Jason Garrett's Late-Game Clock Management: Why Garrett Coached Like a Coward
For those who missed it, I published a rather harsh criticism of Jason Garrett last night, explaining why his lack of courage is a hindrance to the Dallas Cowboys.
As long as Garrett is punting on 4th-and-1 at the opponent's 35-yard line or displaying atrocious (if there was a word that was worse, I would us that) clock management skills, this team will cease to capitalize on its potential.
After time to contemplate the value of his decision to not call a timeout late in the fourth quarter of Sunday's loss, Garrett must surely see the error of his ways, right? Nope. Said Garrett:
TOP NEWS
.jpg)
Colts Release Kenny Moore

Projecting Every NFL Team's Starting Lineup 🔮

Rookie WRs Who Will Outplay Their Draft Value 📈
"We very well could have taken a timeout there. We felt like we were in field-goal range. We have yard lines that we use as guidelines before the game. We felt like we were in range at that point. Tony had them on the line of scrimmage quickly, so we went ahead and clocked it and used that as a timeout. You see so many situations where you have negative plays in those situations. We felt like we were in (Dan Bailey's) range to give him a chance to kick the game-winner...We felt pretty good about where we were. Once you get to that 30-yard line we felt like that was a pretty good opportunity for us.
"
You cannot be serious, Jason. There were 23 seconds left on the clock when the Cowboys obtained a first down at the Cardinals' 31-yard line, so Garrett's insinuation that the offense clocked the ball "quickly" is erroneous.
On top of that, spiking the ball "as a timeout" is the entire reason no one in their right mind can understand what was going through your own yesterday.
With two timeouts in hand, how in the world do you not use one with 23 seconds on the clock? Even if you decide you do not want to try to advance the ball down the field, why not at least give yourself the option?
If you (mistakenly) want to settle for a 49-yard field goal attempt, why not run Romo to the middle of the field, let the clock run down, then attempt the field goal with your kicker in a better spot?
Of course, the no-brainer coaching decision is to immediately call timeout and work harder to get the ball downfield. Instead, Garrett coached scared, disregarding the numbers in favor of not risking a big loss.
But what are "the numbers"? Let's see. . .
- On average, a kicker has a 65 percent chance of converting a 49-yard field goal try.
- If the Cowboys gained six more yards, those odds increase to 75 percent.
- If the Cowboys had passed the football, there chances of giving up a sack (based on season averages) were 4 percent. In reality, they were lower because this wasn't a "normal" game situation and Romo would be more willing to throw the ball away at the first sign of trouble than on, say, a 1st-and-10 in the first quarter.
- A loss of six yards would equate to a field goal try on which kickers have displayed around 50 percent accuracy.
For Garrett's decision to let the clock tick down to be correct, we would have to assume the Cowboys' offense has less than a 6 percent chance of gaining six yards on a passing play. Anyone think that is the case? Me neither.
One of the major mistakes Garrett made was in his binary thinking regarding field goals. Brian Burke of Advanced NFL Stats pointed that out, discussing Garrett's black-and-white ideas:
"Also, note Garrett's conception of "field goal range." He has a yard line established before the game. That kind of thinking assumes a yes-or-no, black-and-white idea of a field goal attempt. Either you're in range or you're not. If we're in "range", and the kicker misses, well, that's his fault. This is a failure to think in probabilistic terms.
"
The sort of false dichotomy Garrett displayed with his thinking shows he either does not understand statistics at a fundamental level, or he understands them and coaches to limit the blame which could be placed upon him after defeat, instead exposing his players to it. I think it is the latter.
Unfortunately for Dallas, cowards don't win Super Bowls.

.png)





