- Joined
- Dec 30, 2012
- Messages
- 16,298
Does it matter? Look at the video with Ekeler’s reaction that @Dan E. Dangerously posted.
I did.
There’s absolutely no way to tell what was being said in that clip.
Does it matter? Look at the video with Ekeler’s reaction that @Dan E. Dangerously posted.
Chargers called TO right before :04 on the play clock, :38 on the game clock.
There's NO defense for LAC calling the timeout. They should have never called the TO. Raiders were running out the clock. I listed their play selection leading up to the TO in a post above. Raiders showed ZERO urgency to score prior to the TO and then the first down run by Jacobs.Yes.
So the timeout was not to stop the clock in an attempt to get the ball back. It was to get the proper defense on the field.
When the Raiders lost 3 yards on the 1st and 10 run play at LAC 44 yard line, they were content in letting the clock run out until LAC called the TO.There's NO defense for LAC calling the timeout. They should have never called the TO. Raiders were running out the clock. I listed their play selection leading up to the TO in a post above. Raiders showed ZERO urgency to score prior to the TO and then the first down run by Jacobs.
I don't care. I hate all 3 teams impacted by this equally.Dan, I love you.
But you’re wrong here.
There's NO defense for LAC calling the timeout. They should have never called the TO. Raiders were running out the clock. I listed their play selection leading up to the TO in a post above. Raiders showed ZERO urgency to score prior to the TO and then the first down run by Jacobs.
When the Raiders lost 3 yards on the 1st and 10 run play at LAC 44 yard line, they were content in letting the clock run out until LAC called the TO.
They were not going to attempt a FG prior to the TO. They were running out the clock. Each snap was under five seconds, run plays, no urgency whatsoever. Raiders had NOTHING to lose in that scenario.You can certainly debate the merits of the timeout, but the fact of the matter is this:
1 - Before the timeout the Raiders were going to run the ball and attempt a FG
2 - After the timeout the Raiders ran the ball and attempted a FG
Nothing changed.
They were not going to attempt a FG prior to the TO.
A 57-yard FG is statistically way more difficult to make than a 47-yarder, which was the game winning kick.Carr said they would’ve attempted a FG from the 40.
They weren’t just going to run it out.
That 3 yard loss on 1st and 10 that moved LV back to the LAC 47, LV was packing it in. They had nothing to lose.A 57-yard FG is statistically way more difficult to make than a 47-yarder, which was the game winning kick.
A 57-yard FG is statistically way more difficult to make than a 47-yarder, which was the game winning kick.
Actually, the Danny Miaz TO to hype his D up so they could try to stop FSU from scoring from the 6-inch line this season was even worse.Worse timeout since Chris Webber called timeout in the NCAA Championship game when Michigan had none
And then they gained 7 yards on second down to move to the Chargers 39 on the play preceding the timeout.That 3 yard loss on 1st and 10 that moved LV back to the LAC 47, LV was packing it in. They had nothing to lose.
I think that they would’ve attempted it anyway, too. No arguing that.That is true.
But folks here are arguing the Raiders weren’t even going to attempt one.
Also, you’re assuming they wouldn’t have gained significant yards on the play before the timeout was called.