Official Game Thread - Divisional Playoffs - KC Chiefs at NE Patriots.

Share this page

Andy Reid claims Chiefs' clock management debacle was intentional

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2016/1/18/10785566/kansas-city-chiefs-clock-management-timeout-andy-reid

Kansas City Chiefs head coach Andy Reid drew criticism for poor clock management in the final minutes of a Divisional round loss to the New England Patriots, but on Sunday he said that the slow pace was intentional.

A touchdown with 1:13 left in regulation cut the Patriots' lead to 27-20, but it came after the Chiefs drove to the 1-yard line with 2:33 remaining. Kansas City had no problem winding the clock all the way to the two-minute warning after just one play and then huddling after a second down play, allowing the clock to tick off another 30 seconds. All the while, Reid had three timeouts at his disposal.

"We wanted to maintain our timeouts the best we could," Reid said on Sunday, one day after the loss. "We didn't want to give the ball back, at any point, to New England after we go ahead and score that next touchdown."

After finally finding the end zone, the Chiefs attempted an onside kick that was recovered by the Patriots. If Kansas City managed to grab the onside kick, Reid says the team would've been in perfect position to tie the game as time expired in the half.

"We potentially would've had three timeouts and an opportunity to drive the field, which I thought was huge," Reid said. "It put us in a perfect position to do that, we work, again on that every week. And so I thought that part was handled right."

Even with the Patriots recovering the onside kick, the Chiefs had a chance to get another possession thanks to the conservation of the timeouts. But getting the New England offense off the field was a problem all game and the Chiefs couldn't force Ryan Allen's fourth punt of the game, due plenty to a blown opportunity that came with some bad luck.
 
I think his logic works just fine as he was basically banking on recovering the kick and conceding the game otherwise.

The alternative was to run a much faster hurry-up earlier in the 4th so that even if the kick wasn't recovered, there was time left to force a punt from NE.

Not saying I agree with his decision, but I see what he's saying.
 
Undertaker #59* said:
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2016/1/18/10785566/kansas-city-chiefs-clock-management-timeout-andy-reid

Kansas City Chiefs head coach Andy Reid drew criticism for poor clock management in the final minutes of a Divisional round loss to the New England Patriots, but on Sunday he said that the slow pace was intentional.

A touchdown with 1:13 left in regulation cut the Patriots' lead to 27-20, but it came after the Chiefs drove to the 1-yard line with 2:33 remaining. Kansas City had no problem winding the clock all the way to the two-minute warning after just one play and then huddling after a second down play, allowing the clock to tick off another 30 seconds. All the while, Reid had three timeouts at his disposal.

"We wanted to maintain our timeouts the best we could," Reid said on Sunday, one day after the loss. "We didn't want to give the ball back, at any point, to New England after we go ahead and score that next touchdown."

After finally finding the end zone, the Chiefs attempted an onside kick that was recovered by the Patriots. If Kansas City managed to grab the onside kick, Reid says the team would've been in perfect position to tie the game as time expired in the half.

"We potentially would've had three timeouts and an opportunity to drive the field, which I thought was huge," Reid said. "It put us in a perfect position to do that, we work, again on that every week. And so I thought that part was handled right."

Even with the Patriots recovering the onside kick, the Chiefs had a chance to get another possession thanks to the conservation of the timeouts. But getting the New England offense off the field was a problem all game and the Chiefs couldn't force Ryan Allen's fourth punt of the game, due plenty to a blown opportunity that came with some bad luck.
Click to expand...

That was evident from the 15:45 TOP advantage KC had for the game. But his clock management at the end killed his team's chances of playing to win the game. Maybe he doesn't practice a true hurry up. :shrug_n:
 
This Might Be The NFL’s Best Defensive Final Four Ever
Simply put, it’s really hard to find something to exploit in these defenses. That doesn’t mean Newton, Palmer, Brady and Manning won’t find a way. But we shouldn’t let the combined star power of the QBs overshadow the fact that, statistically, this could be the best group of defenses to ever collide on the brink of the Super Bowl.
Click to expand...


http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/this-might-be-the-nfls-best-defensive-final-four-ever/
 
mooseontheloose said:
I think his logic works just fine as he was basically banking on recovering the kick and conceding the game otherwise.

The alternative was to run a much faster hurry-up earlier in the 4th so that even if the kick wasn't recovered, there was time left to force a punt from NE.

Not saying I agree with his decision, but I see what he's saying.
Click to expand...


When you are two scores down, more time is always better then less time. as we know anything can happen while the clock is still running.

Basically Reid us saying that under no circumstance does he trust his defense to come out and stop the Pats. By eliminating all other options other than recovering an on-sides kick, he is betting the farm on a 2% probability of success.

I can't see how a professional ball coach could think this way. If his defense has less than a 2% chance of making a stop, they shouldn't be in the playoffs anyway.
 
foley11 said:
I can't see how a professional ball coach could think this way. If his defense has less than a 2% chance of making a stop, they shouldn't be in the playoffs anyway.
Click to expand...

Like I said, I don't agree with the decision but I also understand what he's saying. If it had worked, I don't think he gets much heat for the way he managed the clock. Successfully keeping the ball away from Brady for the last major portion of the 4th would have been a big success.

But obviously he was banking on a very low probability strategy, which is why I think his decision was wrong. But I think that is different than saying he doesn't know how to manage a clock. He does (based on his comments), but just chose a bad strategy.
 
mooseontheloose said:
Like I said, I don't agree with the decision but I also understand what he's saying. If it had worked, I don't think he gets much heat for the way he managed the clock. Successfully keeping the ball away from Brady for the last major portion of the 4th would have been a big success.

But obviously he was banking on a very low probability strategy, which is why I think his decision was wrong. But I think that is different than saying he doesn't know how to manage a clock. He does (based on his comments), but just chose a bad strategy.
Click to expand...

That was the the overall strategy it looks like
TOP NE 22:09 vs Kanas 37:41
The game plan was to keep Brady off the field :shrug_n:

~Dee~
 
mooseontheloose said:
Like I said, I don't agree with the decision but I also understand what he's saying. If it had worked, I don't think he gets much heat for the way he managed the clock. Successfully keeping the ball away from Brady for the last major portion of the 4th would have been a big success.

But obviously he was banking on a very low probability strategy, which is why I think his decision was wrong. But I think that is different than saying he doesn't know how to manage a clock. He does (based on his comments), but just chose a bad strategy.
Click to expand...

And that works awesome if you're down 7.

If you're down 14, it's another story entirely.
 
TommyD420 said:
And that works awesome if you're down 7.

If you're down 14, it's another story entirely.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

But if they had recovered the kick and tied the game (then won in OT), would he be getting criticized or called a genius for keeping the ball away from Tom for the majority of the 4th quarter?
 
mooseontheloose said:
Agreed.

But if they had recovered the kick and tied the game (then won in OT), would he be getting criticized or called a genius for keeping the ball away from Tom for the majority of the 4th quarter?
Click to expand...

Andy Reid doesn't ever have to worry about doing something that would get him called a genius.
 
mooseontheloose said:
Agreed.

But if they had recovered the kick and tied the game (then won in OT), would he be getting criticized or called a genius for keeping the ball away from Tom for the majority of the 4th quarter?
Click to expand...

If your entire strategy relies on recovering an onside kick, where an expected onside kick is successful about 18% of the time, then you should really be evaluating the HC position, if you're the GM or Owner. :coffee:

The chances of scoring quickly and then forcing a punt, are much, much better than 18%.
 
TommyD420 said:
If your entire strategy relies on recovering an onside kick, where an expected onside kick is successful about 18% of the time, then you should really be evaluating the HC position, if you're the GM or Owner. :coffee:

The chances of scoring quickly and then forcing a punt, are much, much better than 18%.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Like I said, Reid put his money on the wrong strategy.

I just think that's different than saying he sucks at clock management. It's not like he had a plan and just mismanaged the clock and wasn't left with enough time to execute it. Based on what he wanted to do, his management of the clock was fine and in line with his plan. Had they recovered the kick, there was enough time and timeouts to score with a short field. We know his plan wasn't great, but I think the "lol Andy Reid can't manage a clock" isn't the same argument as what happened: "lol Andy Reid gambled on 18% probability."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top