Way do we have coaches if it is a players game. It is a game that has always and will always have coaches as part of the game. When the rule is changed back how will it change what happens?
The problem is that (go back and rewatch the game), during the first kick, the whistle is not blown until the kicker is in the motion of kicking. When it shows the side view of Meyer telling the ref when to call the TO, the ref blow IMMEDIATELY. I don't believe that Meyer got the time out on time, yet the play was still dead. That is the biggest problem with it, time outs are allowed after the ball is snapped because of human error.
As a fan, it's annoying as heck. But, if I was a kicker, I'd love to get a practice kick before I try the real thing. It's going to be real funny when some coach pulls this, and the kicker misses the first attempt. Then nails a game winner on his second try.
When it comes to icing the kicker, I've always thought the best strategy was to leave one timeout uncalled. When you run out of time outs, the kicker knows "This is it." If you leave one uncalled, he's left wondering if he'll have to kick this time or not. I think it probably hurts focus to make a kicker wonder if you'll call it or not, and helps him re-focus once you're out of time outs to call. You almost never see a coach leave a timeout uncalled this situation, though. Still, I agree this is a rule that is very likely to change next year. I don't blame Meyer for trying to take advantage of this rule, but I can't see it lasting long. Very few people like it.
If the rules allow him to call a last-second timeout, I don't have a problem with him doing it. However, I am not convinced it's a smart thing to do, and here's why: There are just a few outcomes under such a scenario: 1) Kicker misses the first kick, and misses the second kick 2) Kicker misses the first kick, but makes the second kick 3) Kicker makes the first kick, but misses the second kick 4) Kicker makes the first kick, and makes the second kick In only one of those scenarios does the team that calls the timeout come out better off (#3). In the other scenarios, the outcome is either the same (#1 and #4), or worse (#2). And psychologically speaking, when you give the kicker another chance, if they made the first kick, they now have confidence that they can make the kick. If the kicker misses the first kick, he gets a mulligan and knows some valuable information (shanked it, hooked it, didn't kick it high enough, far enough, etc.) that he can use just seconds later on the re-kick. It seems much smarter, to me, to do the classic "icing the kicker" maneuver... call the timeout(s) right before the ball is snapped, making the kicker think about the kick longer, restart his kicking procedures, etc. Not to mention the possibility that your team may block the first kick, but now the kicking team can quickly rectify the blocking breakdown for the second kick.
You left off a good one. Tie game, 2 seconds left (timeout is called a split second before the snap). Kick is blocked, and the defensive would have a sure-fire TD on the return. Oooops, thanks to the timeout, kickers gets a second shot and drills it for the win. By the way, all of this takes place in the MNC game.:grin:
Sounds like the ref is more to blame than the coach for allowing a timeout during a live ball. There's this small little team in west Alabama....:hihi:
They're paying him to make their team better, not so they can watch him prance and yell up and down the sidelines. :thumb:
