What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Timeout before field goal (2 Viewers)

Elevencents said:
This. Gives you a chance to check the wind. I think it benefits the kicker. 
Click to expand...
"Icing" the kicker is done to give the kicker extra time to contemplate the kick, so it probably works on nervous kickers.  Coaches have probability statistics on everything, so obviously there is merit in this strategy.  But if I were the kicker and the ball gets hiked, I am going through with my "practice" kick.  I've seen many instances where the ball gets hiked, the timeout is called, and the kicker just stands there because he hears a whistle.  Take the free practice.

 
I'm not a fan of going through with a practice kick when you know the TO was called.  There have been kickers who try to adjust the real kick based on how the practice kick went and end up over-compensating and missing.  

 
As a hockey goalie, shootouts aren't much different from this in that stopping consecutive "penalty shots" is part of the job just as making kicks is the kicker's job. As far as having to make two in a row goes, you expect to make all of them in a row. There's gamesmanship and psychology here (real or perceived) but to me it's just another independent event. Can a professional golfer drive one down the middle of the fairway on the 18th tee at Augusta or not? To what extent does it matter if he did it on the previous 6 holes or the previous 3 days?

 
I don't see why the timeout rules for a kick should be any different than for any other play. If they want to make a rule that says you can't call timeout once there are 5 seconds left on the play clock on ANY play, so be it.

If kicking teams were that concerned about icing a kicker and having the defense call timeout, they don't have to run the play clock down to one or two seconds. If they simply lined up and snapped the ball fairly quickly, I would guess that most of the time they would get the kick off without the defensive team having time to call a timeout.

 
I hate it. No idea on it's effectiveness... I just hate using the officials to disrupt the game. The whole coach standing there with an incomplete "T" in front of the refs face... wait for it... wait for it... OK NOW!

No problem with "icing" the kicker, but would like it to limit it to giving him more time to think about it. Ask the opposing team if they want to take a TO. If they decline, then play on.

 
amnesiac said:
it’s one of the dumbest things in all of sports. 

i’d be interested to see the actual data on it, i doubt it’s an effective strategy.  
Click to expand...
I believe a lot of kickers say it doesn't bother them and some actually like the fact that they can get a practice kick in before the one that counts.  They don't have to kick the first one at all, it's a freebie.  Who wouldn't like a practice attempt before something like that?

 
amnesiac said:
it’s one of the dumbest things in all of sports. 

i’d be interested to see the actual data on it, i doubt it’s an effective strategy.  
Click to expand...
Logic says coaches have access to the data, and since it is a tactic used by nearly every team, it HAS to have merit.  If the data showed it to be ineffective, it wouldn't be a weekly occurrence.  FWIW, I think it's stupid how they go about it, with the coach standing next to a ref.  If the team wants to call a TO, why can't they just tell the ref to call a TO at a given amount of seconds left on the play clock?

 
TheWinz said:
Logic says coaches have access to the data, and since it is a tactic used by nearly every team, it HAS to have merit.  If the data showed it to be ineffective, it wouldn't be a weekly occurrence.  FWIW, I think it's stupid how they go about it, with the coach standing next to a ref.  If the team wants to call a TO, why can't they just tell the ref to call a TO at a given amount of seconds left on the play clock?
Click to expand...
Didn't I just see you posting in this thread?  :lmao:

The fact that a majority of coaches do something tells you very little. Before this year, coaches had literally never gone for two after scoring to make it an 8-point game, despite the data showing it was unmistakably the right move. Coaches do a lot of dumb s##t, and the majority of them have demonstrated they're bad at using data (to be fair, Pederson is one of the smarter ones).

From what I remember, the numbers say icing is a net benefit to the kicker, but the effect is small. I will say that as a viewer, I find it annoying irrespective of its outcome on the game.

 
zftcg said:
From what I remember, the numbers say icing is a net benefit to the kicker, but the effect is small. I will say that as a viewer, I find it annoying irrespective of its outcome on the game.
Click to expand...
It may be a net benefit to kickers overall, but Parkey was not a very confident kicker to begin with.  Pederson said after the game he was definitely icing him no matter what.  Eagles' players said they could tell after the TO was called that Parkey was missing the kick.

 
Amused to Death said:
It may be a net benefit to kickers overall, but Parkey was not a very confident kicker to begin with.  Pederson said after the game he was definitely icing him no matter what.  Eagles' players said they could tell after the TO was called that Parkey was missing the kick.
Click to expand...
They knew they were going to get a fingertip on the ball, have it doink off two crossbars, and come down on the wrong side? Wow, those Eagles players were amazingly prescient!

Anyway, I'd be curious to know if the data show any difference in the effect of icing on kickers based on factors such as their accuracy, experience, etc. (ie, you should ice Parkey but not Justin Tucker or Vinatieri).

 
zftcg said:
They knew they were going to get a fingertip on the ball, have it doink off two crossbars, and come down on the wrong side? Wow, those Eagles players were amazingly prescient!

Anyway, I'd be curious to know if the data show any difference in the effect of icing on kickers based on factors such as their accuracy, experience, etc. (ie, you should ice Parkey but not Justin Tucker or Vinatieri).
Click to expand...
Pederson knew Parkey's recent history with uprights and thought it was a good call.  He said as much in his post-game presser. IDK for sure, but I'd guess the Eagles had a pretty good read on Parkey. He wasn't the most-confident of kickers entering that game.

 
I believe they used to let you call 2 or 3 in a row. Now i think you can only do it once.

some kickers say they like getting a free practice kick.

 
Brunell4MVP said:
I agree with OP.  No skin in this particular game.  Could care less.

I think the solution is the timeout has to be called before the kicker lines up the 1st kick.  Maybe the kicker has to give a sign for that to happen since they all have their own routines.  But there needs to be some way.

Not only because the icing comes late at times, but because the kicker often sneaks in a practice try - like in this game.
Click to expand...
either team can call timeout up until the ball is snapped....maybe they have 12 men on the field, etc....

personally...I am calling the timeout every time if I am a coach.....I'm gonna roll the dice on the mental side of things....I do think there is something to be said for making them think a little longer about it at that particular moment.....you can't really practice what that moment is actually like...

 
TheWinz said:
Logic says coaches have access to the data, and since it is a tactic used by nearly every team, it HAS to have merit.  If the data showed it to be ineffective, it wouldn't be a weekly occurrence.  FWIW, I think it's stupid how they go about it, with the coach standing next to a ref.  If the team wants to call a TO, why can't they just tell the ref to call a TO at a given amount of seconds left on the play clock?
Click to expand...
what happens if I say give me a timeout with 5 seconds left on the play clock but they snap it at 6.....

 
For the record, I Googled the subject, and the results were all over the map. Bill Barnwell at Grantland said in 2011 that it didn't work. So did Freakanomics (both were citing the book Scorecasting). ESPN said it improved kickers' chances. A separate ESPN Stats and Info piece suggested it did work. Mixpanel ran a bunch of numbers in 2016 and concluded that it actually had more of an effect in regular action compared to late-game situations, but also that it was more effective on longer FG attempts. I look at all that data and have no idea what to make of it.

 
zftcg said:
For the record, I Googled the subject, and the results were all over the map. Bill Barnwell at Grantland said in 2011 that it didn't work. So did Freakanomics (both were citing the book Scorecasting). ESPN said it improved kickers' chances. A separate ESPN Stats and Info piece suggested it did work. Mixpanel ran a bunch of numbers in 2016 and concluded that it actually had more of an effect in regular action compared to late-game situations, but also that it was more effective on longer FG attempts. I look at all that data and have no idea what to make of it.
Click to expand...
It's just noise. 

 
CalBear said:
It's just noise. 
Click to expand...
Right. If a coach wants to do it, then he should. Intuitively, it does seem to make more sense to do it to shaky kickers like Parkey, and maybe Pederson did have data indicating it was the right call (if Vance Joseph had done it, I wouldn't have given them the benefit of the doubt).

That said, I do think this point in a Quora post is important as well. It may be smart to ice or it may not be, but you should be aware that confirmation bias is going to push you in the direction of doing it.

Icing is perfectly designed to prey on human confirmation bias. When a coach doesn't ice, the kicker usually makes the kick anyway (at least, at the NFL level). If he does ice and the kicker misses, people see a cause-and-effect relationship that probably doesn't exist. But no one ever says "that kicker missed because he didn't get iced." The evidence against icing only turns up when you intelligently study a large sample of data. And if coaches don't have a nuanced understanding of what kinds of decisions can be accurately analyzed with statistics, they're likely to stick with their gut, experience, and mainstream opinion. 
Click to expand...

 
Stinkin Ref said:
either team can call timeout up until the ball is snapped....maybe they have 12 men on the field, etc....

personally...I am calling the timeout every time if I am a coach.....I'm gonna roll the dice on the mental side of things....I do think there is something to be said for making them think a little longer about it at that particular moment.....you can't really practice what that moment is actually like...
Click to expand...
I would mix it up.  If you always do one thing all the time then the other kicker probably knows you are going to call time out and isn't expecting to have to kick the first time.  So switch it up and act like you are going to call time out and then don't. 

I don't think it makes much difference but if you mix things up then maybe you can catch a guy off guard one way or the other.  I haven't really seen a coach go up to the official acting like he is going to call time out but then never do it.  The reverse icing.  That's what I would do. 

 
Gally said:
I would mix it up.  If you always do one thing all the time then the other kicker probably knows you are going to call time out and isn't expecting to have to kick the first time.  So switch it up and act like you are going to call time out and then don't. 

I don't think it makes much difference but if you mix things up then maybe you can catch a guy off guard one way or the other.  I haven't really seen a coach go up to the official acting like he is going to call time out but then never do it.  The reverse icing.  That's what I would do. 
Click to expand...
Ahhhh, the old reverse icing, I like it.  I would also love to see a coach pull out his challenge flag and run up and down the sidelines the whole game, threatening to throw it out on every play, even obvious incomplete passes.

 
Gally said:
I would mix it up.  If you always do one thing all the time then the other kicker probably knows you are going to call time out and isn't expecting to have to kick the first time.  So switch it up and act like you are going to call time out and then don't. 

I don't think it makes much difference but if you mix things up then maybe you can catch a guy off guard one way or the other.  I haven't really seen a coach go up to the official acting like he is going to call time out but then never do it.  The reverse icing.  That's what I would do. 
Click to expand...
I once heard that the most effective tactic used by baseball catchers to throw off hitters is telling them what pitch is coming. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not, but either way you get in their heads.

That said, my guess is most kickers aren't stealing glances at the sidelines to see what the opposing coach is doing. They focus on their routine and shut out the world.

 
I understand calling the timeout to "ice" the kicker before the ball is snapped.  There's a reason you see kickers warming up on the sideline before they come in to kick.  Practicing mechanics, visualizing, muscle memory, focusing on the kick, etc.  Once they're out on the field they don't have time to run back and take another practice swing and have another minute or so to stand around and think about it.  

What I don't understand is calling the TO so close to the snap that the kicker gets a practice try.  I would think when the practice of calling the TO just before the snap occurred started that kickers said to snap it anyway and give me a warm up / practice kick to test the wind.  I can't imagine a kicker would decide to not take the meaningless kick and rather wait around for another couple minutes before taking the real kick.  They're kickers, they kick, that's all they do in practice, etc... what's the difference between kicking it once or twice?  (Except, of course, for Janikowski this weekend.)  After the kickers figured out how to get a practice try out of it, I'm surprised coaches then didn't start calling it earlier to prevent the practice try. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Steeler said:
I think it's BS to call a timeout right before a field goal attempt .  Bears make a field goal but philly called a TO.  Then Bears missed the second attempt and Philly wins. Nothing against the Eagles or for the Bears I just dislike this strategy. Essentially forcing the team to make two field goals in a row. Not sure what can be done to correct the problem. 

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Two things.....

1st, Cody?

And 2nd, Robbie Gould woulda split those uprights both times with his eyes closed.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lehigh98 said:
I understand calling the timeout to "ice" the kicker before the ball is snapped.  There's a reason you see kickers warming up on the sideline before they come in to kick.  Practicing mechanics, visualizing, muscle memory, focusing on the kick, etc.  Once they're out on the field they don't have time to run back and take another practice swing and have another minute or so to stand around and think about it.  

What I don't understand is calling the TO so close to the snap that the kicker gets a practice try.  I would think when the practice of calling the TO just before the snap occurred started that kickers said to snap it anyway and give me a warm up / practice kick to test the wind.  I can't imagine a kicker would decide to not take the meaningless kick and rather wait around for another couple minutes before taking the real kick.  They're kickers, they kick, that's all they do in practice, etc... what's the difference between kicking it once or twice?  (Except, of course, for Janikowski this weekend.)  After the kickers figured out how to get a practice try out of it, I'm surprised coaches then didn't start calling it earlier to prevent the practice try. 
Click to expand...
Because if they miss that’s what’s in their head.

Also, I don’t think they call time out just to ice the kicker. They also get a last live look at any weakness in the blocking scheme and try some last minute strategery to attempt the block. 

 
Amused to Death said:
It may be a net benefit to kickers overall, but Parkey was not a very confident kicker to begin with.  Pederson said after the game he was definitely icing him no matter what.  Eagles' players said they could tell after the TO was called that Parkey was missing the kick.
Click to expand...
Watching the game, I felt the same.. 

Moment seemed too big for him and you know the season's tribulations had to be on his mind.

 
I’m not a fan of it because the ideal strategy and intention is to call the timeout  as close as possible to the moment just before the ball is snapped. The big uglies on the line are set, the kicker has already performed his ritualistic cadence to get in position, there’s a pause.....TIMEOUT!! 

In my opinion it’s a stain on the integrity of the game and a horrific way to lose but It’s perfectly legal and I can’t nor do I hold it against coaches for doing it. 

I also don’t have a solution. I would suggest not allowing timeouts under say, 5 or 10 seconds but you will run into a plethora of problems. 

 
I think the timeout should have to be called as soon as they come to the line.  We shouldn't have to watch 2 kicks.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
In this case he didn't even have to kick the first one. The whistle came in plenty of time, he kicked it anyway just for practice. 
Click to expand...
I've always thought situations like this were actually beneficial for the kicker. Who wouldn't want a no pressure practice kick?

 
Dizzy said:
I hate it. No idea on it's effectiveness... I just hate using the officials to disrupt the game. The whole coach standing there with an incomplete "T" in front of the refs face... wait for it... wait for it... OK NOW!

No problem with "icing" the kicker, but would like it to limit it to giving him more time to think about it. Ask the opposing team if they want to take a TO. If they decline, then play on.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%

SaintsInDome2006 said:
This is totally out of context at this point. The kick was blocked. Did Pederson 'freeze' the Bears' o-line?
Click to expand...
I believe most everyone in the thread is discussing this as a whole, not just the Bears game

 
Cowboysfan8 said:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
This is totally out of context at this point. The kick was blocked. Did Pederson 'freeze' the Bears' o-line?
Click to expand...
I believe most everyone in the thread is discussing this as a whole, not just the Bears game
Click to expand...
I think people might underestimate what goes on during those timeouts also. I realize kicking formations are set and standard but defensive players can time their rush based on the snap count. Teams do this on defensive during ordinary offensive snaps so I don't see why they would not do it for special teams snaps, and in fact I know they do because the Broncos did it to the Saints a couple years back. It just so happens that this kick was blocked, and yeah the defense probably talked timing and alignment during the TO.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I think people might underestimate what goes on during those timeouts also. I realize kicking formations are set and standard but defensive players can time their rush based on the snap count. Teams do this on defensive during ordinary offensive snaps so I don't see why they would not do it for special teams snaps, and in fact I know they do because the Broncos did it to the Saints a couple years back. It just so happens that this kick was blocked, and yeah the defense probably talked timing and alignment during the TO.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong, but I thought the OP was talking about the coaches standing by the official trying to time his timeout call a split second before the ball is snapped 

Those are the ones that I think are dumb.

If a coach wants to call a timeout to talk timing and alignment idk why he would want to stand next to the official with his hands close to one another trying to time it a split second before the snap 

 
Cowboysfan8 said:
I could be wrong, but I thought the OP was talking about the coaches standing by the official trying to time his timeout call a split second before the ball is snapped 

Those are the ones that I think are dumb.

If a coach wants to call a timeout to talk timing and alignment idk why he would want to stand next to the official with his hands close to one another trying to time it a split second before the snap 
Click to expand...
I understand that, but I think there's more going on. If a HC wants to screw with the kicker and also give his defense more time to look over their alignment and coordinate more, let them, it only helps. There's an extra TO left over, use it. Let these guys play football, there's enough interference from the NFL already.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
I understand that, but I think there's more going on. If a HC wants to screw with the kicker and also give his defense more time to look over their alignment and coordinate more, let them, it only helps. There's an extra TO left over, use it. Let these guys play football, there's enough interference from the NFL already.
Click to expand...
Icing the kicker isn't playing football. It's bush league.

 
Having to watch him try and kick 2 game winning FGs was fun for me...not a fan of either team and didn’t really care who won, was somewhat leaning bears because I do think it’s fun watching that D. As a fan of football it was awesome to be on the edge of my seat twice to see if he could make both kicks. Sorry you guys had to wait an extra 3 minutes till the game was over.

Also for everyone saying taking a TO to ice the kicker doesn’t work. Well obviously it did because the eagles won because of it. Sure it was blocked so maybe it didn’t get to parkeys head as much as people thought but without the TO being called then parkey makes the kick and bears move on.

 
Sometimes I think people like to complain for the sake of complaining.  It's strategy and it worked for the Eagles this time.  Next time maybe it backfires.  Each team has 3 and only 3 TOs per half; who cares when they choose to use them.  The game didn't get any longer.

 
Amused to Death said:
Sometimes I think people like to complain for the sake of complaining.  It's strategy and it worked for the Eagles this time.  Next time maybe it backfires.  Each team has 3 and only 3 TOs per half; who cares when they choose to use them.  The game didn't get any longer.
Click to expand...
Just what NFL games need, more dead time.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Joe Bryant
Rams kicking "meaningless" FG to end game - And cover spread
Replies
47
Views
888
Da Guru
Da Guru
eighsse2
General Dynasty Strategy: "Evergreen"
Replies
9
Views
941
Tonycarpenter
Tonycarpenter
J
  • Question
Approximate Value Before 1960
Replies
21
Views
1K
Justin McCarthy
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top