I have no problem with the spike. Tannehill just completed a 46 yard bomb. You have an entire team sprinting down half the field, including lineman. The time it takes to get there, get a play, setup properly, read the defense, and get the play off, is wasted time. Spiking the ball wasn't a bad call. I don't think Brady/Manning/Brees do any differently. Miami didn't execute after that play (or the three before it, really) and got Tannehill sacked and ****ed everything up.
It just seems ridiculous to me that so many armchair HC's think we shouldn't have spiked the ball, and to expect Philbin to give away what plans he may have for the bye week is also ludicrous IMO. A month ago we would all be thrilled to think we would come out of those first five games 3-2 yet many here are now questioning Philbin as a HC and ready to throw him under the bus. Do you same people think Pats fans are ready to bench Tom Brady? He didn't throw a TD pass Sunday after all, Bellichick & Brady must go! We definitely have some major problems, OL sucks and I'd like to see Garner replace Clabo, our running game has problems, Tannehill still has some maturing to do, we need our DBackfield to get healthy, Wake too. But we're any of you really believing this was our year to go to the SB? Seriously? Would you same posters be ready to bench the Falcons Matt Ryan, fire their HC considering they've got a worse record than we do right now? I doubt it, but reading these posts it wouldn't surprise me. We are 3-2 and we've got two weeks to regroup, fix some problems, and a fairly soft schedule after the bye. Stop worrying, be happy!
I thought it was pretty interesting when he was asked if there would be any changes to the coaching staff during the bye week... he raised his eye brows, shook his head and said... "aahhhhh no"... I wouldn't have expected him to answer any of those questions any differently. hindsight, the spike wasn't advisable... but he wasn't expecting his quarterback to take a sack on the next play, and then his receiver to drop the next pass. I like that he's thinking about going for the win, down by 3, rather than just going for the field goal. Spiking the ball shows confidence in your offense... and confidence that you can score a touchdown to win, like we did the last time we played at home against Atlanta.
The problem isn't that we're 3-2 ... it's the way we arrived at 3-2. The OLine has been an issue all season in that play hasn't improved with running or passing. This needs to be improved after the bye as the Bills will be looking to exploit what they have seen in the past 2 games. Sherman needs to figure it out and with 2 weeks there will be no excuses for another 3+ sack day.
Agree with this, which is what makes it all the more infuriating that they aren't rolling Tannehill out more to buy time. We did this with good success last season and as Tannehill demonstrated on the 40 yard completion, he has the mobility and accuracy to do it more often.
The spike was the correct call. We had enough time to win the game and should of had two plays to get the next first down. We weren't playing for a FG because we had time to win the game. WHo cares if the defence looked a little confused. SO did our offence. Jesus call some quick play and throw an int and everyone would cry why we didn't spike it or take our time. We were playing for the win. Sparano I think had too much influence on people here. He would of had us do a running play or two and then kick for OT. We wanted the TD. I loved Philbin's answer. They wanted to win the game. If there was no sack or Clay catches the ball we are still trying to score a TD. A play that no one is talking about is Sturgis kicking the kickoff out of bounds. What the hell was that? That cost us 15 yards and put the Ravfens in great field position.
If Philbin really is doubling down on the team's strategies then it could be a mistake but it also could end up making him look genius. At this point I don't really know what's going to happen. Players can always play better. It happens. I just know that what has happened, even in those three wins, can't continue to happen because they're not going to win enough games for the playoffs that way.
A month ago if we were 0-0 and 1-0 looking at the schedule some would be thrilled to be 3-2 (not I ... who would be thrilled at 2 losses I want to win them all). But a week ago we're 3-0. Ask ANYONE if they'd be thrilled to go 0-2 and what is their response? 1-1 would have been ok. We could have won this game. It wasn't like we got blasted 34-0. We had a chance to win this game, and super bowl winning teams win games like this. Think, Patriots 2001. We want this. And we want it badly. Could it be worse? Sure. We could be 0-5. But we were 3-0 and now 3-2, and could have been tied for the division lead, and the Jets keep hanging around etc. It's ok to want better and get pissed off when we don't get it.
Interesting stuff from Bill Barnwell on Philbin's clock management the last two and a half minutes and the "spike" In short, if Philbin had used his timeouts more appropriately (before the 2 minute warning) and everything played out exactly as it did, we wouldn't have needed to spike the ball at all as we would have had at least 8 additional seconds on the clock. As for the way it played out, I thought the spike was a bad call. You have the Ravens scrambling and they can't substitute. You need to already have the next play called. You even could have run the ball and tried to catch the Ravens in poor position and then spiked on 2nd down if necessary. If you did that, you'd eliminate the sack that took us out of reasonable field goal range
Managing the clock in those situations is a performance. You don't have an hour to study the exact times that are left on the clock and consult different resources to divine the best strategy. You're on the sideline operating by a few set of core principles and making your decisions from there. Also, people assume timeouts can just easily be called at the very second they need to be called and that's just a myth. The coach can signal a timeout himself but he has to be next to an official to do it. If he's not, he's S.O.L. until he can catch an official's attention or get his players to notice he wants a timeout. The spike was a judgment call. Hindsight is 20/20. I'm not sure it was the right call or not. It's up for debate. What matters most with those judgment calls is being decisive about them in the moment.
I understand and agree with you in general, but I also think that coaches should know what their time out strategy is going to be before the game. I agree with barnwell that the timeouts should have been used before the two minute warning so you save the extra time prior to your "freebie" This is similar to going for it on 4th down. You oguht to have a fairly standarrd philosophy of when and where you are going to go for it so you don't waste a ton of time deciding what to do in the moment when the decisions can be more difficult.
I'm not sure the spike was necessary either, but I don't have a big problem with it. I also don't think that in the heat of that moment 8 seconds would've made much of a difference in their decision. Perhaps if they had gotten down there with a minute-twenty or minute and a half they would have given more consideration to just slowing everything down.
Perhaps, but my overall point is that it shouldn't have been a heat of the moment decision. You should philosophically know that wehn you're down one score with two timeouts prior to the 2 minute warning that you're going to take those timeouts prior to the warning. By making the decision we did, we gave Baltimore 20 seconds where they did not have to do anything but stand around and wait for the 2 minute warning.
Unrelatedly, among QBs with 100+ throws Ryan Tannehill has been victimized by the 3rd-most drops per catchable pass. First is Brandon Weeden, which is unsurprising considering he played two of his three games with Greg Little, Travis Benjamin and Davone Bess as his receivers. Bess believe it or not has never been particularly sure handed. Greg Little is known for drops. Gordon is prone to them as well. Second is Tom Brady, again unsurprising considering he's been without Gronkowski this whole time and Amendola has been hurt most of the year as well. He's been throwing to rookies like Kenbrell Thompkins, Aaron Dobson, Josh Boyce and Zach Sudfeld. Fourth is the Rams. Again, not surprising with such a young overall unit. Austin a rookie, Givens and Quick are second year guys. Even Pettis is a third year guy. Fifth is the Bills. Once again another young unit. The WR with the most playing time Robert Woods is a rookie. T.J. Graham is a second year guy. This is Chris Hogan's first year actually playing regular season football...and I don't think he played much in college either, if at all. He was one of those sport to sport converts I believe. Miami has a veteran receiving unit. They should not be up there with those inexperienced units. That's not cool.
Why don't you like the odds. At that point we were in range for a 52 yard FG. We were playing with house money going for the TD. 52 yarder isn't a gimme but very makeable. Go for the win not the tie should always be the philosophy.
It was lack of preparation by our coach for that situation. It was 4th and 10. After the coordinator dials up that play, how is your staff not preparing the next play if they make it? Let's call this play if we get 10 yards. Let's call this play if we make it into field goal range. If we somehow made it to the goal line I see a spike there. But I feel as if the staff was watching the game as much as we were. You know Peyton Manning would be prepared there. Why wasn't Sherman.
then take your shot downfield after the fourth down play...immediate focus if your at the 35 with that amount of time is to get my kicker closer, you know the chances go up once under 50, I'm gonna take all three plays, don't spike it, get up there and call your play, cause you know you have a timeout left, call that after first down.. I'm not buying that it was the right thing to do, looks like a wasted down to me..get your damn team up to the line, have their defense not be able to substitute and call a freaking play that either takes a deep shot, or anything else actually, we had time..
If we have a timeout there, I 100% agree with the don't spike it there. But like you are pointing out, and it's been pointed out many times before I'm sure, we didn't have a TO.
My bad., still I think it could of been managed to set up the field goal with minimal seconds on the clock.