they would have given them a chance to regroup and get a breather...I can't fault them since they won the game. On the surface yes it looks sloppy but hey they won.

 

[Rushmore]

I do think it inadvertently gave the Bengals an advantage though. A timeout would have really stopped the flow of the game and allowed the Steelers defense to regroup. For whatever reason, in those situations it always seems like a team is more likely to score if they just keep moving fast. The D's tendency seems to be to give too much cushion when there is a rush situation.

Good point.

 

[tangfoot]

I think at just about any point in the game, going for 2 down by 5 is the right call.

This type of thinking drives me crazy. It is NEVER correct to go for two unless you're in the fourth quarter. Take your gimme and move on, and let the chips fall as they may for the rest of the game. You will more often than not find that the extra point you could have had is the difference between having to score a TD at the end or having a FG try to tie/win/seal it.

 

[cvnpoka]

Steelers were moving the ball, had there been enough time they could have kicked a field goal. Marvin was going for the win.

You totally missed the point. They stopped the clock either way.

I really think they were trying to catch the Steelers defense off guard here. Had they called a timeout they would have given them a chance to regroup and get a breather...I can't fault them since they won the game. On the surface yes it looks sloppy but hey they won.

yesterday i got super hammered, like blackout drunk, and drove home. made it just fine. cant fault me bc i got home no problems.when i was in africa, i was bangin every skank hooker i could find. they are super cheap over there and sometimes they give it up for free to us white boys. best part, they dont make me us a condom. its all good, i dont have aids yet.

was playin poker tourney and some tight guy raised all in. dude hadnt been playing many hands, but i just had a feeling. so i called with 27o and cracked his aces. cant fault me, bc look whos stacking chips.

 

[cvnpoka]

I think at just about any point in the game, going for 2 down by 5 is the right call.

This type of thinking drives me crazy. It is NEVER correct to go for two unless you're in the fourth quarter. Take your gimme and move on, and let the chips fall as they may for the rest of the game. You will more often than not find that the extra point you could have had is the difference between having to score a TD at the end or having a FG try to tie/win/seal it.

your argument drives me crazy. platitudes and cliches are not very convincing. imo.

 

[Limp Ditka]

Steelers were moving the ball, had there been enough time they could have kicked a field goal. Marvin was going for the win.

You totally missed the point. They stopped the clock either way.

I really think they were trying to catch the Steelers defense off guard here. Had they called a timeout they would have given them a chance to regroup and get a breather...I can't fault them since they won the game. On the surface yes it looks sloppy but hey they won.

yesterday i got super hammered, like blackout drunk, and drove home. made it just fine. cant fault me bc i got home no problems.when i was in africa, i was bangin every skank hooker i could find. they are super cheap over there and sometimes they give it up for free to us white boys. best part, they dont make me us a condom. its all good, i dont have aids yet.

was playin poker tourney and some tight guy raised all in. dude hadnt been playing many hands, but i just had a feeling. so i called with 27o and cracked his aces. cant fault me, bc look whos stacking chips.

Considering it's the same as your IQ, you're always calling with 27 no matter what the cards are.

 

[mario soto]

I completely agree with the original poster. It was poor coaching by Marvin and a poor decision by Carson. When you are that far down there, I think it makes sense to value the down more than you value the timeout.I do think it inadvertently gave the Bengals an advantage though. A timeout would have really stopped the flow of the game and allowed the Steelers defense to regroup. For whatever reason, in those situations it always seems like a team is more likely to score if they just keep moving fast. The D's tendency seems to be to give too much cushion when there is a rush situation.

Marvin doesn't know how to manage the clock. They really need to pay an assistant to do that for him. But it took years for Mike Brown to buy big enough towels in the locker room to cover lineman's butts... another assistant will be over the top.

 

[jafo]

Steelers were moving the ball, had there been enough time they could have kicked a field goal. Marvin was going for the win.

You totally missed the point. They stopped the clock either way.

I really think they were trying to catch the Steelers defense off guard here. Had they called a timeout they would have given them a chance to regroup and get a breather...I can't fault them since they won the game. On the surface yes it looks sloppy but hey they won.

yesterday i got super hammered, like blackout drunk, and drove home. made it just fine. cant fault me bc i got home no problems.when i was in africa, i was bangin every skank hooker i could find. they are super cheap over there and sometimes they give it up for free to us white boys. best part, they dont make me us a condom. its all good, i dont have aids yet.

was playin poker tourney and some tight guy raised all in. dude hadnt been playing many hands, but i just had a feeling. so i called with 27o and cracked his aces. cant fault me, bc look whos stacking chips.

Hey buddy I can't fault you because you're the jackass.