dave mcbride Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 No one seems to mentioning the most successful short yardage play in the book - the QB sneak. It almost always works.
Section242 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 You get a chance to put the ball in Ricardo Lockette's hands you do it. It was a horrible play call. Carroll's explanation was laughable. I think he was biting the bullet for Beavell. Good luck with him getting a job. I don't get going shotgun on the half yard line.
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Ok, so you are defending the pass with the hindsight is 20/20 excuse. Just like I thought. Sorry man but this isn't it's easy to criticize after the fact situation. The play call was horrendous and everyone I was watching the Super Bowl with was asking what are they doing when they lined up in the shotgun spread. Just like 99% of the football watching world. It was an obvious mistake after the play and just as obvious before the play. No hindsight needed here. the shotgun spread is what they often run out of. its not that strange of a formation for them.
Webster Guy Posted February 2, 2015 Author Posted February 2, 2015 No one seems to mentioning the most successful short yardage play in the book - the QB sneak. It almost always works. Wilson is strong too. And there's no risk of handoff fumble. My point of the whole post is everyone was crying for Lynch, but 4 out of 5 times this year that play didn't work when they gave it to him, and the guy isn't a great short yardage back. It's like everyone is assuming that's the no-brainer play. The Pats stuffed him for a loss on many occasions and if they did it again on the next play you have to burn your time out which limits your options on what you can run the next two plays.
K D Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 2nd down and 1 yard to go to win the Super Bowl. You choose the play: 1) get under center and hand the ball off to your "beast" of a RB 2) shotgun pass where the receiver runs a slant right into the middle of the coverage I'm handing it to the RB 3x in a row and if they stop us from the 1 yard line 3 plays in a row then they deserve to win
Big Gun Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) Wilson is strong too. And there's no risk of handoff fumble. My point of the whole post is everyone was crying for Lynch, but 4 out of 5 times this year that play didn't work when they gave it to him, and the guy isn't a great short yardage back. It's like everyone is assuming that's the no-brainer play. The Pats stuffed him for a loss on many occasions and if they did it again on the next play you have to burn your time out which limits your options on what you can run the next two plays. Late in the game and the defense somewhat tired, you gotta go with your strength given the situation and especially since NE was second worst team in the league stopping 3rd/4th and less than 2 to go. It really was a no brainer and was that simple, you run the ball there. That was the time if there ever was one to play smash mouth goal line football. Edited February 2, 2015 by old school
217014170 Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) This is the 4 play sequence the Seahawks should have run. Notice the very familiar opponent. All 4 snaps are taken from the shotgun and includes a 1st down run by Marshawn Lynch. Granted, this is not a goal line situation but it works anywhere on the field - especially against defensive goal line personnel. Seattle has "Jumbo" personnel in the game at midfield. It's what everyone is talking about - make it a two man game, Wilson and Lynch. Lynch lined up next to Wilson in the shotgun leaves the defense having to account for every possibility and lets Wilson decide based on what he sees. Honestly, when I saw Wilson in the shotgun I was sure they would run the last play in this sequence but Lynch was no where to be found - I expected to see him next to Wilson. This is from 2012! http://www.ninersnation.com/2012/12/22/3796090/all-22-marshawn-lynch-russell-wilson-and-the-zone-read Edited February 2, 2015 by 217014170
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 2nd down and 1 yard to go to win the Super Bowl. You choose the play: 1) get under center and hand the ball off to your "beast" of a RB 2) shotgun pass where the receiver runs a slant right into the middle of the coverage I'm handing it to the RB 3x in a row and if they stop us from the 1 yard line 3 plays in a row then they deserve to win its a strong enough point without the running into the middle of coverage embellishment -
K D Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Pete Carroll said they passed because they wanted to have 3 plays instead of 2 so if it was incomplete then the clock would stop. That doesn't make sense. There was 29 seconds left. They couldn't run the ball 3 times in 29 seconds? I'm handing it off to Marshawn then rushing back to the line and running a QB sneak if that doesn't work. Then call a timeout for the last play if you must. There's nothing PC can say that would make sense imo
NoSaint Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 Pete Carroll said they passed because they wanted to have 3 plays instead of 2 so if it was incomplete then the clock would stop. That doesn't make sense. There was 29 seconds left. They couldn't run the ball 3 times in 29 seconds? I'm handing it off to Marshawn then rushing back to the line and running a QB sneak if that doesn't work. Then call a timeout for the last play if you must. There's nothing PC can say that would make sense imo ive seen several coaches and analysts say the same. you go into that pile and the pats are going to do everything they can to sit on the ball and pile up and you get the refs struggling to spot the ball. nate silver actually did a good little piece on why the pass wasnt crazy. essentially you have to throw once, so if you do it first it keeps the play book wide open for the defense to defend for 3 plays, and if you think the run is a slam dunk anyway the worst case is that you score later which is good.
Ted William's frozen head Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 No...they should have run the ball without question. Lynch is their best player and should have the ball in that scenario, and that's without any regard for the fact that they needed to keep the clock moving. Run, run, pass, followed by a timeout, is the only play-calling sequence that (a) puts the ball in the hands of your best player 2 out of 3 plays, and (b) manages the clock properly to leave enough time for a 4th down play without giving the opponent time to move down the field after a score. Both coaches made glaring mistakes in the final minute. As Marv Levy once said: "Three things can happen when you pass the ball" ........"Two of them are bad".
jahbonas Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 (edited) As Marv Levy once said: "Three things can happen when you pass the ball" ........"Two of them are bad". You mean Marv who in the 2nd cowboy superbowl at the end of first half after an interception inside cowboys 10 decided to not throw it into the endzone once and take 3 instead of going for a td when you had a hall of famers at WR, a HOF QB and a HOF RB? please.... Edited February 2, 2015 by jahbonas
yungmack Posted February 2, 2015 Posted February 2, 2015 As the OP reports, Lynch is not particularly good at 1 yard goal line plays (one for seven and a minus one yard net on the season) and the Pats have been pretty darn good at stopping those runs of late. So with three plays, 26 seconds and one time out left, a pass might have been a good idea, just not the one they ran. If ever a situation called for the read option, I believe that was it. Others are saying they should have run it and even if it failed, it would have forced Belichick to call a time out, so the Hawks would have gotten a "free" one to set up their next two plays, with their last time out in their pocket. Still and all, I'm leaning toward the idea that you should have run the ball with Lynch those final three plays. Ah, well, at least an original AFL franchise won.
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 No one seems to mentioning the most successful short yardage play in the book - the QB sneak. It almost always works.Right you could line up an sneak like 3 time in a row with 26 seconds and a timeout- easy. No matter which way you slice lynch gets that TD. There is no way as brutal of a runner as he is, in that situation he doesn't beast across even with wilfork on his back
Dorkington Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 ESPN Stats & Info The Patriots' defense faced 6 rush attempts from their own 1-yard line this season (including playoffs). They allowed a TD on 5 of them. Oh boy.
3rdand12 Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 that particular pass play was the wrong call.
cantankerous Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Lynch has 71 career rushing TDs. Not very good? Right.
BackInDaDay Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Wilson is strong too. And there's no risk of handoff fumble. My point of the whole post is everyone was crying for Lynch, but 4 out of 5 times this year that play didn't work when they gave it to him, and the guy isn't a great short yardage back. It's like everyone is assuming that's the no-brainer play. The Pats stuffed him for a loss on many occasions and if they did it again on the next play you have to burn your time out which limits your options on what you can run the next two plays. Lynch has really blossomed as a one-cut back under Bevell and Cables zone blocking schemes.. unfortunately for the Seahawks, ZBS doesn't create opportunities in short yardage situations - too much penetration by low leveraged D linemen blow it up.. i don't know how they've tried and failed in similar situations with Lynch, but i thought i'd offer that as a possible explanation why his success elsewhere doesn't translate to success near the goal line. as far as this now infamous play is concerned - i'll repeat something i thought about since responding to one of my favorite X&O posters on the 'dumbest play ever' thread.. Bevell came to the park with this play tucked in his goal line offense binder - circled in green as a game changer.. he was as sure as sure can be that he would get a particular look from the Pats D if he lined this formation up near the goal line. he anticipated that all his receivers would get press coverage - including his TE - and that the Pats would stack their DBs if he hid a flanker behind a split end on the weak side - in order for them to defend combo routes. what he seemed to underestimate, was the physical presence Browner gave the Pats in his role as a press cover DB - and when he ran his slant/pick play as it was drawn up - the SE Kearse couldn't get enough inside depth on Browner to pick the stacked DB Butler and keep him from jumping Locketter's slant. everything else was there.. MLB Hightower wasn't in position to defend the inside slant, and - as expected -the weakside LB Nikovich was playing force contain on the edge. the play was there, if Kearse doesn't lose that match-up with Browner. so that's strike one against Bevell - not anticipating how Browner's presence could disrupt the timing of his bread and butter goal line play.. strike two was not having an alternate route for the flanker to run - one that Wilson could have audibled to if he thought Kearse couldn't get inside Browner quick enough to pick off the closing DB. a simple switch to fake slant/corner fade would have put Lockette beyond the biting Cutler's reach. strike three is my favorite. Bevell had to know that Browner was covering Chris Matthews almost the entire 2nd half. as i see it, putting Matthews in the goal line package in place of Lockette would have accomplished at least one of two things.. the Pats swap Browner and Butler's assignments, so Browner could better defend the corner fade to the taller Matthews. if they made that switch, Kearse would become Wilson's primary on the slant against Butler. and if they swapped Revis with Butler to defend Kearse, then Baldwin becomes the primary with his inside slant on the strong side - where the TE is also running a similar pick route against LB Collins. then the Pats may have to cheat Hightower to the strong side to help Butler defend a Baldwin slant, and that leaves the weak side ripe for a Lynch dive or Wilson draw. the Pats don't adjust, and Mathews's primary route is a corner fade..if Browner switches off Kearse to follow Matthews running his corner fade - Kearse is becomes primary on inside slant. otherwise Matthews remains primary due to his mismatch with Butler on fade. with all that said.. Bevell's worst mistake wasn't his faith in his play, or his inability to increase it's odds of success - it was blaming Lockette for not rescuing it.
Mango Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Pat Kirwan made a really good point today, if You don't like the goal line personel on the field, spread everybody out. It either forces a mismatch in coverage, where you look towards the pylon, or forces the pats to take a TO. Not defending the play call, but in theory the Seahawks picked on an undrafted rookie FA to win the game. It was a winnable match up on paper, guy made a good play.
Freddie's Dead Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 C'mon man. Punkshawn lead the league in rushing TD's. B word please.
Recommended Posts