Bill's Handling of the End of the Ravens Game

[TheoShmeo]

The HC of the NEP has said that the end of the Ravens game went according to plan.
 
That means -- taking that at face value -- that he was prepared for the clock to be killed with about 14-15 seconds left and, as a result, for Flacco to have a shot at the end zone at the end absent a Ravens muff when they fielded the punt. 
 
Had the Ravens punt returner not attempted a return, the result could easily have been that the Ravens would have been able to run two plays before time expired, with one of them possibly getting the ball closer into position before the final heave.
 
I know that the percentage of Hail Marys that succeed is very low.  I also know that I gave birth to a litter of kittens on that last play.  And that had it succeeded, many people would be asking how it was that BB chose a strategy that virtually guaranteed that the Ravens would have a shot to decapitate the Pats at the very end of the game, when other choices could have been made.
 
A couple of caveats are in order at this point.
 
One, BB is a freaking football genius.  So when I question something he decides of this magnitude, it's from a place of humility and respect.  And more importantly, it's with an acknowledgement that he is playing chess while I am playing something taught in kindergarten.
 
Two, this week is dragging like crazy and I have been ruminating on this, and perhaps others have been too at one point or another.  Since we have the luxury of asking such a question in the context of a happy ending, why the hell not?
 
Three, if this has been covered elsewhere on this site, mea culpa.
 
Anyway, it strikes me that in addition to giving Flacco as many as two attempts to win by choosing this path, Bill also risked a bad snap on the punt, a block of the punt or a shanked punt.  I'm sure I was not alone in wincing when the snap arrived a little on the low side.
 
So what Bill could have done?  Were there better options?
 
One thing he could have done is run the offense and tried to get a first down.  Many risks present themselves with that, of course.  A fumble.  An interception.  On the flip side, a first down ends the game without Flacco seeing the ball.
 
Another thing he could have done is kneeled down twice and then had Brady or more likely a RB take the ball at the snap and run into the end zone to take a safety, thereby allowing Allen to punt the ball without having to receive a snap and take the risk of a muff or a block.  Putting the Ravens down by only two would have been very risky, however.
 
Another thing he could have done is kneel down twice, run one running play with his best ball security guy (none are Ridley-esque) and then had Brady heave the ball with a Flacco like angle into the sky on 4h down.  It is at least possible that doing those two things would have eaten up the additional 14 seconds that remained on the clock when the Pats were forced to punt, and thereby ended the game. 
 
Bottom line, I am much less certain that there were better alternatives than Bill took than I am that if things had gone wrong, we would be reading about the decision to give Flacco a shot in the same way we read about the 4th and 2 in 2006 and thereafter.  Of course, as many have pointed out in MDL's thread, that people questioned the 4th and 2 call certainly doesn't make it wrong, and questioning this call wouldn't either.
 
Edited to clarify the last sentence.       

 

[Stitch01]

They weren't really going to try and get a first down, and any sort of regular passing play is by far the worst of the available options.  The question becomes 1) could they have run out enough clock with an alternate method to end the game on 4th down via safety or Brady chucking it deep and 2) is that less risky than having to punt and survive one or two hail Mary's.
 
I like the conventional run into the line three times play (probably could have run 6-8 seconds off of the clock) better, that was probably the only way they would have had a chance to get to being able to take a safety to end the game.  Once they kneeled Id rather punt it than take the safety and risk a shanked punt and free kick FG attempt to lose the game.  I think once the Ravens saved their TO for third down, Brady chucking a pass deep and out of bounds was probably better on third down than kneeling, that would have at least killed enough time that the Ravens would have no shot to run two plays (they would never have had time for 2 Hail Mary's, but could have run a play to get closer possibly with a fair catch) and the Ravens TO would have almost no value if the Pats ran a play that took 4-5 seconds off the clock.
 
We would have read about this forever if it hadnt worked, but the people comparing it to 4th and 2 would have been silly because 1) 4th and 2 was a really awesome coaching decision where this was not and 2) the differences in win equity between potential options was probably something like 99.75% for one choice and 99.5% for the other choice or something like that, so it wasn't really a consequential decision.

 

[lexrageorge]

The punt and subsequent return attempt took about 10 seconds off the clock.  Off hand, the punt itself probably took about 4 or 5, so had Jones signaled a fair catch on the punt, the Ravens would have had at most 9-10 seconds.  Not sure that's enough time for 2 Hail Mary attempts, which take quite a bit of time off the clock.  Although it's possible the Ravens could have tried gaining 10-15 yards on a quick sideline route first, which would have made the Hail Mary attempt marginally easier to pull off.  Gets scary if the sideline route nets the Ravens 25 or 30 yards, however.  
 
Executing the punt itself was scary enough; it could have been blocked, or the snap could have been high, or a number of other issues.  
 
However, I'm not sure how easy it would have been for the Pats to take off much more time.  I'm guessing they still would have had to punt; 14 additional seconds over 3 plays is not all that easy.  And you know the defense would be doing everything they can to go for the strip tackle.  Could they have taken another 10 seconds over those 3 plays?  Sure, but it's still pretty risky, and the Pats are still punting (and the Ravens are likely rushing 11 if there's less than 5 seconds on the clock).  
 
Taking a safety was never an option unless the snap on the punt was bad.  All the Ravens would have needed to do is get to the 35, and even with a good free kick and no return that's still only a 35 yard drive for the Ravens.  Now that's risky. 
 
With the Pats approach, they just needed to execute the kneel downs (easy), the punt (medium difficulty, but Belichick has a lot of confidence in the punt team), and the Hail Mary defense (probably something the Pats have practiced 100 times this season, given what we know about the coach).  So, as scary as it was, it was also the one that in retrospect seems to make the most sense.  
 
Had the Pats lost, the over/under on this thread would be somewhere around 50 pages....

 

[Ed Hillel]

Keep in mind that a safety kickoff is from the 20. If the Pats took a safety with 3 seconds left and Allen shanked a safety kickoff or even kicked it 30 yards, the Ravens could have fair caught it and set up a free kick or FG. What's scarier, a hail mary or a 65 or so yard FG kick from Tucker that I believe has no shot of being blocked (depends on if free kick rule applies on safety kickoffs; I believe it does.)

 

[MainerInExile]

I thought BB explained himself really well.
 
- Running plays would not have taken much more time off the clock (he guess 2 seconds, maybe there are stats on this?).
- Running plays would have had a much higher fumble risk then a kneel.
- The punt followed by hail mary was higher percentage than free-kick followed by FG attempt.
 
Also, it should be noted that if they had time for 2 hail marys instead of 1, DMC would have simply caught the first attempt and taken a knee rather than tossing it out of the endzone.

 

[Harry Hooper]

If the Pats weren't so close to their own end zone, we might have seen Brady take the snap and retreat a few steps before sliding down. The goal would have been to eat more clock on each play.

 

[gammoseditor]

Running the ball 3 times, imho, was the only other option. Throwing is too risky/not running the clock, and I don't see any way they run 3 plays, and a 4th down play, and leave no time.

While the punt was scary, I don't see any smart way they could have avoided it. I would have preferred they run the ball 3 times, but I guess they didn't want to risk a fumble.

 

[Rasputin]

Can they do the kneel from a shotgun? Maybe eat up an extra second or so?
 
As much as I like to think there had to be something better, every time I look at the something better, it comes with a pretty significant risk.

 

[MainerInExile]

If the Pats weren't so close to their own end zone, we might have seen Brady take the snap and retreat a few steps before sliding down. The goal would have been to eat more clock on each play.

 
He did take his knees pretty slowly.  Probably smart, because if he had tried to actually move, there would have been large men trying to kill him.

 

[Import78]

Well, he did delay the actual knee hitting the turf.  He almost always does.  I recall him losing his mind at a ref when they blew the whistle before his knee was down.

 

[JimBoSox9]

The interior of the OL got beat on like a drum for most of the game.  That had to be the main factor in BB choosing kneeling over simple A-gap dives, which I agree seemed to be the only potential 'safer' alternative.  I think in general we probably overrate the risk of a punt block or hail mary, and the prospect of Ngata just blowing something up crazystyle in that last series was scarier to me at that moment.

 

[lexrageorge]

Keep in mind that a safety kickoff is from the 20. If the Pats took a safety with 3 seconds left and Allen shanked a safety kickoff or even kicked it 30 yards, the Ravens could have fair caught it and set up a free kick or FG. What's scarier, a hail mary or a 65 or so yard FG kick from Tucker that I believe has no shot of being blocked (depends on if free kick rule applies on safety kickoffs; I believe it does.)

Correct.  Pats would have to stand back 10 yards from spot of kick.  
 
Also, no time comes off the clock during the free kick after the safety.  

 

[j44thor]

The interior of the OL got beat on like a drum for most of the game.  That had to be the main factor in BB choosing kneeling over simple A-gap dives, which I agree seemed to be the only potential 'safer' alternative.  I think in general we probably overrate the risk of a punt block or hail mary, and the prospect of Ngata just blowing something up crazystyle in that last series was scarier to me at that moment.

I think the better option would have been some off tackle runs. Those would have taken a few extra seconds and possibly much more. Problem with kneel downs is they lost 5-6 yards on them and took virtually no time during the play.

Also fourth down chuck an incompletion makes no sense because you risk intentional grounding which would result in one play from about the ten for bal.

 

[lexrageorge]

I think the better option would have been some off tackle runs. Those would have taken a few extra seconds and possibly much more. Problem with kneel downs is they lost 5-6 yards on them and took virtually no time during the play.

Also fourth down chuck an incompletion makes no sense because you risk intentional grounding which would result in one play from about the ten for bal.

There's still the risk of the ball carrier getting blown up by a defender going all out for a strip fumble.  The Ravens would have had at least 9 (probably 10) players in the box.  There was a game in Foxborough against the Cardinals a couple of years back during which Wilfork recovered a fumble late in the 4th quarter after NE used all its timeouts.    
 
Chances of Baltimore executing the Hail Mary from midfield are probably less than a fumble in that situation.  

 

[DJnVa]

Can they do the kneel from a shotgun? Maybe eat up an extra second or so?
 

 
Well sure, they can. But then you introduce another variable.
 
There's a story I saw posted that said when the Pats defense came off the field after the Harmon INT the coaches were telling them that they were going to have at least one more play.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Shortly after Harmon picked off the ball, I started thinking about the right approach. I had a slight lean toward kneel downs. Here was my analysis.

1. Starting a series from the 20, what is the maximum amount of time I would be comfortable with on the clock that I would run a non-punt play on fourth down?

My answer here was three seconds, possibly four. With a four point lead, I don't love a deliberate safety for two reasons. First, the two points puts the game within a field goal and if I miscalculate and have to free kick, fair catch on a shank or free kick out of bounds enters the equation. Second, with a lead fewer than seven points, I don't want the ball in the end zone on a live play. So, my options on a fourth down play are QB run around or roll out and pass out of bounds. More than 3 seconds worries me.

2. Can I run off enough time by running three non kneel down plays three to avoid punting?

I get 40 seconds x 2 because of the one Baltimore time out. That leaves 19 seconds. Given my answer to question one, this means I need to run off 16 seconds in three plays in order to avoid punting. I am not comfortable that I can run off 16 seconds in three plays. Therefore, running three non kneel down plays probably does not allow me to avoid punting. I am going to have to punt, whether aaI kneel down or run three plays. A first down wins the game, but I don't want my RB staying up too long and having six guys trying to strip the ball.

3. Can I run off enough time that the punt will be the final play of the game?

A properly executed punt is probably a five to seven second play. That means I need to try to run off 12 to 14 seconds in my three plays. Possible? Yes. Guaranteed? No.

Analysis:

I likely have to punt anyway, so the risk of a turnover on the snap or a block is neutral with respect to the decision whether to kneel down or run. Even if I run three runs, there is a chance I will punt and leave a second or two on the clock anyway, and thus they get a hail mary opportunity. If this happens, I have done a hand off exchange and put the risk of fumble on the table for little upside. This is the tie breaker for me. I do not want to have a non-negligible chance of putting fumble in the equation for no reward. In the event I can run enough time so that the punt is the last play of the game, my choice is betwwen the risk of a successful hail mary and the risk of a turnover if I try to run on three plays. This is a very close call. I think it's 50/50. On the one hand, a hail mary is a loss. A fumble on a running play, though, is not necessarily a loss. If recovered out of the end zone, I can still win on defense. The other major consideration is that three kneel down put the potential of giving Baltimore two plays. The math I did in my head was that three kneel downs and a punt and fair catch should leave six seconds. At six seconds, I think it's risky to try two plays. As it turned out, it would have been 8 seconds.

My lean watching the game was that with a likely punt anyway, I would rather face the risk of a hail mary than risking three chances to fumble. I don't know if this is overly conservative. After the game it occurred to me the Patriots had not attempted a QB to RB exchange for nearly two hours. This sort of breaks the tie for me.

 

[mcpickl]

Another factor in this situation that I wished Belichick had mentioned is committing a penalty.
 
If the Patriots had a penalty called on them while trying any of three theoretical running plays, the clock is stopped even if Baltimore declines the penalty, which they surely would unless lightning had struck and the Pats had gained a first down.
 
That would be a disaster as they'd be giving Baltimore close to a minute after a punt.
 
This happened in the Atlanta/Detroit London game this year.
 
I think the possibility on fumbling/committing a penalty wasn't worth the risk to take a few more seconds off the clock(they weren't going to get all 14 seconds off on the two plays Baltimore couldn't call timeout). You can tell your players, whatever you do don't hold. But I'd think a guys instinct takes over if he gets blown by and he could reach out and grab his guy.
 
That would've been my biggest worry.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Also fourth down chuck an incompletion makes no sense because you risk intentional grounding which would result in one play from about the ten for bal.

Is this correct? Does the defense get an untimed down following intentional grounding if the clock expires?

 

[tims4wins]

Game can't end on a penalty

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Game can't end on a penalty

Sure it can. Five point game. Two seconds left. Offense scores a TD but had an illegal formation. Defense accepts penalty. Game over.

Only a defensive penalty results in an untimed down, except for a handful of unsporting acts. Grounding is not a defensive penalty.

Here is a link. Section 8. http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/7_Rule4_Game_Timing.pdf

 

[tims4wins]

Sure it can. Five point game. Two seconds left. Offense scores a TD but had an illegal formation. Defense accepts penalty. Game over.

Only a defensive penalty results in an untimed down, except for a handful of unsporting acts. Grounding is not a defensive penalty.

In that scenario they replay the down

 

[crystalline]

The one big mental/coaching error on this sequence was by the Ravens- the returner going a long way to get out of bounds.

That doesn't change the win equity much either- making the hail Mary shorter doesn't make it much more effective. The only way it helps is if they can get off two plays- a long pass and then a real shot at the end zone. But that was a real brain fart, I thought.

As for the other decisions:
Harbaugh knew what was going on- he was telling the refs and his players to "look at the clock". Brady was kneeling slowly. BB chose the right strategy, given the weakness of the running game. Harbaugh might have erred by not coaching his guys to treat the victory formation as a running play- eventually some team is going to try to bring Brady down if he keeps trying to kneel slowly.

Harbaugh also chose to try to block the punt instead of returning. Probably the right plan- the chance you bust a long enough return to matter (35 yd?) is low, and a punt block changes your win equity from 0.5% to 50%.

Both teams seemed to coach their guys to get ready for the last play.

The defenders on the Hail Mary did the right thing by batting the ball way out of the endzone- as much as I was scared in realtime, if a Raven grabbed the batted ball he was probably downing it at the 5.

One remaining thought: should the Ravens have tried a modified hail mary strategy designed to tip the ball to a few short guys a yard or two out? Of course that's why Gronk is out there - I'd guess he touches higher than any player on either team.

I hope we never see it, but I'd bet that Belichick has at least one tricky hail Mary variant with tippers and targets.

Edit: good thread, thx for breaking this out.

 

[MentalDisabldLst]

In that scenario they replay the down

 
No, they don't.  They run off 10 seconds, and the game ends.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

In that scenario they replay the down

 
I don't think that's the case.
 
 

1. 
   [SIZE=9pt](b)  If there is a foul by the offense, there shall be no extension of the period. If the foul occurs on the last play of the half, a score by the offense is not counted. However, the period may be extended for an untimed down, upon the request of the defense, if the offensive team’s foul is for: [/SIZE]
   

[SIZE=9pt](1) illegal touching of a kick; [/SIZE]
[SIZE=9pt]Note: The period may also be extended for a “First Touching” violation. [/SIZE]

1. 
   [SIZE=9pt](2)  fair-catch interference; [/SIZE]
   
2. 
   [SIZE=9pt](3)  a palpably unfair act; [/SIZE]
   
3. 
   [SIZE=9pt](4)  a personal foul or unsportsmanlike conduct foul committed prior to an interception of a forward pass or the recovery of a backward pass or fumble; or [/SIZE]
   
4. 
   [SIZE=9pt](5)  a foul by the kicking team prior to a player of the receiving team securing possession of the ball during a down in which there is a safety kick, a scrimmage kick, or a free kick. [/SIZE]
   

Also:
 
 

• 
  [SIZE=8pt]Third-and-10 on A45. Offensive team is offside. Quarterback A1 throws a legal pass which is completed to end A2 who runs for a score. Time for second half expired during play.[/SIZE]
  [SIZE=8pt]Ruling:[/SIZE][SIZE=8pt]No score and game over as it was an offensive foul on last play of half. [/SIZE]
  

 

[tims4wins]

Football things you learned recently...

Edit: but I still don't think the game can end on a penalty by the WINNING team that is accepted by the other team, like in the grounding scenario

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Football things you learned recently...
Edit: but I still don't think the game can end on a penalty by the WINNING team that is accepted by the other team, like in the grounding scenario

I think it can. Ten seconds left, offense is winning and trying to run out the clock. QB is running all over the place and offensive lineman grabs the defender's facemask. Clock expires and game ends. The defense can't prolong the game by accepting the penalty. And even if it could the down is replayed so the offense would just kneel down.

Grounding is kind of a weird example, because it's a loss of down, which is why I found the question intriguing. But the rule seems to speak of offensive and defensive teams commiting penalties and grounding is a foul by the offense.

 

[Stitch01]

Yeah I don't think it matters who is winning just who is on offense. You can ground it to end the game

 

[Oil Can Dan]

How about this - ten seconds left, offense is winning and trying to run out the clock.  QB is running all over the place and successfully throws the 4th down pass far enough down the field that time expires as it falls incomplete.  Game over.  But, there's a dead-ball foul on the offense - taunting, unsportsmanlike, or something, and so the defensive team for that play takes over at the spot of the ball - the penalty yards.
 
Crazy to see that happen, but you never know...

 

[Mystic Merlin]

How could you have a dead ball foul with no time left?

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

How about this - ten seconds left, offense is winning and trying to run out the clock.  QB is running all over the place and successfully throws the 4th down pass far enough down the field that time expires as it falls incomplete.  Game over.  But, there's a dead-ball foul on the offense - taunting, unsportsmanlike, or something, and so the defensive team for that play takes over at the spot of the ball - the penalty yards.
 
Crazy to see that happen, but you never know...

Good question. Just guessing, but my thought is that for it to be a dead ball foul, it must occur after the completion of the play. So I would guess the game has ended and the foul is a post-game act that is a league matter but not a penalty that is enforced in the game.

 

[Oil Can Dan]

How could you have a dead ball foul with no time left?

 
What if Dan Connolly punched Suggs in his chin the moment after the ball hit the ground?  I honestly don't know, but assume that a penalty is an option there.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

What if Dan Connolly punched Suggs in his chin the moment after the ball hit the ground?  I honestly don't know, but assume that a penalty is an option there.

He'd never buy a drink in Boston? On ipad and I can't cut and paste everything, but my reading is that a foul is a dead ball foul if it occurs "between downs". To be "between downs" a ref must have stopped play with a whisle. So, before the whistle, this would be a foul during the play. After the whistle, the game is over. Article 7 in this rule indicates there is no enforcement for dead ball fouls that occur after time has expired in the second or fourth quarter. http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/17_Rule14_Penalty_Enforcement.pdf

 

[Oil Can Dan]

Alright, well there you go then.  Thanks for dropping the knowledge...

 

[dynomite]

BB chose the right strategy, given the weakness of the running game.

Ultimately this is how I feel.  It was the best of the options available considering all of the conditions and personnel on the field.
 
From that distance (around the 50, right?) there was a ~3% chance of the Ravens successfully scoring a TD.  That feels like the best odds for the Patriots of any possibility.

 
Link
 

I hope we never see it, but I'd bet that Belichick has at least one tricky hail Mary variant with tippers and targets.

If so, wouldn't he have used it on the Hail Mary at the end of the 2011 Super Bowl?  I mean, if not then, in literally the most important situation the team can ever face, when?
 
I don't have the stomach to watch the play many times on repeat, but it seems like it was no accident that Gronk almost came up with the tipped ball: looks like Welker (83) and Gronk (87) are set up facing the scrum from the right and left, waiting to catch a deflected ball.  It seems like they're trying to take advantage of the defense's training to bat the ball out of the end zone -- hard to tell from the video, but I bet the Patriots receivers are trying to bat the ball toward Gronk and Welker as much as they're trying to catch it.
 
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtAB9OSrIdI[/youtube] 

 

[GeorgeCostanza]

While celebrating somewhat uncontrollably I tried to explain to my 11 and 9 year old boys what the "victory formation" is, only to be interrupted...."dad, then why are they kicking the ball back to them?"

 

[dynomite]

Ugh I can't believe I watched that again.

 
I know.  I debated whether to post it.  Ugh.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

2 more steps and Gronk would have caught that.
 
That's Hernandez in the middle, and his job was to try to make that tip up or forward a bit. I don't think his job was to actually catch it outright. I don't believe he was the first guy to make contact with that ball, so the ball didn't come forward out of the pile, but rather back a bit.

 

[MalzoneExpress]

Unless I missed it, no one has mentioned that calling running plays rather than kneel downs would have put the ball into the hands of a running back that did not have a single carry in the second half. You don't want a "cold" player handling the ball at that time.
 
Although passing the ball usually carries time management risks, passing on 3rd down should have been an option there because of the improper use of the Baltimore time out. I know the talking heads were lauding Harbaugh for waiting until after third down to call the time out, but that was a dumb move. It allowed the Pats to try to pass for a first down if they wanted to without the normal time management risk. Even if incomplete, a 3rd down pass in that situation would have left under 14 seconds left, which is pretty much the same situation they wound up in. The only difference would be that Baltimore would have a timeout remaining after the punt, but with about 5 seconds left, I am not sure that would have mattered. The upside of the 3rd down pass would have been a first down and game over.

 

[Super Nomario]

Unless I missed it, no one has mentioned that calling running plays rather than kneel downs would have put the ball into the hands of a running back that did not have a single carry in the second half. You don't want a "cold" player handling the ball at that time.
 
Although passing the ball usually carries time management risks, passing on 3rd down should have been an option there because of the improper use of the Baltimore time out. I know the talking heads were lauding Harbaugh for waiting until after third down to call the time out, but that was a dumb move. It allowed the Pats to try to pass for a first down if they wanted to without the normal time management risk. Even if incomplete, a 3rd down pass in that situation would have left under 14 seconds left, which is pretty much the same situation they wound up in. The only difference would be that Baltimore would have a timeout remaining after the punt, but with about 5 seconds left, I am not sure that would have mattered. The upside of the 3rd down pass would have been a first down and game over.

Baltimore called the timeout after the third down play, not before.

 

[MalzoneExpress]

Baltimore called the timeout after the third down play, not before.

Right. The 3rd down play only ran 1 second off the clock as a result. Rather than kneeling, you throw it.

 

[Silverdude2167]

Right. The 3rd down play only ran 1 second off the clock as a result. Rather than kneeling, you throw it.

Having them use the timeout is the most important thing on 3rd down. No way you risk an in-completion and allowing them to keep their TO. 

 

[DJnVa]

 
What if Dan Connolly punched Suggs in his chin the moment after the ball hit the ground?  I honestly don't know, but assume that a penalty is an option there.

 
 
I heard some audio from Suggs during game last night. Despite how he acts off the field, his in-game stuff, at least what they played, was exactly what you'd want. Including him saying "Just tackle them, no extracurricular stuff. Just tackle."
 
Then, after Amendola broke that tackle for TD, the DB came over and Suggs said "What did we say? Just tackle. The sideline has never missed a tackle."
 

 

[lexrageorge]

Throwing the ball has about 30% chance of stopping the clock in the best of circumstances.  Basically hands the Ravens a free timeout.  And there's the risk of an INT or strip sack.  
 
Had Harbaugh used the timeout after the first down, the Pats could have taken a delay of game prior to the punt (or, better yet, taken a timeout after running down the play clock).  
 
I'll take my chances on the punt and subsequent Hail Mary defense.  

 

[Bergs]

I don't have the stomach to watch the play many times on repeat, but it seems like it was no accident that Gronk almost came up with the tipped ball: looks like Welker (83) and Gronk (87) are set up facing the scrum from the right and left, waiting to catch a deflected ball.  It seems like they're trying to take advantage of the defense's training to bat the ball out of the end zone -- hard to tell from the video, but I bet the Patriots receivers are trying to bat the ball toward Gronk and Welker as much as they're trying to catch it.
 

 
Goddammit.

 

[MalzoneExpress]

Throwing the ball has about 30% chance of stopping the clock in the best of circumstances.  Basically hands the Ravens a free timeout.  And there's the risk of an INT or strip sack.  
 
Had Harbaugh used the timeout after the first down, the Pats could have taken a delay of game prior to the punt (or, better yet, taken a timeout after running down the play clock).  
 
I'll take my chances on the punt and subsequent Hail Mary defense.  

 
I'm not saying I prefer the pass (I agree with the bolded), just that it was a viable option because of the timing of the timeout IN THIS CASE. The Pats could make it look like a kneel down on 3rd down. Then with 10 seconds left on the play clock, go to a spread formation. This doesn't give the Ravens time to set their defense or they panic and call time out. You are right that there are risks associated with a pass, but leaving extra time on the clock is not one of those risks here. If the Pats snap the ball with 15 seconds left (like they did on the kneel down), then there will be about 10 seconds left after an incomplete pass. After the punt there will be about 5 seconds left and the Ravens will take that timeout to the golf course with them after a Hail Mary. By using the time out earlier, the Ravens could have maintained the clock management risk associated with a pass on 3rd down. Of course the upside to a pass attempt is a first down and no Hail Mary attempt, which is the reward part of the risk:reward.
 
Harbaugh saved at most 1-2 seconds by waiting to take the time out. The Pats ran the play clock down to 1 before snapping the ball, which used almost all the time anyway. The reason coaches almost always take the time out early is to make sure they get the full benefit.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Having them use the timeout is the most important thing on 3rd down. No way you risk an in-completion and allowing them to keep their TO. 

 
I guess I don't agree with this.  The third down snap occurred with about 15 or 16 seconds left.  If you throw a pass, the play ends with 12 seconds left.  When are they going to use the time out?  Punt takes 5 or 6 seconds.  
 
At most the time out gives them the possible chance of running a play to the middle of the field to make the hail mary shorter.  
 

 
I'm not saying I prefer the pass (I agree with the bolded), just that it was a viable option because of the timing of the timeout IN THIS CASE. The Pats could make it look like a kneel down on 3rd down. Then with 10 seconds left on the play clock, go to a spread formation. This doesn't give the Ravens time to set their defense or they panic and call time out. You are right that there are risks associated with a pass, but leaving extra time on the clock is not one of those risks here. If the Pats snap the ball with 15 seconds left (like they did on the kneel down), then there will be about 10 seconds left after an incomplete pass. After the punt there will be about 5 seconds left and the Ravens will take that timeout to the golf course with them after a Hail Mary. By using the time out earlier, the Ravens could have maintained the clock management risk associated with a pass on 3rd down. Of course the upside to a pass attempt is a first down and no Hail Mary attempt, which is the reward part of the risk:reward.
 
Harbaugh saved at most 1-2 seconds by waiting to take the time out. The Pats ran the play clock down to 1 before snapping the ball, which used almost all the time anyway. The reason coaches almost always take the time out early is to make sure they get the full benefit.

 
I agree with all of this -- calling the time out when he did was a judgment mistake.  I agree, though, that Belichick did the right thing by not attempting a pass on third down -- just too many potential downsides and since you've already sort of made your decision that you're in avoid a turnover mode, I think you get caught in the switches a bit.  But that doesn't mean Harbaugh made the right decision -- he didn't, because he didn't know what Belichick was going to do and he gave him more options the way he did it.
 
Edit:  And, if the pass is complete in bounds, Harbaugh has to use the TO anyway even if short of the first down.

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

I'm a bit late to the party here, but I should point out that the Falcons blew the game at Wembley against the Lions this season in a similar clock situation - they intended to run three plays instead of kneeling to use up some extra seconds, and the first domino to fall came when one of their offensive lineman was whistled for a holding penalty (which of course the Lions declined, killing the down as well as the clock). I trust Belichick infinitely more than Mike Smith when it comes to coaching his players not to commit a holding penalty no matter what in that situation, but that's still a potential monkey wrench you face when choosing not to kneel down until fourth down.

 

[Stitch01]

Holding call is a really excellent point actually, think that might chance my answer.

 

[richgedman'sghost]

I think it can. Ten seconds left, offense is winning and trying to run out the clock. QB is running all over the place and offensive lineman grabs the defender's facemask. Clock expires and game ends. The defense can't prolong the game by accepting the penalty. And even if it could the down is replayed so the offense would just kneel down.

Grounding is kind of a weird example, because it's a loss of down, which is why I found the question intriguing. But the rule seems to speak of offensive and defensive teams commiting penalties and grounding is a foul by the offense.

Grounding on 4th down results in a change of possession so I thought there would be one untimed down, even if the clock ran out? That would seem to be unfair. 

 

[Kevin Youkulele]

Grounding on 4th down results in a change of possession so I thought there would be one untimed down, even if the clock ran out? That would seem to be unfair. 

Is it really unfair?  If time expires during a 4th down play, the game normally ends at the end of the play.  So the intentional grounding (which is necessarily an incompletion) must have occurred after the clock struck zero.  Where the ball would be spotted next is the only thing that the penalty affects, but if the QB just took the sack the game would still be over.  So the offense gains no unfair advantage that needs to be remedied by committing grounding after time expires.  (But note that there is a special rule for fouls causing safeties, which would include grounding committed in the endzone: "If a safety results from a foul during the last play of a half, the score counts. A safety kick is made if requested by the receivers.").
 
 
Also, since it requires the confluence of three circumstances:
- Intentional grounding
- On 4th down
- As time expires
it issue may never have come up before.  Here is the untimed down rule (Sec. 8 Art. 2) (there are exceptions, but they aren't relevant here):
 

 
Article 2 At the election of the opponent, a period may be extended for one untimed down, if any of the
following occurs during a down during which time in the period expires:
 (a) If there is a foul by the defensive team that is accepted, the offensive team may choose to extend the
period by an untimed down after enforcement of the penalty. If the first or third period is not so
extended, any accepted penalty is enforced before the start of the succeeding period.
(b) If there is a foul by the offense, there shall be no extension of the period. If the foul occurs on the last
play of the half, a score by the offense is not counted. However, the period may be extended for an
untimed down, upon the request of the defense, if the offensive team’s foul is for:
 (1) illegal touching of a kick;
Note: The period may also be extended for a “First Touching” violation.
(2) fair-catch interference;
 (3) a palpably unfair act;
(4) a personal foul or unsportsmanlike conduct foul committed prior to an interception of a forward
pass or the recovery of a backward pass or fumble; or
 (5) a foul by the kicking team prior to a player of the receiving team securing possession of the ball
during a down in which there is a safety kick, a scrimmage kick, or a free kick.
(c) If a double foul occurs during the last down of either half, the period shall be extended by an untimed
down.
 

 
They've established a general prohibition on untimed downs due to offensive fouls and listed specific exceptions, none of which include intentional grounding.  Case closed.