QUESTION: Why did Marone take that 1st time out of the 2nd half?

[OttosBestFriend]

Why did Marrone take that 1st time out of the 2nd half?

I still don't get it.

Might've come in handy at the end of the game there, no?

And none of the commentators mentioned why it was called.

Color me confused.

(ALSO, I hate that you can't edit the title of a thread... I spelled DM's name incorrectly and now it's locked forever)

 

[dollarbill44]

Why is it an issue? We had a 2 TOs at the start of our last possession. It turned out to be enough.

 

[mountaincuse]

He was hoping to get the play reviewed.

 

[Chip]

Why is it an issue? We had a 2 TOs at the start of our last possession. It turned out to be enough.

Like I said yesterday, if we had all 3, maybe we call timeout when we noticed Davis in man to man coverage lined up against Fields.

You're also using hindsight in that we didn't actually move the ball on that last drive. If we had actually moved the ball, having 3 would have been helpful. The last one being necessary for setting up the field goal.

2nd half timeouts should never be wasted like that. Someone in the booth should have been telling him the pass went backwards and the fact that they hadn't reviewed in all that time before you called the timeout means they're never reviewing it. Northwestern wasn't hurrying to kick that XP.

 

[690West]

He was hoping to get the play reviewed.

Yup. He looked at the ref and said "you're not getting buzzed?". Then he called it

 

[dollarbill44]

Like I said yesterday, if we had all 3, maybe we call timeout when we noticed Davis in man to man coverage lined up against Fields.

You're also using hindsight in that we didn't actually move the ball on that last drive. If we had actually moved the ball, having 3 would have been helpful. The last one being necessary for setting up the field goal.

2nd half timeouts should never be wasted like that. Someone in the booth should have been telling him the pass went backwards and the fact that they hadn't reviewed in all that time before you called the timeout means they're never reviewing it. Northwestern wasn't hurrying to kick that XP.

I don't think the fact that we had used a TO earlier had any impact on not calling a TO with Davis on Fields. If, as you say, we had moved the ball on our last possession, we wouldn't have used our last TO to set up an ill-executed final play. As VT showed, 44 seconds is plenty of time to move the ball 50 yards with 2 TOs to get a FG. The clock stops with 1st downs which leaves plenty of time. The big difference was their WRs made plays at the end and ours didn't.

The TO situation played absolutely no role in this loss.

 

[Chip]

I don't think the fact that we had used a TO earlier had any impact on not calling a TO with Davis on Fields. If, as you say, we had moved the ball on our last possession, we wouldn't have used our last TO to set up an ill-executed final play. As VT showed, 44 seconds is plenty of time to move the ball 50 yards with 2 TOs to get a FG. The clock stops with 1st downs which leaves plenty of time. The big difference was their WRs made plays at the end and ours didn't.

The TO situation played absolutely no role in this loss.

I'm not really sure how you can make a guess at what we would have done had we had 3 Timeouts, and then make the definite ending statement, but I'll spare the board from here on out, because this is a hindsight argument anyway.

Going forward, I hope we're more selective than stubborn when using 2nd half timeouts.

 

[Ozcuse]

I thought he was just trying to calm and rally the troops. Several mistakes/bad breaks led up to that and he may have just tried to get things back under control.

 

[JoeSU]

Yup. He looked at the ref and said "you're not getting buzzed?". Then he called it

It was a pivotal play that meant the difference between simply an incomplete pass and SU retaining possession, versus NW getting another 6 points on the board and putting us down 15 pts.. Huge. IMO it was worth burning a TO in that situation to allow time for a review.

 

[TDTOrange]

It was a pivotal play that meant the difference between simply an incomplete pass and SU retaining possession, versus NW getting another 6 points on the board and putting us down 15 pts.. Huge. IMO it was worth burning a TO in that situation to allow time for a review.

My only issue is if you're going to call the TO, call for your coaches challenge at the same time. However, I suppose it's possible that he had gotten word from the booth that it wasn't worth wasting the one challenge on and just eat the timeout that had been spent.