Sign in to follow this  
tazinib1

Seahawks/Falcons

Recommended Posts

Why call timeout with 13 seconds?

 

 

He absolutely panicked in front of his team, his owner, and his fans.

 

Let the clock run to 2 seconds, kick the FG, game over. Instead, with time on the clock, Seattle gets two plays to either get in FG range, or a shot at a Hail Mary.

 

He's a disgrace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was sweating that one out. WTG Falcons!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This weekend's games have not disappointed.....

 

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you call with with 13 seconds left in case of a penalty on a made FG. If there is no time left on the clock and there is a penalty on a made FG you don't get a chance to kick it again. They should have ran it down to 6-7 seconds though as no FG attempt can take more than 5 seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He absolutely panicked in front of his team, his owner, and his fans.

 

Let the clock run to 2 seconds, kick the FG, game over. Instead, with time on the clock, Seattle gets two plays to either get in FG range, or a shot at a Hail Mary.

 

He's a disgrace.

 

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you call with with 13 seconds left in case of a penalty on a made FG. If there is no time left on the clock and there is a penalty on a made FG you don't get a chance to kick it again. They should have ran it down to 6-7 seconds though as no FG attempt can take more than 5 seconds.

 

 

I believe there is a 10 second runoff....not sure what the parameters of the 10 second runoff are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the 10 second run off only occurs when the clock was running and since they called a timeout before that play if there is an offensive penalty there would not be a 10 second run off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you call with with 13 seconds left in case of a penalty on a made FG. If there is no time left on the clock and there is a penalty on a made FG you don't get a chance to kick it again. They should have ran it down to 6-7 seconds though as no FG attempt can take more than 5 seconds.

 

Seriously? That makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

He absolutely panicked in front of his team, his owner, and his fans.

 

Let the clock run to 2 seconds, kick the FG, game over. Instead, with time on the clock, Seattle gets two plays to either get in FG range, or a shot at a Hail Mary.

 

He's a disgrace.

 

 

Disgrace may be a bit much. He was probably channeling Andy Reid.

 

Or he forgot they had slready used their 3rd timeout snd was planning on one more play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously? That makes no sense.

 

 

Have you guys not seen teams call timeouts with 6 and 7 seconds left many times in games ? I have seen it so many times in case their is a bad snap or a penatly because if the clock hits 0 you don't get a second chance.

 

It makes tons of sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you guys not seen teams call timeouts with 6 and 7 seconds left many times in games ? I have seen it so many times in case their is a bad snap or a penatly because if the clock hits 0 you don't get a second chance.

 

It makes tons of sense.

 

Bad snap, yes. Penalty, no I've never heard that mentioned. Found it. I thought it defense accepted a penalty the game wouldn't end, but I stand corrected.

Edited by kcmast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he was thinking about running another play. Perhaps a quick out to the sideline. But wisely decided against it. After all, it was a 50 yarder. I don't mind the time out there.

Edited by CaptainHook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Peyton passed over both Seattle and San Fransisco last year in favor of Denver. Think either of those teams wishes they had Peyton now?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Peyton passed over both Seattle and San Fransisco last year in favor of Denver. Think either of those teams wishes they had Peyton now?

 

I'll answer that one for you...NO

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Peyton passed over both Seattle and San Fransisco last year in favor of Denver. Think either of those teams wishes they had Peyton now?

 

 

Didn't Arizona really want him badly? Safe to say they still do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you guys not seen teams call timeouts with 6 and 7 seconds left many times in games ? I have seen it so many times in case their is a bad snap or a penatly because if the clock hits 0 you don't get a second chance.

 

It makes tons of sense.

 

 

What difference would it have made if, with 7 seconds on the clock, there was a bad snap? Are you saying they could have lined-up again, re-snapped the ball, and kicked it...all within 7 seconds? :wacko:

 

Further if there was a penalty (say, a false start)...what difference does it make if it happens with 13 seconds versus 2? Instead of a 48 yard FG, it would be a 53 yarder....still within Bryants range, so the point is moot.

 

You can try to defend him, but in his presser afterwards, he admitted there was some confusion with the way the whole last 13 seconds went down. Uh, yeah...you can say that again, dipweed.

 

Jeez Henry....you smoking some $100K crack?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way Pete Carroll would rather have Peyton Manning over Russell Wilson. Russell is on his way to 10+ years of success in the NFL. Peyton is a first ballot HOF inductee, with maybr 2 years left. Russell will have more SB rings than Peyton by the end of his career. This kid is special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Peyton passed over both Seattle and San Fransisco last year in favor of Denver. Think either of those teams wishes they had Peyton now?

 

A big, resounding, No!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way Pete Carroll would rather have Peyton Manning over Russell Wilson. Russell is on his way to 10+ years of success in the NFL. Peyton is a first ballot HOF inductee, with maybr 2 years left. Russell will have more SB rings than Peyton by the end of his career. This kid is special.

 

 

Pretty bold essentially calling the guy a hall of famer after one good season. I agree of course I'd take Wilson due to age alone, but jeez how many good qbs don't win a Super Bowl, or struggle to even win 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty bold essentially calling the guy a hall of famer after one good season. I agree of course I'd take Wilson due to age alone, but jeez how many good qbs don't win a Super Bowl, or struggle to even win 1

 

Exactly, he is good and special, but saying he'll win at least 2 Super Bowls is going way out on a limb, or being a total homer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.