Seattle made correct call?
There were 66 passes thrown from the 1-yard line:
0 passes were intercepted.
Marshawn Lynch had 5 carries from the 1-yard line:
only 1 touchdown scored.
However, I agree Seattle wins if they run, instead of throw.
I don't blame Pete Carrol for calling the play. It was an excellent defensive play that did them in.
Quote: AlanMendelsonIt's been a long, long time since I played high school football but when the ball is on the 1 you don't pass it. The QB hands off to a running back who only has to fall over forward.
Exactly and that won't change.
You know I am in the emergency response haz-mat spill clean up business. Almost all of our business is as a first responder with State Police, Heavy Wreckers and other transportation related matters regarding tractor trailers and railroads, etc. There are just certain things, protocols and 'well laid past experienced situations' that are proven and dedicated for years. There are things I would never ever change in my business everyday scene operating agenda and then there are things I have. But none of them involve the set up and initial response because they have not failed in the past. And I am sorry, I relate my personal work situation to that of the passing versus running the ball in situation that took place. I wholeheartedly believe in any profession (pro-sports included of course) you abide by what is fundamental and proven. Sorry, it was just plain wrong and showboating, kind of slightly reminds me the way Vinnie Testaverde used to want to always throw the ball in from the <10 yard line, etc.
I will go out on the limb here and second guess what was going through a coaching mind. 'Headlines tomorrow: Seattle wins SB with spectacular last second throw into crowded end zone'.
Quote: RivaIt was, without question, the worst call made in Superbowl history!
Is this an empirical fact? I'm no expert on sports history, but surely there must have been a worse call at some point in the last 48 Super Bowls, no?
Quote: renoIs this an empirical fact? I'm no expert on sports history, but surely there must have been a worse call at some point in the last 48 Super Bowls, no?
Man, I don't think so. This is the one call in Super Bowl history where nobody but Pete Carroll thinks it was the right call.
The Patriots Knew Exactly What Was Coming
Quote: HowManySeattle made correct call?
No, no, a thousand times no. This is not a time for stats, probabilities, or other numerical tomfoolery. This is one shot. One moment. One chance to make a stand and be a Warrior.
It's the Super Bowl. It's 3rd and 6. There are multitudinous plays you can call. But when that play is called, and that play fails, and the only option is a 37 year old man with no knees and a forty time of a lunar month is your only hope, it's time to be a Warrior. The throwaway, the "smart play", does not apply. When that man hobbles over scrimmage and is met by two angry, youthful linebackers looking to end his soul, the QB slide, the "smart play", does not apply. And when that geriatric bag of bones hurtles himself skyward, gets pummeled by 500lbs of meat, and helicopters over the first down line, men and boys separate with the force of righteousness that is created when a Legend comes into being. We look back at the Class of '83 and see failure; a man who threw for six million miles - a failure. The man who went to four straight Super Bowls - a failure. Only the man who stood as a Warrior, only he is Legend. Because when the time came, he stood in the face of challenge, and challenge fell before him.
So you let that time tick, tick it off until the Pats have no hope. Then you come to the line, and come as Warriors. You stuff that pig into the hole with everything you got. If you fail, you line right back up, quick snap, and you do it again. And if that fails, you line right back up and you do it again!
You may fail to score, but you did not fail the game. You met the challenge and you met that #$%^er#$%^er head on. You gave no quarter and you fought. Win or lose, live or die, you leave the field a Warrior.
364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 20 seconds of blood, sweat, and tears, all in the pursuit of leaving a Warrior. And 40 seconds of forgetting that lesson caused them to leave as Clowns.
I think that what pisses most of us off is that it should have ended with strength against strength. Beast vs the Patriots' eleven. There was that great catch to set it up, there was some botched clock management to put it at 30 seconds, 3 plays, and one time out.... It should have been BOOM! BOOM!<time out>BOOM! Or even the read option, and let Wilson try to run it in.
Props to the Pats kid who made the pick. If you read the article I linked above, he explains why he made the play. Good, heady decision. Too bad it's overshadowed by the sheer boneheadedness of him being in that position to begin with.
Quote: Face
So you let that time tick, tick it off until the Pats have no hope. Then you come to the line, and come as Warriors. You stuff that pig into the hole with everything you got. If you fail, you line right back up, quick snap, and you do it again. And if that fails, you line right back up and you do it again!
You may fail to score, but you did not fail the game. You met the challenge and you met that #$%^er#$%^er head on. You gave no quarter and you fought. Win or lose, live or die, you leave the field a Warrior.
364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 20 seconds of blood, sweat, and tears, all in the pursuit of leaving a Warrior. And 40 seconds of forgetting that lesson caused them to leave as Clowns.
And you know, even if the Seahawks had failed by an inch at the last second -- the game would have been likely considered an EPIC Super Bowl.
And the shouting would only just be dying down about now.
The only downside might be all the heart attacks.
I say somewhere between "correct play" and "not as bad as everyone makes it to be".
He has a known history of throwing during plays that do not warrant it.
His decision to go for the touchdown instead of the field goal before the first half ended is a perfect example. Just because it paid off doesn't mean it was the correct play. Horrible coaching during this game. Some outstanding players though.
Quote: AyecarumbaI don't blame Pete Carrol for calling the play. It was an excellent defensive play that did them in.
I don't blame Carrol either. However, it wasn't the defense. It was an absolutely poor decision by Russell Wilson to throw that ball. He pissed on himself.
I disagree. It's a timing pick-play that was working until the Pat's Butler jumped the route. The receiver was clear, but got bumped off. It all happens in a split second. 66 times that play works. Unfortunately, this was attempt number 67.Quote: steeldcoI don't blame Carrol either. However, it wasn't the defense. It was an absolutely poor decision by Russell Wilson to throw that ball. He pissed on himself.
If you have ever played football in the street, this play was known as "three steps and turn around". Tough to defend, because it happens quickly, and if you try to jump it, you risk getting burned on the pump fake. Butler gambled and it worked out well for him.
Lynch had over 100 yards and was averaging over 4 yards per carry for the game. He had just carried on 1st and goal from the 5 yard line to the 1 yard line. 4 yards right up the middle. If they failed to push it in they had a timeout to stop the clock and then again decide what to do.
The call was bad. Should have run it. Lynch had 24 rushes and none of them were less than a yard.
The pass was bad. Wilson did not put it where only the receiver could catch it.
The route by the receiver was bad. Very weak in the catch attempt. The Super Bowl is on the line. Top receivers run that route much stronger. If you watch the replay, he kind of tippy toes past the pick and never runs hard. If you don't catch it, it shouldn't be caught by anyone.
But with all that said, Seattle shouldn't have even been there. They pulled off a 1 in 100 games comeback against the Packers. One play doesn't decide a game. It was a great game. Congrats to the Patriots.
ZCore13
Quote: BoulderDamIt
His decision to go for the touchdown instead of the field goal before the first half ended is a perfect example. Just because it paid off doesn't mean it was the correct play. Horrible coaching during this game. Some outstanding players though.
I thought it was a fair play regardless of the result. I think Wilson has the wherewithal to at least throw it away if he can't find anyone and was well-aware of the clock situation. As long as he doesn't throw into double coverage, or anything, I see nothing wrong with that call. If the Patriots were getting the ball first in the second half I might agree, but with SEA getting it back, the potential TD puts them in position to take control of the game...which they did, briefly.
1. 2nd / G from the 1 YL.
2. About 30 seconds remaining.
3. Seahawks had at least one TO remaining.
4. Lynch (a well-known power back) had just gained four yards on the previous play.
If it were me, I would run Lynch again and call time out if he didn't score. If he doesn't score, that gives you at least 20 seconds left and 3rd down. Throw it on that down and if you don't complete it the clock stops. And then it's 4th down and it's all the same to run or pass because the clock is irrelevant at that point.
I just can't see throwing it on that second down play. And if I were gonna throw it, it would be a bootleg pass against a desperate defensive front that cannot give up a single yard in the running game and had trouble tackling Wilson in space all night. Wilson might have booted out and walked in. No way would I line up in the shotgun and try to throw a tight, inside breaking route. I would have run a QB sneak before I did that.
But geez, if you're going to throw on second down make it a back shoulder fade in the corner; either your guy gets it or it falls to the ground.
Quote: MoscaI would run Lynch, then call time out. Then the next play would be the read option with Wilson going wide, pass or run, so that he could get out of bounds if he had to, or throw it away outside the tackle box if no one is open. Assuming neither of those plays work, then you are left with one play for all the money, and it could be anything.
But geez, if you're going to throw on second down make it a back shoulder fade in the corner; either your guy gets it or it falls to the ground.
This is exactly right in my opinion. With 20-some seconds and one time out you can run the ball twice, plus throw an incomplete pass. But if and when you throw a pass from the one yard line it has to be a fade to the corner, so it is either a TD or incomplete. You don't throw any kind of pass in the middle where you have 22 guys congested into a very small area like that. That is just too dangerous.
Personally I would have run again on second down (lynch had just picked up 4 and a half on first down), and if he didn't make it, used my timeout and then run either a fade to the corner or an option run where Russell throws it away if nothing is WIDE open. If that didn't work, you still have one final play and all options on the table.
Quote:Interceptions are extremely unlikely from the 1—Russell Wilson’s was the first of the year—so the risk seemed worth it. Between the matchups and the clock considerations, the decision to pass seems defensible, but the play call of a quick inside slant and Wilson’s decision to pull the trigger remain subject to criticism.
But an interception wasn’t the only added risk of a passing play. There was also the possibility of a sack and higher probabilities of a penalty or turnover. There are any number of possible combinations of outcomes to consider on Seattle’s three remaining downs—too many to directly evaluate. So I ran the situation through a game simulation. The simulator plays out the remainder of the game thousands of times from a chosen point—in this case from the second down on. I ran the simulation twice, once forcing the Seahawks to run on second down and once forcing them to pass. I anticipated that the results would support my logic (and Carroll’s explanation) that running would be a bad idea. It turns out I was wrong. The simulation—which is different than Win Probability—gave Seattle an 85 percent chance of winning by running and a 77 percent chance by passing.
Quote: renoBrian Burke, founder of Advanced NFL Stats writes:
Pah. Stats and sims are for you all people. Gamblers, forseers, predictors, and prognosticators. It's great at the sportsbook. It's great on a forum. It's great for all the sports programs who base all their content on it, and all the fantasy blokes who cling to them like Holy Scripture.
But this ain't that. This is a moment when the only thing that matters is heart. Not one other thing matters in the whole entire world other than that one question - "How Bad Do You Want It?"
Face would've punched that #$%^er in. And then I would've stayed on for defense just for a shot at the Golden Boy. And I would've had it, by god. Killed him dead and ate his children, too.
Quote: Face"How Bad Do You Want It?"
Face would've punched that #$%^er in. And then I would've stayed on for defense just for a shot at the Golden Boy. And I would've had it, by god. Killed him dead and ate his children, too.
You should be a coach. I'm fired up. I'd run through a brick wall for you, man.
Quote: Face
But this ain't that. This is a moment when the only thing that matters is heart. Not one other thing matters in the whole entire world other than that one question - "How Bad Do You Want It?"
If it is only heart that matters, didn't it play out just the way it should have. By your logic the Pats linebacker had more heart and went and got the ball. Maybe his heart was just bigger and would have knocked the ball away from Lynch on a run also.
