Lurker Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Thats why it is not 100%. In that case you roll Wilson out. He's incredible at making a lineman miss. Yeah, that's the right way to use your weapons. A pass wasn't necessarily the wrong call (I'm sure that's what the Pats would have run if the roles had been reversed). It was just THAT route and THAT targeted wideout that made no sense whatsoever. The congestion in that area was off the charts. The ball could have been batted, all kinds of bad things could--and did--happen. A roll out by Wilson giving him the option to throw it out of the endzone if he didn't think he could make it would have been the best alternative to handing it to Lynch and using the timeout if he got stuffed (which, if he runs away from Wolfolk, I can't see happening)...
BackInDaDay 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. i'd have to guess that's a play that worked every time Bevell got the same defensive look he got from the Pats.. for him, it was as sure a thing as Lynch dive play is to you guys.. and i'm also guessing that Bevell was prepared enough to know that the look he got there, might be his best chance to beat them. none of us know what he saw studying the Pats goal line D, but he must of liked his chances. i get the angst from his critics, but what folks should be criticizing is why he didn't anticipate the critical Kearse/Browner match-up. he thought Kearse could win that, and staked the play on it.. and THAT was a gross oversight.. any other DB match-up, and the parade's in Seattle.
Proteus Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 A play action or roll out could be condoned but still a bad call. Go back and watch the tape. The Pats defense was reeling and confused after the first down run. Line up and run it right away and it is a guaranteed TD. Then you give the Pats the ball with about 35 seconds left and make them earn the right to get into field goal range with their short slant/screen passing game, good luck with that. I think Carroll was expecting a T.O. by the Pats and when that didn't happen, he panicked and didn't stop Bevell from ruining his legacy.
leh-nerd skin-erd 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! the expression that seems to fit best here is "dance with who brung ya.". nothing is guaranteed, but if they stand you up at the goal line, you still have your timeout for a pass play. if they hold you out, it wasn't meant to be.
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) The congestion in that area was off the charts. while i agree with the rest of your sentiment, i just dont here with regards to congestion. there was a throwing window in the line and the receivers were 1-1. it was text book what they were looking for on the defensive side schematically. and against a UDFA. id put the run, and a play action roll out above it (and truly a packaged play where wilson can make some reads at the line between those options).... but if i told you that it would come down to a 2 v 2 matchup outside and the seahawks ran an slant with a pick over the top against a UDFA most would assume the hawks would be wearing the rings. the expression that seems to fit best here is "dance with who brung ya.". nothing is guaranteed, but if they stand you up at the goal line, you still have your timeout for a pass play. if they hold you out, it wasn't meant to be.someone i read quoted mike mccarthy with similar sentiment once upon a time as it being a situation where you have to "think of your players not your plays" Edited February 2, 2015 by NoSaint
thebandit27 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 i'd have to guess that's a play that worked every time Bevell got the same defensive look he got from the Pats.. for him, it was as sure a thing as Lynch dive play is to you guys.. and i'm also guessing that Bevell was prepared enough to know that the look he got there, might be his best chance to beat them. none of us know what he saw studying the Pats goal line D, but he must of liked his chances. i get the angst from his critics, but what folks should be criticizing is why he didn't anticipate the critical Kearse/Browner match-up. he thought Kearse could win that, and staked the play on it.. and THAT was a gross oversight.. any other DB match-up, and the parade's in Seattle. I hear all of that...no doubt. I just get hung up on the idea that running the ball virtually guarantees that you get the last shot at winning the game given that Belichick hadn't called a timeout. I also think that your last point is one of the biggest flaws in the play call...Seattle's personnel at WR vs. NE*'s DBs is a losing proposition...Bevell should know that IMO.
YoloinOhio Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Funny @celebrityhottub: We criticize Seattle for calling a pass, but what would the other 30 NFL teams have done? http://t.co/4DLY5v1LdZhttp://t.co/ArRz8Q2Ttr
dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) The QB sneak is the most successful short yardage play in football. If it works this well for Brady, it should work even better for Wilson, who is a better athlete: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/01/sports/football/a-tom-brady-sneak-is-the-patriots-unstoppable-play.html . For the life of me, I don't know why teams don't do it more often. The Pats seem to be the only team that understands. "Counting the postseason, Brady has run in those situations 115 times, according to play-by-play data from Pro Football Reference. He has gotten a first down or scored a touchdown on 105 of them, a success rate of 91.3 percent. Over one stretch, spanning more than seven years, he converted 60 of 61, including 37 straight." Edited February 2, 2015 by dave mcbride
bbb Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 The QB sneak is the most successful short yardage play in football. If it works this well for Brady, it should work even better for Wilson, who is a better athlete: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/01/sports/football/a-tom-brady-sneak-is-the-patriots-unstoppable-play.html . For the life of me, I don't know why teams don't do it more often. The Pats seem to be the only team that understands. "Counting the postseason, Brady has run in those situations 115 times, according to play-by-play data from Pro Football Reference. He has gotten a first down or scored a touchdown on 105 of them, a success rate of 91.3 percent. Over one stretch, spanning more than seven years, he converted 60 of 61, including 37 straight." I can hear my father the whole time I was growing up - "Quarterback sneak! Quarterback sneak!"...............When the Bills listened to him, it worked! It seemed like it was used a lot during the 70s, etc.............I have no idea why it's not anymore, except by the Patriots!
dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 I can hear my father the whole time I was growing up - "Quarterback sneak! Quarterback sneak!"...............When the Bills listened to him, it worked! It seemed like it was used a lot during the 70s, etc.............I have no idea why it's not anymore, except by the Patriots! The Pats' organization is just smarter, although you don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that the play is historically very successful.
SpunkysSD Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 This makes up for all the pain Carroll gave us when he was with the Jets.
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) The Pats' organization is just smarter, although you don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that the play is historically very successful. its one of those little things that goes a LONG way. Converting "and short" situations is HUGE for keeping the chains moving and scoring. in a game of inches, its amazing how many coaches ignore the easiest way to get those inches. if you want to see why the pats win so often, its decisions like this. it isnt some sexy play or big secret. its simply doing the right thing at big moments. Edited February 2, 2015 by NoSaint
bbb Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 The Pats' organization is just smarter, although you don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that the play is historically very successful. I guess Brady just goes into BeastMode!
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 I guess Brady just goes into BeastMode! i wonder if he too has a beast mode grill
dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 its one of those little things that goes a LONG way. Converting "and short" situations is HUGE for keeping the chains moving and scoring. in a game of inches, its amazing how many coaches ignore the easiest way to get those inches. if you want to see why the pats win so often, its decisions like this. it isnt some sexy play or big secret. its simply doing the right thing at big moments. Right? The Pats' success rate on those plays is off the freaking chart.
BackInDaDay Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) I also think that your last point is one of the biggest flaws in the play call...Seattle's personnel at WR vs. NE*'s DBs is a losing proposition...Bevell should know that IMO. i agree.. Browner's ability to bang heads got lost in the giddiness of being schematically correct.. actually, Bevell probably should have anticipated that the Pats would play Browner as the press man in that D - given his physical ability - and replaced Lockette with Matthews. this would have forced Browner - who spent the 2nd half shadowing Matthews - to swap out his press man duties with Butler, in order to defend a possible fade to the 6-5 Matthews. Kearse would have gotten off the line, putting himself and Butler between Matthews and Browner with no one to defend the slant.. boy.. football's pretty simple the day after Edited February 2, 2015 by BackInDaDay
plenzmd1 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 For the life of me, I don't know why teams don't do it more often. The Pats seem to be the only team that understands. " Injury concerns for the QB they say...idiot coaches in reality
bbb Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 It was a good call. It was just poor execution. At least that's what the jackwagons here tell me when I criticized Hackett's playcalling. I said this as a joke last night, and yet I see some people here are actually talking about the execution. The only thing that might be stupider than the call are Bevill and Caroll's explanations for it. They don't even make sense. its one of those little things that goes a LONG way. Converting "and short" situations is HUGE for keeping the chains moving and scoring. in a game of inches, its amazing how many coaches ignore the easiest way to get those inches. if you want to see why the pats win so often, its decisions like this. it isnt some sexy play or big secret. its simply doing the right thing at big moments. Agreed
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Injury concerns for the QB they say...idiot coaches in reality i mean, really, who was the last qb hurt on a "fall forward" type of play? occasionally a young one will be dumb and reach the ball out unprotected.... but man, youd think thatd be easy to coach out of them if you know you want to use it.
bbb Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 i mean, really, who was the last qb hurt on a "fall forward" type of play? occasionally a young one will be dumb and reach the ball out unprotected.... but man, youd think thatd be easy to coach out of them if you know you want to use it. It was the first sign that maybe Trent Edwards wasn't as good as we were thinking he was
Recommended Posts