End of Half Clock Management

[Ibeeballin]

And as the coach would you rather them have 1:14 with three timeouts or one timeout?

With UCF pace and ability to move the chains it really doesn’t matter

 

[danny daniel]

Again, in these scenarios that are being created, everyone seems to be forgetting that UCF had 3TOs. There was always going to be too much time on the clock whether we spiked it or not.

There is a big difference between "lots of time" on the clock with 3 TOs and "lots of time" after been forced to use up the TOs.

 

[bke1984]

With UCF pace and ability to move the chains it really doesn’t matter

Come on man, of course it matters some. Let’s just agree it was a bad call and move on. You already said you didn’t like it. I just hope next time they screw up clock management it doesn’t cost us a game.

 

[Ibeeballin]

There is a big difference between "lots of time" on the clock with 3 TOs and "lots of time" after been forced to use up the TOs.

In relation to UCF, this is 2-3 drives worth of time with no timeouts

 

[Backstreetbuzz]

The bottom line is we have Sims and Gibbs playing for GT and, if Collins we’re not our coach, we would not. This is about 1000 times more important than one bad decision in the first half of a game, that had zero bearing on the outcome. GT is blessed with a lot of fans who had 1600 on their SAT, but would score 400 on a common sense test.

 

[JacketOff]

McElroy said it best when UCF had the ball with about 4:00 left in the half. He said, “You might as well put 20:00 on the clock with the way this UCF offense moves the ball.” Giving UCF the ball with 1:20 left in the half and 3 timeouts is like giving somebody else the ball with 5:00 left and 3 timeouts. There’s so much time on the clock that it becomes irrelevant to their offense. That’s why spiking the ball with 1:20 left in the half makes no sense.

If your arguing that it was still the right call because it allowed the offense a chance to set up, then why not call the last timeout and save the down? Everybody knew in goal-to-goal situation that a field goal was never going to be considered given our current kicking game. So instead of having 4 downs to score, you give yourself 3. There shouldn’t be an offense in America that would struggle to get off 4 plays with 1:20 left, I don’t care if a 4th grader is playing QB. A 14 point game at the half is manageable. A 21 point game is not. The fact that UCF was getting the ball to start the 2nd half makes that point even heavier.

In hindsight, the call had zero impact on the outcome of the game, but it could’ve had a huge impact. At that point in the game UCF was scoring and moving the ball at will. Had they scored again to close the half, and then once more to start the second half, that makes it a 28 point deficit, then we have no chance of ever getting back into that game.

Im a big CGC supporter. I think he’s the man that GT needs at the helm right now. But of the 3 decisions that could’ve been made in that situation 1) run a first down play with the clock running 2) call a timeout 3) spike the ball, he chose the worst one, and I really don’t think there should be any defense of that specific decision.

 

[WreckinGT]

The bottom line is we have Sims and Gibbs playing for GT and, if Collins we’re not our coach, we would not. This is about 1000 times more important than one bad decision in the first half of a game, that had zero bearing on the outcome. GT is blessed with a lot of fans who had 1600 on their SAT, but would score 400 on a common sense test.

Should we get rid of all threads that aren’t just praising Collins for recruiting Sims and Gibbs? Seems on a football message board, discussing in game coaching decisions should not be too controversial.

 

[bke1984]

The bottom line is we have Sims and Gibbs playing for GT and, if Collins we’re not our coach, we would not. This is about 1000 times more important than one bad decision in the first half of a game, that had zero bearing on the outcome. GT is blessed with a lot of fans who had 1600 on their SAT, but would score 400 on a common sense test.

Did anyone say to fire Collins? I said he needs to realize that he doesn’t know how to manage the clock in critical situations and take measures to improve. It’s happened several times in just 14 games, so he’s already establishing a pattern. The talent part is great...but to quote A Bronx Tale, the saddest thing in life is wasted talent. It’s going to be a shame the next time we outplay someone and lose the game because our coach doesn’t understand when to call timeouts, spike the ball, or call passes instead of runs to preserve clock. And based on what I’ve seen so far it will probably happen this year.

 

[PantherWreck]

Those concerned about the spike recognize that in-game clock management would have been in our top 5 areas of focus for the coaching staff during this past off season. I’ve seen improvements in other areas, but this is an example of an area where concerns remain.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Should we get rid of all threads that aren’t just praising Collins for recruiting Sims and Gibbs? Seems on a football message board, discussing in game coaching decisions should not be too controversial.

The cancel culture’s goal is to eradicate all thoughts contrary to their own. Stare at a bad decision, then rationalize every way why it wasn’t or didn’t matter. Then convince everyone that type of judgment, decision making ability will never ever matter. We used to call it fascism and it was largely political. Now it has migrated to every corner of our lives including GT football.

C’mon folks, even armchair QBs know what the right move was. My wife knew it was dumb. It was a mistake. No, it wasn’t THE CALL that changed the outcome of the game. Does not matter, we’ve already had questionable moves cost us games. Admit it and move along. Learn from your mistakes. Anything short of that’s just makes you look foolish.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

The bottom line is we have Sims and Gibbs playing for GT and, if Collins we’re not our coach, we would not. This is about 1000 times more important than one bad decision in the first half of a game, that had zero bearing on the outcome. GT is blessed with a lot of fans who had 1600 on their SAT, but would score 400 on a common sense test.

Hopefully coach learns and gets better.

 

[lv20gt]

I swear people just don't want to even try to consider that there was a reason to do so.

So lets look at the "too much time to give UCF" argument. For people who act like this was such an obvious bad call, why then did UCF, with 1:14 and two TOs did UCF not even try to go push it? They took one quick attempt to the sideline, then ran the ball, and let 20 seconds go off the clock. Because being a good up tempo team doesn't mean the two minute offense is that much easier. A two minute offense is much more than just tempo. It's limited playcalling to either get out of bounds or get a first down and if not then an incomplete pass to stop the clock. With the exception of a first down the other two don't lend themselves to the tempo game style, nor does calling a TO to stop the clock. Tempo teams still want to utilize the running game and the short over the middle game because the ball is quicker to spot and so quicker to snap. And with a 14 point lead, the reward for getting a TD likely isn't worth the risk of giving up a TO and giving momentum back, especially if you get the ball to start the second half. All of those are reasons why they made at best a half hearted attempt to score, and why it's not nearly the threat people think.

If your arguing that it was still the right call because it allowed the offense a chance to set up, then why not call the last timeout and save the down? Everybody knew in goal-to-goal situation that a field goal was never going to be considered given our current kicking game. So instead of having 4 downs to score, you give yourself 3.

Because a timeout has more use than just stopping the clock, which seems like many fans think is it's only purpose. For instance, if we call a play, recognize that the opposing team is in a formation that is good against it, and our TR freshman doesn't look like he's going to change it, it's nice to have a TO in that situation. There are a number of things that could pop up that you'd want a TO to deal with. That is especially true being without your power running RB and two TEs that would normally be a go to in goal to go situations.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I swear people just don't want to even try to consider that there was a reason to do so.

So lets look at the "too much time to give UCF" argument. For people who act like this was such an obvious bad call, why then did UCF, with 1:14 and two TOs did UCF not even try to go push it? They took one quick attempt to the sideline, then ran the ball, and let 20 seconds go off the clock. Because being a good up tempo team doesn't mean the two minute offense is that much easier. A two minute offense is much more than just tempo. It's limited playcalling to either get out of bounds or get a first down and if not then an incomplete pass to stop the clock. With the exception of a first down the other two don't lend themselves to the tempo game style, nor does calling a TO to stop the clock. Tempo teams still want to utilize the running game and the short over the middle game because the ball is quicker to spot and so quicker to snap. And with a 14 point lead, the reward for getting a TD likely isn't worth the risk of giving up a TO and giving momentum back, especially if you get the ball to start the second half. All of those are reasons why they made at best a half hearted attempt to score, and why it's not nearly the threat people think.

There is no way anybody could know if UCF intended to try and score or not, or if our defensive alignment would work against their first few plays or not. This is an impossible line of thinking. No matter who you play, when time is running down and you have plenty of it, you use as much as you can. Ideally, 3rd Down scores or doesnt with about 20 seconds on the clock so in a worse case scenario you still have time to attempt a FG. Remember, UCF went for it on 4th down inside their own 30 a bit earlier - they had already shown they were going to be aggressive.

 

[CuseJacket]

If the best argument is that the coaches were concerned about how a freshman QB would handle decisions with 1.5 minutes on the clock in goal to go with a timeout in the pocket, and that wasting a down was the right decision, then there is an element of acknowledging that we were not fully prepared for the situation.

I'm not convinced that the coaches lacked trust in our QB in a situation, but they demonstrated trust in him in every other situation as we continued to rack up turnovers.

It was a bad decision, imo.

 

[GT_EE78]

He doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He had three plays and a time out. He could have consumed the entire play clock twice and run two plays with the time he had, and very easily could have run three plays...especially since any incomplete pass stops the clock. If you survey all FBS and NFL coaches and see what they’d do in that situation the overwhelming response will be to let the clock run. It was a dumb mistake and he’s either a) too dumb to realize it, or b) trying to cover for his OC or QB for making the mistake as to not throw them under the bus. When it doesn’t matter like on Saturday we can just let it go. But when it costs you the game (like the clock management against Citadel) then you look like a fool.

He needs to learn how to admit mistakes and take the blame himself or he will eventually create real problems with fans and media.

I think this is a concern that needs to be monitored.This one was no big deal since it didn't cost us any points, whereas against FCS Citidel CGC's timeout may have cost us the game and was 100% due to CGC not knowing the rules for a clock restart - which he never admitted. Of greater concern was that during the postgame presser CGC agreed with media who stated that refs had made a wrong PA announcement about that clock restart. Subsequent review of game video proved that refs had called it correctly and that the PA announcement was the play before the one in question. CGC never apologized for or acknowledged the false accusation toward the ref.Hence,the concern.

 

[Silk3]

it was very dumb decision to spike the ball, no way around it.

 

[lv20gt]

There is no way anybody could know if UCF intended to try and score or not, or if our defensive alignment would work against their first few plays or not. This is an impossible line of thinking. No matter who you play, when time is running down and you have plenty of it, you use as much as you can. Ideally, 3rd Down scores or doesnt with about 20 seconds on the clock so in a worse case scenario you still have time to attempt a FG. Remember, UCF went for it on 4th down inside their own 30 a bit earlier - they had already shown they were going to be aggressive.

There is no way to "know" about the future at all. That applies to the worry about leaving too much time as well. That is always a risk vs reward thing, and so you have to consider whether it would be good for them to try and push the issue. And there are reasons that team that was aggressive early, and continued to quick snap when they could be in victory formation chose not to push the issue and that is a factor in weighting how much of a threat "leaving them time" is. Also, you're ideally implied that a FG was an option. It wasn't. If we kick a FG there, regardless of making it, we might have well of punted it. But also what if we get to something like 3rd and 12 with 20 seconds left, run a play, they get called for a facemask and we get a fresh set of downs? Burning time could bite us in that situation, and it doesn't take far fetched events to make it so.

But the reality is that the time isn't what should being discussed because in that game situation you don't worry about that. The discussion should be whether the down was worth it to give up.

If the best argument is that the coaches were concerned about how a freshman QB would handle decisions with 1.5 minutes on the clock in goal to go with a timeout in the pocket, and that wasting a down was the right decision, then there is an element of acknowledging that we were not fully prepared for the situation.

We have a true freshman QB who didn't have the benefit of spring practice and we've been practicing in a different situation than normal. We're also in year 2 of a drastic scheme change so the muscle memory isn't there for the experienced players like it would normally be. We were also missing our starting RB who would be our normal goal to go back as well as two tight ends who would probably be in the goal to go lineups we would normally want to go. So yeah, did you expect us to be fully prepared for every situation that could possible come up? That's why there is logic to spiking the ball. It makes it so there is one less factor to have to worry about, and lets us have a better shot at making the right call, reading the play right, and executing it better. With a QB who already has shown he has some issues with those things in the redzone it's not a benefit that should just be half heartedly dismissed.

It was a bad decision, imo.

You were also calling for us to call a timeout when they had the ball so....

 

[MidtownJacket]

it was very dumb decision to spike the ball, no way around it.

Except for the many reasons discussed above.

This call was no doubt controversial but by definition that means it was not a clear cut choice (right or wrong). This coaching staff uses data to drive a lot of in game decisions. When to go for deep balls, where 4 down territory begins, blitz timing and other decisions. CGC and his coordinators reference that most of the interviews they give about game day choices.

I frankly did not like the spike, but if he is good with the decision than fine by me. We judge a coach on the body of their work. It’s fine to nitpick items and choices they’ve made, but it’s pretty short sighted and foolish to wax poetic about our “superior understanding of the team’s preparedness level, game day coaching ability or perspective on the needs of our players when it comes to what they’re comfortable doing” beyond the guys who get payed millions of dollars and focus their entire professional lives around knowing those specific things.

I get it, this is a message board and people like to discuss things. What I don’t get is people coming on and presenting themselves as rational while advancing completely irrational perspectives as unassailable fact.

 

[jojatk]

And as the coach would you rather them have 1:14 with three timeouts or one timeout?

I think as the coach you'd rather make sure your team is in the right mindset and calm so they can score.

Under normal circumstances I would actually agree with a significant amount of what you're saying other than your degrading terminology towards our coaches. But there are a bunch of factors I think outweighed the ones you're bringing up which I think are all legitimate:

1) True freshman QB playing only second game against a top 15 team without either of the TEs available with whom he has worked (this was apparently important since we had planned to use the 12 personnel group in some of those situations and having only Ward and Coco available made that very difficult - true frosh and converted walk-on who, BTW, is playing really well)
2) We've struggled so far this year in the red zone and just generally finishing drives
3) UCF Is a special case because 1:14 for them with 1 TO is the same as 1:14 with 3 TOs for other teams. Frankly they don't even need a TO with 1:14 left.

I didn't love the spike when it happened and I still didn't love it when we ended up scoring. And had this been a more experienced team led by a more experienced QB I'd have been much more upset about it. But I think in this case we need to focus more on making sure we score when we have those opportunities. I'm not defending the decision as a great decision. I just don't think it's as egregiously bad or nearly as cut and dried as many of you do.

 

[jojatk]

There is a big difference between "lots of time" on the clock with 3 TOs and "lots of time" after been forced to use up the TOs.

For almost every other team in college football this is true. For UCF having 1:14 with no TOs is just as good as having 3 TOs. I don't think they even would have needed 1 TO with that much time. Change that to 0:30 on the clock and now the TOs make a difference. But UCF is a different beast than almost any other team with how fast they run plays.