Time-outs and Clock Management

Turk's B.B.C. · Post by **Turk's B.B.C.** » 13 Dec 2021 01:19

Hard to argue that special teams are the Pack's glaring weakness, but I am concerned that our Achilles heel could be the freewheeling use of timeouts and the time clock. Directly related to this is the seeming disregard for running the clock when holding the lead. Seems to me it has happened often this season.
Tonight, we were out of TOs before the 2 min warning. Bears had all three. I understand AR likes to run it right down to try to draw defenders offside, but do you think maybe they're finally catching on? Those burned TOs to avoid a delay are gonna bite us sooner or later, no matter how quickly we can strike.

Towards the end of the Rams game, in their territory, we ran twice; threw an incomplete pass, stopping the clock; missed a field goal. Two runs, even getting nothing, would have kept the clock running. Better field position than a missed FG, one less chance for Cros to miss. I can't remember Rams TO situation at the time, but it would have compelled them to spend at least one if they had it.
I think that a heavy dose of Dillon is in order in these situations. As great as our D has been performing, we still want them off the field more than on.

Are these occasions worth worrying about?

TheSkeptic · Post by **TheSkeptic** » 13 Dec 2021 07:34

Turk's B.B.C. wrote: ↑
13 Dec 2021 01:19
Hard to argue that special teams are the Pack's glaring weakness, but I am concerned that our Achilles heel could be the freewheeling use of timeouts and the time clock. Directly related to this is the seeming disregard for running the clock when holding the lead. Seems to me it has happened often this season.
Tonight, we were out of TOs before the 2 min warning. Bears had all three. I understand AR likes to run it right down to try to draw defenders offside, but do you think maybe they're finally catching on? Those burned TOs to avoid a delay are gonna bite us sooner or later, no matter how quickly we can strike.

Towards the end of the Rams game, in their territory, we ran twice; threw an incomplete pass, stopping the clock; missed a field goal. Two runs, even getting nothing, would have kept the clock running. Better field position than a missed FG, one less chance for Cros to miss. I can't remember Rams TO situation at the time, but it would have compelled them to spend at least one if they had it.
I think that a heavy dose of Dillon is in order in these situations. As great as our D has been performing, we still want them off the field more than on.

Are these occasions worth worrying about?

Dillon played most of the game. Odds are he was out of energy.

APB · Post by **APB** » 13 Dec 2021 07:44

I think it's pretty clear the Packers (MLF and particularly Rodgers) don't see the value in conserving TOs like us fans. I honestly think AR feels like he can manage a no-TO drive effectively and would just as soon use TOs in situations where he feels like he needs to discuss something with MLF or in certain game-flow situations (drawing offside attempt, misread a defense, etc).

It drives us fans batty but, in reality, I don't think the Packers really give a rip about conserving their TOs.

YoHoChecko · Post by **YoHoChecko** » 13 Dec 2021 07:53

The only one that bothered me was taking a TO to avoid a delay on 4th and goal at the 2 when they were kicking the FG next. That 5 yards means nothing. But it's possible Rodgers tried to draw them off but didn't know, for sure, that MLF would kick after, since he was running the no-huddle at that point.

I think MLF and Rodgers do care--especially MLF--but yeah, it's true they clearly care less than we do. I like them more for defensive use in tight games than for offense. I know they can manage a no-timeout drive on offense, but when the other team has the ball and you need to conserve clock, they're your only option.

go pak go · Post by **go pak go** » 13 Dec 2021 07:53

I have zero problem with how our offense operated in the 4th quarter yesterday. I thought they were fantastic

APB · Post by **APB** » 13 Dec 2021 08:02

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑
13 Dec 2021 07:53
The only one that bothered me was taking a TO to avoid a delay on 4th and goal at the 2 when they were kicking the FG next. That 5 yards means nothing. But it's possible Rodgers tried to draw them off but didn't know, for sure, that MLF would kick after, since he was running the no-huddle at that point.

I think MLF and Rodgers do care--especially MLF--but yeah, it's true they clearly care less than we do. I like them more for defensive use in tight games than for offense. I know they can manage a no-timeout drive on offense, but when the other team has the ball and you need to conserve clock, they're your only option.

Yeah, I should have categorized my post with more emphasis on AR rather than lump MLF in equally. AR will burn a TO in heartbeat. I agree MLF isn't as nonchalant about them but he also doesn't appear to reign AR in on his use of them either.