scine09 Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 Just now, Titans279 said: They wanted to either run the clock down so Cincy couldn't get the ball and go to OT or to get in range for a FG. I don't see how this is playing not to win, they were playing to win, and I don't see how this is making things harder for Tannehill. The issue is Tannehill fucking it up, not the strategy. It's retarded to say they didn't trust in Tannehill. They clearly did. That’s exactly what it was. Not sure why this is so hard to understand. To me it’s clock management 101. rns90 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rns90 Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 1 minute ago, scine09 said: That’s exactly what it was. Not sure why this is so hard to understand. To me it’s clock management 101. We disagree on when they should have been burning clock. But on the basic point, we agree. oldschool 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scine09 Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 I think I’m correct in saying that this is the second time since Vrabel has been the coach that they’ve lost on a last second field goal in regulation, in his 5th game as a head coach after the receiver dropped the sure TD that made them settle for the FG. The other time was against Buffalo in 2018. He’s just not going to let it happen if he can happen. And it wouldn’t have this time either if his quarterback didn’t throw an INT. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rns90 Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 Just now, scine09 said: I think I’m correct in saying that this is the second time since Vrabel has been the coach that they’ve lost on a last second field goal in regulation, in his 5th game as a head coach after the receiver dropped the sure TD that made them settle for the FG. The other time was against Buffalo in 2018. He’s just not going to let it happen if he can happen. And it wouldn’t have this time either if his quarterback didn’t throw an INT. Nick Williams was the name of that stiff. I question why the hell Tannehill was throwing into a congested middle of the field on that INT but that's another topic I guess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
heyitsmeallen Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 It was stupid as hell imo. You don’t bleed the clock that much until you’re past the 50. The whole time it was happening I was confused because they had no sense of urgency. It almost feels like they had no faith in the offense and were hoping for overtime for some reason. Former_Fan, Mercalius, and rns90 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scine09 Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 1 minute ago, rns90 said: We disagree on when they should have been burning clock. But on the basic point, we agree. I mean I see your point. What gets me is when people say that he had no clue what he was doing. It was clear what the plan was and it didn’t work. Should they have gone more uptempo? Ultimately this is how he coaches in these situations. It’s been this way since he took over. And probably one of the big reasons why they’re won so many close games. I’ll look it up later but I’m gonna say he’s won somewhere in the 66% area in one-score games. Again, there is a reason for this. You can try acting like Brandon Staley, just going uptempo with little regard for the clock. Would it have worked better? Maybe. But, again, more times than not this exact strategy works. When teams like the Titans are winning close games teams like the Chargers are losing close games. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scine09 Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 1 minute ago, rns90 said: Nick Williams was the name of that stiff. I question why the hell Tannehill was throwing into a congested middle of the field on that INT but that's another topic I guess. Yeah that’s certainly a debatable topic and one I’m sure they will revisit in meetings and in their heads for seven months. If you think it bothers us, imagine what it’s doing to Vrabel and Robinson? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former_Fan Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 I'm glad someone made a thread on this. I am still trying to comprehend the strategy and incompetence of the final drive. To me this is the worst part of this loss. With almost 2 1/2 minutes on the clock, I felt like we had the game in the bag with a FG and the normal good clock management by Vrabel. Absolute disaster on every level to finish the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
code Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 At the time I thought that Vrabel had lost confidence in QB play and was running the clock so he could get to overtime and pound the rock. Having now watched the all-22 and seeing the TE wide open under coverage in the middle of the field (in Tannehill's vision field) - I know why the HC had lost confidence. RT was off from the first play of the game to the last. The miss on the AJ Brown post was awful with no safety over the top to defend. The WR screen that got picked was a ridiculously good play - but the ball never should have been thrown. We all have to accept that Tannehill is our QB at least for one more season. But there is no perfume strong enough to cover up his last two playoff performances. I can give him all the excuses in the world for his in-season play - but his play on Saturday will never be forgotten in my household. Lars, BudsOilers, and titanskick8851 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzTitan Posted January 24, 2022 Report Share Posted January 24, 2022 I really hate WR screens in the red zone. When was the last time they got a TD or even a nice gain for the Titans? nothing stands out. They don't have the personnel for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonboy Posted January 25, 2022 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2022 46 minutes ago, scine09 said: That’s exactly what it was. Not sure why this is so hard to understand. To me it’s clock management 101. I’m curious…would your opinion be different if the Titans were down 1 instead of tied? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scine09 Posted January 25, 2022 Report Share Posted January 25, 2022 Just now, Jonboy said: I’m curious…would your opinion be different if the Titans were down 1 instead of tied? Oh absolutely. If you're TRAILING you have to go until you're in a reasonable position to get into field goal range. You do have the buffer of OT when you're tied. So because of that one of two things has to happen. You win the game on the last play of the game with a field goal or the other team gets the ball with like 15 seconds left without enough time (hard to say that after what happened last night, but usually it's correct) to go down the field for a field goal try. Again, in my mind it was played perfectly and there was no way that he could've expected them to turn the football over, which was the only real way that they could've lost in regulation. Playcalling is another subject and one that I think was suspect at best. If you want to pin that on Vrabel fine, he's the head coach and has the right to overrule any of Downing's calls. Contrary to what seems like popular belief, at least in this thread, I do not think the Titans were playing to go to OT nor were they playing not to lose. They were playing to win it on the last play of the game, trying to manage the clock to get to that point while keeping in mind that if they didn't pick up the necessary yardage to leave as little time on the clock as possible. They actually kind of did the same thing against the 49ers. If you go back and look at those playcalls it wasn't all that much different. They just got a lot more yards because of Tannehill's scramble. And they were able to milk the rest of the clock because of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
XAEA12 Posted January 25, 2022 Report Share Posted January 25, 2022 1 hour ago, TheBukafax said: 100p was a move to ensure Burrow didn’t see the ball again. Don’t think it had anything to do with hiding Tannehill. Then use your timeouts and run the clock out when you're in field goal range like any normal person would do. Unless you think your QB is going to turn the ball over and you're playing for OT. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Posted January 25, 2022 Report Share Posted January 25, 2022 I don’t understand the argument people are trying to make that we were fiddling with click management on our side of the field instead of doing it on theirs. It doesn’t matter where you’re at when running time off the clock if that’s your only intent, but it’s safer to do so while you’re in scoring range if scoring is your intent. Seems to me, anyways. Not trusting your QB and then asking him to throw is some kind of alternate reality shit. OILERMAN 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschool Posted January 25, 2022 Report Share Posted January 25, 2022 No one is arguing they shouldn't bleed the clock nor saying Vrabel isn't good with clock management in general. Or that he didn't know what he was doing. He knew exactly what he was doing it was just the wrong strategy and it made it more difficult for the offense to score by running too much of the clock on the wrong side of the field. I think Vrabel is great at clock management, I just think he was over thinking it on Saturday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.