I think Marvin's approach to timeouts is misunderstood by most

[treee]

(08-17-2016, 01:12 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: He shouldn't need timeouts to "maintain cohesiveness", at least not with that much frequency. You rarely see the Patriots or Steelers (for examples) burn timeouts because things are unraveling. Just paying attention to the teams we play, it seems Marv is more willing (or more required) to burn those TO's than most other teams/coaches. It'd be nice if there were some statistical data to look at.

That said, I do think some make this into a bigger deal than it really is. First half TO's really don't matter much, IMO. The second half TO's are pretty valuable though. They can give you an extra possession in a close game. As long as we keep 2 TO's through the 2nd half of close games, I'm usually good with that. It at least gives us a shot to get a stop and get the ball back.

Perhaps I didn't articulate my main point well enough because people are really latching on to the "unreadiness" aspect. I think most of the time Marvin uses the seemingly random timeouts strategicly, probably because someone up in the booth notices something.