NYDN: The Cowboys lost the game to the Packers when Dallas decided to spike the ball

[bbgun]

Football coaches are smart people who sometimes do dumb things. And with 49 seconds left in Sunday's divisional playoff game, Jason Garrett's football team did a dumb thing. And it cost them.

The Cowboys trailed by three but were driving inside of the last minute of the contest when Dak Prescott hit Jason Witten for an 11-yard gain and a first down at the Packers' 40-yard line. At that point, Dallas ran to the line and could have either run a hurry-up play or called their final timeout. Instead, they spiked the ball, which did more harm than good.

It's true, Dallas was fighting the clock, but there was enough time that they easily could have needed all four downs — especially with a timeout in their back pocket. The down was more valuable than the extra six-to-10 seconds or so they saved with a spike.

Teams make this mistake with the spike relatively frequently, though it often goes unnoticed because a first down can negate the error. In this case though, that didn't happen. Sure, the Cowboys were able to score a long field goal, but there was no guarantee that that would be good. The goal at that point should have been to score a touchdown or, at the very least, get to a safer field goal distance.

An extra play could have accomplished any of the three or a combination of the following things:

1. A first down that kept the drive alive.

2. A yard or two to shorten field goal distance.

3. Kept the clock moving.

While Dallas shouldn't have been overly concerned with the fact that there was time left when they had the ball, it was a minor factor considering Green Bay had all of its timeouts left. Aaron Rodgers, at least, thought it was important. His reaction after Dan Bailey hit a game-tying 52-yard field goal with 35 seconds left? "A little too much time on the clock," Rodgers said.

Though the broadcast didn't show it, presumably the choice to clock the ball was Garrett's. And just as disconcerting as that in-game mistake was that, apparently, he was still in denial that it was a problem later.

"We just felt that was the right thing to do at that time," Garrett said, via NFL.com. "Keeping the timeout to be able to kick a field goal is really important if you can do it. So in those situations when you make a first down, we believe clock it there so you keep the timeout in your back pocket. Obviously, in that situation we're trying to go down there and score a touchdown, so you want to keep as much time on the clock as you can. If the clock is going and you need a timeout to get yourself in field goal range, you have that one still available to you."

Even if Garrett was truly adamant about keeping a timeout for before a potential field goal, that's no reason to trade a down for a few seconds. They should have just run a play.

But hey, at least he saved the timeout to try to ice Mason Crosby at the end of the game. That was definitely worth it.

 

[yimyammer]

I'm sorry, I just don't see this issue as cut and dry and black and white.

Its certainly not the reason they lost the game, at worst its the final link in a chain of events that culminated in a loss but had any one of these events played out differently, the Cowboys likely would have won.

Imo, clocking the ball has merit because it does several things:

1. Keeps a timeout in their pocket

2. The TO allows the offense to keep the play book wide open which makes it more difficult on the defense vs being forced to run sideline patterns which makes it easier on the defense.

3. Burns less time

I do think they should have been practiced enough so that Dak had the option to run a play or clock the ball based on the defensive look. Since it appears this wasn't an option, I think thats were the criticism is due. i just fail to see where 100% of the time you have to run a play in this instance.

After spiking the ball, it was 2nd down at GB's 40 yard line, they had momentum on offense going up against a mash unit for a defense. I'm more bothered they couldn't get the first down and get in a position to try and score a TD.

I also think we might be able to look back and see where the other two timeouts were used and realize the situations that lead to the use of those timeouts is more of a problem than clocking the ball on 1st down at GB's 40 yard line.

 

[bbgun]

I didn't care for the spike because we had the Pack on their heels. The spike allowed them to catch their breath and regroup. Worse, we stopped the clock on 2nd and 3rd down, allowing the Pack to preserve their two timeouts. There was no room for an Elliott run on any of those downs?

 

[yimyammer]

I didn't care for the spike because we had the Pack on their heels. The timeout allowed them to catch their breath and regroup. Worse, we stopped the clock on 2nd and 3rd down, allowing the Pack to preserve their two timeouts. There was no room for an Elliott run on any of those downs?

I agree there should have been an option to run a play, what I take exception to is the notion that its 100% black and white that you run a play there. Its probably gonna cost at least another 10 seconds to run a play and certainly in retrospect, I wish they had run there but then they have to rush the next play too or burn the timeout depending upon the outcome of that play.

It was a tough situation magnified by the closeness of the game caused by the futility of many other prior plays.

It should have never come down to this.

 

[boozeman]

I didn't care for the spike because we had the Pack on their heels. The timeout allowed them to catch their breath and regroup. Worse, we stopped the clock on 2nd and 3rd down, allowing the Pack to preserve their two timeouts. There was no room for an Elliott run on any of those downs?

That was my main issue. It was like giving Green Bay a defensive TO and a cost us a down.

 

[NoMoRedJ]

It should have never come down to this.

This is the bigger issue. This game shouldnt have been close. But since it was its imperative to have a coach that can handle moments like these. Its often the difference between winning and losing. As we saw once again with the red clapping *ss clown.

 

[Doomsday]

An extra play could have accomplished any of the three or a combination of the following things:

1. A first down that kept the drive alive.

2. A yard or two to shorten field goal distance.

3. Kept the clock moving.

Orrrrrr.... A fucking touchdown.

 

[yimyammer]

This is the bigger issue. This game shouldnt have been close. But since it was its imperative to have a coach that can handle moments like these. Its often the difference between winning and losing. As we saw once again with the red clapping *ss clown.

I agree on the former but not on the latter. I just don't see it as a binary decision and therefore Garrett is a clown, there are plenty of other reasons to discredit him, I'm not convinced this situation qualifies

 

[Doomsday]

NYDN: The Cowboys lost the game

 

[Dustdevil]

Orrrrrr.... A fucking touchdown.

Or...a sack that put us out of FG range with the clock running.

Or....a false start penalty which again, puts us out of FG range. (+10 s runoff)

Or...an interception by a rookie QB in a hurry to a WR who might run the wrong route.

There are a lot of things that could happen. Bottom line, if you can't stop a team from marching from their own 25 to FG range with 35 sec left, you probably deserve to lose. It hurts. It sucks. We lost. Build a better defense and try again next year.

 

[TheZoneSucks]

Or...a sack that put us out of FG range with the clock running.

Or....a false start penalty which again, puts us out of FG range. (+10 s runoff)

Or...an interception by a rookie QB in a hurry to a WR who might run the wrong route.

There are a lot of things that could happen. Bottom line, if you can't stop a team from marching from their own 25 to FG range with 35 sec left, you probably deserve to lose. It hurts. It sucks. We lost. Build a better defense and try again next year.

You fit right in with Garrett and the pussy out approach. Coach scared. Testicles never won any championships anyway.

 

[TheZoneSucks]

I'm sorry, I just don't see this issue as cut and dry and black and white.

Its certainly not the reason they lost the game, at worst its the final link in a chain of events that culminated in a loss but had any one of these events played out differently, the Cowboys likely would have won.

Imo, clocking the ball has merit because it does several things:

1. Keeps a timeout in their pocket

2. The TO allows the offense to keep the play book wide open which makes it more difficult on the defense vs being forced to run sideline patterns which makes it easier on the defense.

3. Burns less time

I do think they should have been practiced enough so that Dak had the option to run a play or clock the ball based on the defensive look. Since it appears this wasn't an option, I think thats were the criticism is due. i just fail to see where 100% of the time you have to run a play in this instance.

After spiking the ball, it was 2nd down at GB's 40 yard line, they had momentum on offense going up against a mash unit for a defense. I'm more bothered they couldn't get the first down and get in a position to try and score a TD.

I also think we might be able to look back and see where the other two timeouts were used and realize the situations that lead to the use of those timeouts is more of a problem than clocking the ball on 1st down at GB's 40 yard line.

You are in the denial stage. Soon you'll move to bargaining and then to acceptance of the historic stupidity of that decision.

 

[yimyammer]

You are in the denial stage. Soon you'll move to bargaining and then to acceptance of the historic stupidity of that decision.

Dude, just make your case and I'll get on board.

Telling me its monumentally stupid isn't the least bit convincing.

I dont care where the truth takes me and I'm not trying to change anyones mind, I just fail to see the logic that a play had to be run there 100% of the time but I'm open to changing my mind

 

[NoMoRedJ]

I agree on the former but not on the latter. I just don't see it as a binary decision and therefore Garrett is a clown, there are plenty of other reasons to discredit him, I'm not convinced this situation qualifies

I think the fact that Garrett is a clown puts the spotlight on that spike. If he didnt have his history of game management issues this wouldnt stand out as much.

 

[bbgun]

NY Post:

Late in the game, with Dallas trailing by three, Dak Prescott hit Jason Witten for an 11-yard gain to set up first-and-10 at the Green Bay 40 with 49 seconds left and the Cowboys holding one timeout. They had enough time and downs to do what they wanted. But when Prescott took the first-down snap, he spiked the ball to stop the clock. The ripple effect was subtle but undeniable.

You kill the clock when there’s no other option. You don’t kill the clock when you have plenty of time to run plays and downs are your most precious commodity. Yet the Cowboys — down three and in field-goal range — wasted one of their three offensive downs because they didn’t want to take a few more seconds to call a play. They killed a clock that wasn’t close to killing them.

“Just felt like that was the right thing to do at the time,” Cowboys coach Jason Garrett told reporters. “Keeping the timeout to be able to kick a field goal is really important if you can do it. So in those situations, when you make a first down, we believe you clock it there so you keep the timeout in your back pocket. Obviously in that situation we’re trying to go down and score a touchdown, so you want to keep as much time on the clock as you can. If the clock is going and you need a timeout to get yourself in field-goal range, you have that one still available to you.”

Garrett’s decision had a multi-pronged effect:

1. Dallas would only have two plays to make a first down because, barring a sack, it would have to attempt the game-tying field goal on fourth down. When you have first down, why do you intentionally make it second?

2. The spike cut down the chances of an Ezekiel Elliott run on the next two plays. A handoff to Zeke should have been called on first down, and if his 5.7 yards per carry were any indication, it could have put Dallas in a position to run any number of plays on second or third. Instead, Elliott didn’t get the ball again, and Dallas had to kick. Elliott getting only 22 carries against a Packers defense unable to stop him was practically criminal. If he’d had 30, that defense might have collapsed. Instead, the Cowboys passed eight more times than they ran, a situation brought on by the deficit, but exacerbated by a lack of guts and imagination. Prescott was great, Dez Bryant played one of his best games and the Packers corners couldn’t hang. But Zeke was the force behind all of it. Once the ball was taken out of his hands, Green Bay’s defense stiffened.

3. And then there was the ultimately crippling effect. When a team’s down in a game, it’s easy to say it should do this or that with the clock. Don’t score too early! Let some time run off! (Don’t spike it!) But that’s hindsight stuff. In the moment, you have to worry about getting your points. Since the Cowboys’ worry was in stopping the clock with 49 seconds left, when the second- and third-down plays both stopped the clock, there was still 35 seconds left after Dan Bailey kicked his game-tying field goal. Those precious seconds would prove fatal, leading to another off-season in Big D of wondering where it all went wrong.

 

[Midswat]

Look at how panicked that idiot looks in that picture. God damn I hate him with every fiber of my being.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

Garrett just doesn't handle these end-of-game pressure situations well, going back to his first year in the frozen kicker game when the real sin was letting about 25 seconds tick off the clock before calling a TO. Yesterday it's like his feeling on that play was, "Okay, we got the first down, let's stop and catch our breath and think about this." I know he's Princeton and all but he doesn't seem to think well when things are happening too fast.

 

[NoMoRedJ]

Garrett just doesn't handle these end-of-game pressure situations well, going back to his first year in the frozen kicker game when the real sin was letting about 25 seconds tick off the clock before calling a TO. Yesterday it's like his feeling on that play was, "Okay, we got the first down, let's stop and catch our breath and think about this." I know he's Princeton and all but he doesn't seem to think well when things are happening too fast.

Thats because he hasnt been able to find a coaching book for situations such as these. He's a mimicker and a parroter and if he has to come up with something on his own he's in serious trouble.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

Thats because he hasnt been able to find a coaching book for situations such as these. He's a mimicker and a parroter and if he has to come up with something on his own he's in serious trouble.

Very true.

And this practice of bleeding the clock on your last possession so the other team doesn't get the ball back is a relatively recent phenomenon, but I do see a lot of teams do it the last few years as it's become more common for teams to drive 40-50 yards in just 30 seconds or so. Like I was saying in another thread, even Clemson did it in the NC game.

I guess what we need is for Dak to get all this on his own and ignore Garrett's instructions like Romo used to have to do.

 

[Doomsday]

Or...a sack that put us out of FG range with the clock running.

Or....a false start penalty which again, puts us out of FG range. (+10 s runoff)

Or...an interception by a rookie QB in a hurry to a WR who might run the wrong route.

Ahh yes, the "risk averse" loser mentality personified. Meanwhile you cannot square this with Garrett's pregame preaching about "always being aggressive." If you're a attack team, you attack. You don't give their defense what amounted to a free time out.

There are a lot of things that could happen. Bottom line, if you can't stop a team from marching from their own 25 to FG range with 35 sec left, you probably deserve to lose. It hurts. It sucks. We lost. Build a better defense and try again next year.

Can't argue with the bolded. But what you're missing (intentionally or otherwise) is Rodgers does that to just about everyone. And you as the HC know that. And you as the HC shouldn't leave the son of a bitch TIME to do it to you. It's called game management.