dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Another interesting stat that makes you think: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/super-bowl-new-england-patriots-seattle-seahawks/ "Before Sunday, NFL teams had thrown the ball 108 times on the opposing team’s 1-yard line this season. Those passes had produced 66 touchdowns (a success rate of 61.1 percent, down to 59.5 percent when you throw in three sacks) and zero interceptions. The 223 running plays had generated 129 touchdowns (a 57.8 percent success rate) and two turnovers on fumbles. Before Sunday, NFL teams had thrown the ball 108 times on the opposing team’s 1-yard line this season. Those passes had produced 66 touchdowns (a success rate of 61.1 percent, down to 59.5 percent when you throw in three sacks) and zero interceptions. The 223 running plays had generated 129 touchdowns (a 57.8 percent success rate) and two turnovers on fumbles." Edited February 2, 2015 by dave mcbride
ProcessAccepted Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 I can't even bring myself to watch sports on tv until this whole thing is over, What a cluster of a way to loose. It was right there, they just had to take it. I wonder will it haunt Wilson and effect how he plays. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcBc-zJ3QxY
TheBillsWillRiseAgain Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) I literally would have rather had them try 3 QB sneaks in a row than that play. There's no point in arguing whether it was a bad call or not because it's going to go down as the worst play call in Superbowl history. It'll still probably be considered that 20 years from now. Edited February 2, 2015 by TheBillsWillRiseAgain
dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 The Grantland piece is fantastic, btw. Again: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/super-bowl-new-england-patriots-seattle-seahawks/ .
DrDawkinstein Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 I can't even bring myself to watch sports on tv until this whole thing is over, What a cluster of a way to loose. It was right there, they just had to take it. I wonder will it haunt Wilson and effect how he plays. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcBc-zJ3QxY Im with ya, dude. I usually start everyday with Mike&Mike and then leave ESPN on in the background while I work. Not today, and not for the rest of the week. Cant take any of the coverage glorifying the Pats*.
timtebow15 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Another interesting stat that makes you think: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/super-bowl-new-england-patriots-seattle-seahawks/ "Before Sunday, NFL teams had thrown the ball 108 times on the opposing team’s 1-yard line this season. Those passes had produced 66 touchdowns (a success rate of 61.1 percent, down to 59.5 percent when you throw in three sacks) and zero interceptions. The 223 running plays had generated 129 touchdowns (a 57.8 percent success rate) and two turnovers on fumbles. Before Sunday, NFL teams had thrown the ball 108 times on the opposing team’s 1-yard line this season. Those passes had produced 66 touchdowns (a success rate of 61.1 percent, down to 59.5 percent when you throw in three sacks) and zero interceptions. The 223 running plays had generated 129 touchdowns (a 57.8 percent success rate) and two turnovers on fumbles." You guys don't get it...with the way Lynch was running, on second down and with a timeout left at the half yard line there is no way you do anything other than hand the ball off to Lynch. If it doesn't work and this is your next call no one is complaining. But with the Pats still reeling after the freak catch and the momentum of the game and the dumb Pats not taking a timeout themselves I am 99% convinced Lynch would have scored. Just run it in!
K-9 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 they got 2 WRs and 2 DBs outside. man up, with a planned pick and the linebacker going towards the opposite hash- it was about as unchallenged as you ever see that play. both DBs played it perfect and the qb and wr each left the play on the table for the defender. its not like its a weird or rare play call in short yardage. we probably saw some variation on it 10 times last night between the two teams. the little underneath pick route is really common in this league. it just didnt work this time. its not like he threw it at 4 defenders. Good take, NS. That was very favorable coverage for Seattle to take advantage of. while I don't agree with his decision to point a finger at Lockett, Bevell had a reason to criticize Lockett as he ran a lazy route that tipped the play and made it easy to jump. Basically, he turned his chin inward inward too soon. He needed to open his outside shoulder first, but he was too impatent. GO BILLS!!!
BackInDaDay Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) sure it was a horrendous play call. but it had to be combined with equally horrendous execution for the outcome that we saw. wilson had tunnel vision, hurried the throw and took no time to contemplate other options, which is what he does well. IMHO he deserves most of the fallout for that INT. would brady have done the same thing? would rogers? it's a timing play.. Lockette's widens/hitches/flattens out at the snap, to give Kearse time to drive up and inside where he and Browner will cutoff Lockette's defender, Butler.. ball was delivered right on time. the only thing that Brady, Rogers, Brees, Rivers, etc. might have done differently was changing Lockette's route to a fake slant/corner when they realized the Browner could disrupt the timing - and that's only if such an audible was included in the base play, and the receivers were coached up to react. IMO, that option probably wasn't there, because it never had to be.. but i guarantee that Pat Ryan and his receivers will have it after yesterday. give credit where credit's due - the D was prepared, and the atypical DB wrecked it Edited February 2, 2015 by BackInDaDay
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 The Grantland piece is fantastic, btw. Again: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/super-bowl-new-england-patriots-seattle-seahawks/ . Linked it earlier- very good read
dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Linked it earlier- very good read I just finished the whole thing. What an awesome piece. I have a new appreciation for Hightower's tackle on Seattle's second to last play. What an amazing, game-saving tackle.
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 I just finished the whole thing. What an awesome piece. I have a new appreciation for Hightower's tackle on Seattle's second to last play. What an amazing, game-saving tackle. Yea it surprised me as a morning after article - wasn't expecting it to be as broad or deep as it was. normally see a bit more of a gap before THAT comes out.
dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Yea it surprised me as a morning after article - wasn't expecting it to be as broad or deep as it was. normally see a bit more of a gap before THAT comes out. Grantland is good.
Ozymandius Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Grantland is good. Bill Barnwell is good (and so is Robert Mays). Grantland itself? Eh. I could do without 90% of its writers.
RevWarRifleman Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 We just witnessed it. Pete Carrol was channeling Chan and he came up with that call.
thebandit27 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 I just don't understand how you choose to throw the ball in that scenario, when both the down/distance and clock point toward run being the best option. I was absolutely flabbergasted that Belichick didn't call a timeout after the 1st-and-goal run, and when he didn't, I thought automatically that 2nd down needs to be a running play followed by a timeout. It leaves enough time for a pass play on 3rd down, followed by anything on 4th down, without giving Brady enough time to get into range for a tying FG.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 In that game, at that point, the way Lynch can and was running, and the way Wilson can and was running, there was a 95+% chance IMO they gain the less than a yard needed to score on 2-3 running plays.
dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 In that game, at that point, the way Lynch can and was running, and the way Wilson can and was running, there was a 95+% chance IMO they gain the less than a yard needed to score on 2-3 running plays. The only wrench in that scenario is that Lynch might get stuffed for like a two yard loss given the personnel the Pats had on the field. Then they probably have to throw it the next play.
Proteus Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 You guys don't get it...with the way Lynch was running, on second down and with a timeout left at the half yard line there is no way you do anything other than hand the ball off to Lynch. If it doesn't work and this is your next call no one is complaining. But with the Pats still reeling after the freak catch and the momentum of the game and the dumb Pats not taking a timeout themselves I am 99% convinced Lynch would have scored. Just run it in! This is so true. In game situations! The Pats had just allowed a miraculous reception that was all but the final nail in the coffin. The Pats were reeling and ready to be put away. The Seahawks pound it for four yards and need 1/2 a yard to go to complete the TD. Get up right away and run it before the reeling Pats have a chance to set and it is an easy TD all the way 100 out of 100 times barring a fluke fumble. Wost play call in NFL history.
Dan Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 I just don't understand how you choose to throw the ball in that scenario, when both the down/distance and clock point toward run being the best option. I was absolutely flabbergasted that Belichick didn't call a timeout after the 1st-and-goal run, and when he didn't, I thought automatically that 2nd down needs to be a running play followed by a timeout. It leaves enough time for a pass play on 3rd down, followed by anything on 4th down, without giving Brady enough time to get into range for a tying FG. Absolutely spot on in every respect. Myself and everyone I watched the game with were absolutely speechless after that play. People can bring all sorts of stats into the conversation. You can talk about the players doing this or that. But, in that situation, you run the ball. Period. It's just that simple. Seattle coaches out thought themselves and handed their season to the cheaters. It was so dumbfounding of a call, it makes me wonder... Does the league actually dictate who wins and loses? Because surely no NFL coach is that dumb. Right? Apparently they are.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 The only wrench in that scenario is that Lynch might get stuffed for like a two yard loss given the personnel the Pats had on the field. Then they probably have to throw it the next play. Thats why it is not 100%. In that case you roll Wilson out. He's incredible at making a lineman miss.
Recommended Posts