Bevell talks about THE play

[SHOCKER315]

Bevell needs to go to basic QB camp for rookies.

Should have been the pass play....low risk, high chance of success...FB is open 90% of the time. If he's covered, leaves RW with run/pass option to drag route and flag.

Ran this play consistently with great success to MikeRob in 2012 (both Skins and ATL playoff games for TD's).

[youtube]9Pb9MxeNuzo[/youtube]

Hawks ran this play to Tukowafu for an easy first down in the KC game. Almost assuredly would have worked in in SB with NE selling out to stop Lynch. RW would not have thrown to anyone unless wide open. Absolute worst case outcome... RW would have plenty of time to throw the ball away in the stands stopping clock.


:34853_doh: :34853_doh: :34853_doh: :34853_doh:

 

[Sports Hernia]

People forget we already gave the ball to Marshawn on first down and he couldn't get in. NE had their GL package in there. If he got stuffed again on second down, we would've only had time to run one more play instead of two. We had to pass to get three plays off with the clock running out. What seems so obvious is actually not so obvious when you do the math. Here's what one of the coaches/qbs said in the article (great article!):

"Interestingly, not a single one supported running a power rush by Lynch against the New England front with three 300-pound-plus defensive tackles filling the gaps. One quarterback said, “Then it would have been third-and-goal from the 2 or 3, and you’d burn your last timeout. So you’d be there with what, how many seconds left? [About 20.] And you’d probably be farther away than you were on second down.""

Yeah, he gained what 4 yards on the play before the 2nd and wrong. On the next play 4 yards at the half yardline = a touchdown....

Besides that NE was 31st in goal line defense. Odds scream that if you hand the ball off to Lynch we would have enjoyed our 2nd consecutive Super Bowl parade last February.

Instead we have the tweetle dumb of offensive coordinators defending his horrid playcall, even after hindsight of knowing the results saying he'd call the same play. SMDH!

 

[LymonHawk]

Still no reason to pass it. He was trying to be to sneaky and it backfired. He could have ran a QB sneak or a even a fullback run wich will most likely have been a TD not to mention you have 3 more tries. PLus you have marshawn.

3 more tries?

No lol i corrected it it was two more tries since if they had failed to score on third down they would try again on 4th and goal.

Here's the problem as I see it: If we run on 2nd down and don't get in, then we HAVE to pass on 3rd down. No way could we run again on 3rd down without taking a chance on the clock running out if the run failed. If we throw on 2nd down and the play fails we would still have two plays and a TO to use. Nobody gives a thought about interceptions or fumbles or a bad snap/hand-off/exchange when deciding a play.

 

[LymonHawk]

People forget we already gave the ball to Marshawn on first down and he couldn't get in. NE had their GL package in there. If he got stuffed again on second down, we would've only had time to run one more play instead of two. We had to pass to get three plays off with the clock running out. What seems so obvious is actually not so obvious when you do the math. Here's what one of the coaches/qbs said in the article (great article!):

"Interestingly, not a single one supported running a power rush by Lynch against the New England front with three 300-pound-plus defensive tackles filling the gaps. One quarterback said, “Then it would have been third-and-goal from the 2 or 3, and you’d burn your last timeout. So you’d be there with what, how many seconds left? [About 20.] And you’d probably be farther away than you were on second down.""

Yeah, he gained what 4 yards on the play before the 2nd and wrong. On the next play 4 yards at the half yardline = a touchdown....

Besides that NE was 31st in goal line defense. Odds scream that if you hand the ball off to Lynch we would have enjoyed our 2nd consecutive Super Bowl parade last February.

Instead we have the tweetle dumb of offensive coordinators defending his horrid playcall, even after hindsight of knowing the results saying he'd call the same play. SMDH!

31st or not, we tried (I believe) five times previously to run the ball in from inside the 5 yard line...we missed on 4 out of 5 times. What were the odds that was gonna happen? Kinda blows up your theory, no?

 

[hawknation2015]

People forget we already gave the ball to Marshawn on first down and he couldn't get in. NE had their GL package in there. If he got stuffed again on second down, we would've only had time to run one more play instead of two. We had to pass to get three plays off with the clock running out. What seems so obvious is actually not so obvious when you do the math. Here's what one of the coaches/qbs said in the article (great article!):

"Interestingly, not a single one supported running a power rush by Lynch against the New England front with three 300-pound-plus defensive tackles filling the gaps. One quarterback said, “Then it would have been third-and-goal from the 2 or 3, and you’d burn your last timeout. So you’d be there with what, how many seconds left? [About 20.] And you’d probably be farther away than you were on second down.""

Yeah, he gained what 4 yards on the play before the 2nd and wrong. On the next play 4 yards at the half yardline = a touchdown....

Besides that NE was 31st in goal line defense. Odds scream that if you hand the ball off to Lynch we would have enjoyed our 2nd consecutive Super Bowl parade last February.

Instead we have the tweetle dumb of offensive coordinators defending his horrid playcall, even after hindsight of knowing the results saying he'd call the same play. SMDH!

31st or not, we tried (I believe) five times previously to run the ball in from inside the 5 yard line...we missed on 4 out of 5 times. What were the odds that was gonna happen? Kinda blows up your theory, no?

The sample size for that stat is way too small (five runs) with three of those runs coming in one game against a much better power run stopping, goal line team.

In most power running situations, Marshawn has been dominant. That was the strength of our offense and New England's greatest weakness.

 

[LymonHawk]

31st or not, we tried (I believe) five times previously to run the ball in from inside the 5 yard line...we missed on 4 out of 5 times. What were the odds that was gonna happen? Kinda blows up your theory, no?

The sample size for that stat is way too small (five runs) with three of those runs coming in one game against a much better power run stopping, goal line team.

In most power running situations, Marshawn has been dominant. That was the strength of our offense and New England's greatest weakness.

We ran ML from the NE 4, in the 3rd QTR...did he score?

 

[hawknation2015]

31st or not, we tried (I believe) five times previously to run the ball in from inside the 5 yard line...we missed on 4 out of 5 times. What were the odds that was gonna happen? Kinda blows up your theory, no?

The sample size for that stat is way too small (five runs) with three of those runs coming in one game against a much better power run stopping, goal line team.

In most power running situations, Marshawn has been dominant. That was the strength of our offense and New England's greatest weakness.

We ran ML from the NE 4, in the 3rd QTR...did he score?

You mean this play?

Never mind, that was the 2nd Quarter. I see the play you are referring to . . . first of all, he gained a solid yard on that play (which is all we needed to score a TD on the one-yard line). Second, this was immediately after a great 14-yard run by Marshawn. And third, it perfectly set up a play action pass for a TD on 2nd down.

 

[grizbob]

Deja vu all over again with this thread :snack:

 

[LymonHawk]

31st or not, we tried (I believe) five times previously to run the ball in from inside the 5 yard line...we missed on 4 out of 5 times. What were the odds that was gonna happen? Kinda blows up your theory, no?

The sample size for that stat is way too small (five runs) with three of those runs coming in one game against a much better power run stopping, goal line team.

In most power running situations, Marshawn has been dominant. That was the strength of our offense and New England's greatest weakness.

We ran ML from the NE 4, in the 3rd QTR...did he score?

You mean this play?

Never mind, that was the 2nd Quarter. I see the play you are referring to . . . first of all, he gained a solid yard on that play (which is all we needed to score a TD on the one-yard line). Second, this was immediately after a great 14-yard run by Marshawn. And third, it perfectly set up a play action pass on 2nd down.

Did he score from the 4 in the third qtr? Or was he stopped for no gain?

 

[hawknation2015]

The sample size for that stat is way too small (five runs) with three of those runs coming in one game against a much better power run stopping, goal line team.

In most power running situations, Marshawn has been dominant. That was the strength of our offense and New England's greatest weakness.

We ran ML from the NE 4, in the 3rd QTR...did he score?

You mean this play?

Never mind, that was the 2nd Quarter. I see the play you are referring to . . . first of all, he gained a solid yard on that play (which is all we needed to score a TD on the one-yard line). Second, this was immediately after a great 14-yard run by Marshawn. And third, it perfectly set up a play action pass on 2nd down.

Did he score from the 4 in the third qtr? Or was he stopped for no gain?

Neither, as I said above. He hit a group of unblocked Patriots and trucked his way for a solid yard, which is all we would have needed to win the game from the one-yard line.

 

[erik2690]

It's interesting that he polled 3 QB's and 2 coaches and none said run was the best call their. It's always struck me that 'just hand it off' was way less of this obvious thing then fans make it out to be. I still dislike the call, but it doesn't seem like it's an insider consensus that "run" was what needed to happen.

LOL, three QBs and two coaches is now considered an insider consensus? It is actually the perfect example of a hasty generalization fallacy, i.e. reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence. Most former QBs that I know always want to pass.

According to Football Outsiders, the Patriots were the worst team in the league in power-running situations. Marshawn scored a TD earlier in the game against a goal line formation. Meanwhile, we were the 2nd best power running team in the league with a 78% success rate.

? I said that shows there isn't an insider consensus that "run" was the best thing. Like I didn't even word that part very clunky how did you completely switch my meaning?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Will. Not. Click.

Will. Not. Read.

Can't do it, won't do it!

Bingo.

I'm not interested in more excuses, from Bevell or anyone else on the Hawks for that matter.............unless it's "sorry, we were stupid and should have run the ball or throw to the corner of the end zone with a low risk pass."

 

[hawknation2015]

It's interesting that he polled 3 QB's and 2 coaches and none said run was the best call their. It's always struck me that 'just hand it off' was way less of this obvious thing then fans make it out to be. I still dislike the call, but it doesn't seem like it's an insider consensus that "run" was what needed to happen.

LOL, three QBs and two coaches is now considered an insider consensus? It is actually the perfect example of a hasty generalization fallacy, i.e. reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence. Most former QBs that I know always want to pass.

According to Football Outsiders, the Patriots were the worst team in the league in power-running situations. Marshawn scored a TD earlier in the game against a goal line formation. Meanwhile, we were the 2nd best power running team in the league with a 78% success rate.

? I said that shows there isn't an insider consensus that "run" was the best thing. Like I didn't even word that part very clunky how did you completely switch my meaning?

My point was you can't say what the "insider consensus" is either way from such a small sample size. If you expanded this to every offensive coordinator in the league, I think there very well could be a general agreement that running the ball with Marshawn Lynch was the safest and highest probability play call for that situation.

 

[ivotuk]

As a coach, you never make a decision based on fear, especially if you're QB is Russell Wilson.

You make that decision based on time left on the clock, number of times the opposing team can stop that clock, and number of downs.

I hate the call, and I probably would have called Lynch's number, but as far as strategy goes, Bevell made the correct call.


It just wasn't executed properly. IMHO, there's plenty of blame to go around, it's just that like, Goodell, Bevell is the most convenient target for people to blame.

The only thing I would have changed is to give Russell Wilson the authority to audible out of that play. In the future I hope that instead of looking at "We've always been succesful on that play," look at "If you've always been successful on that play, then opposing teams are going to be practicing and planning against it and maybe you should give that look, but go somewhere else."

 

[themunn]

But the abandoning of our greatest weapon was a continual theme of the season.

I'm pretty certain we set a franchise record for yards in a game where Lynch only got 10 carries

 

[Zebulon Dak]

Y'all still on this shit?

 

[hawknation2015]

But the abandoning of our greatest weapon was a continual theme of the season.

I'm pretty certain we set a franchise record for yards in a game where Lynch only got 10 carries

Because Lynch was out at the beginning of the game, and then happened to run for 113 yards and 2 TDs on those 10 carries. By the 4th Quarter, Christine Michael was in there running the ball (and fumbling). That's a pretty rare thing. Normally, our offense functions best when Lynch receives twice as many carries as that.

Not giving the ball to Lynch on first and second downs against Dallas and San Diego led to some ugly 3rd and long situations and short drives.

 

[blue 22]

Not that it matters but Jim rome had something to say about bevell

Nobody Buys It, Bevell

Show me someone who swears they have no regrets in life, and I’ll show you a liar.
http://jimrome.com/2015/08/20/nobody-buys-it-bevell/



You have to sign up to hear it unfortunatly.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

Still no reason to pass it. He was trying to be to sneaky and it backfired. He could have ran a QB sneak or a even a fullback run wich will most likely have been a TD not to mention you have 3 more tries. PLus you have marshawn.

3 more tries?

He probably meant three tries total:

2nd down - Marshawn Lynch run
Touchdown ~80% of the time
or
Use the timeout ~19.5% of the time (less than 0.5% chance of a Marshawn fumble)
3rd down - Play action, throw a fade up to Kearse, Matthews (the hot hand), or a TE
Touchdown ~60% of the time
or
Incompletion stops the clock ~38% of the time (2% chance of a Wilson INT)
4th down - Marshawn Lynch run
Touchdown ~80% of the time
or
Lose the game ~20% of the time

These are rough approximations based on the team's relative strength in power-running situations, the Patriots' weakness in that area, and Wilson/Marshawn's relative turnover ratios. There is also the possibility of a sack on the 3rd down play action (~9%), which would necessitate running to the line to get off one last play and would reduce the probability for success on the subsequent play. If we assume these very rough approximations are accurate, which they are not, then the total probability of scoring a TD on three tries from the one-yard line was 98.4%.

They gave Marshawn the ball on first down and he got stuffed. Against the GL package on second down a run would've been more like a %15 chance

 

[hawknation2015]

Still no reason to pass it. He was trying to be to sneaky and it backfired. He could have ran a QB sneak or a even a fullback run wich will most likely have been a TD not to mention you have 3 more tries. PLus you have marshawn.

3 more tries?

He probably meant three tries total:

2nd down - Marshawn Lynch run
Touchdown ~80% of the time
or
Use the timeout ~19.5% of the time (less than 0.5% chance of a Marshawn fumble)
3rd down - Play action, throw a fade up to Kearse, Matthews (the hot hand), or a TE
Touchdown ~60% of the time
or
Incompletion stops the clock ~38% of the time (2% chance of a Wilson INT)
4th down - Marshawn Lynch run
Touchdown ~80% of the time
or
Lose the game ~20% of the time

These are rough approximations based on the team's relative strength in power-running situations, the Patriots' weakness in that area, and Wilson/Marshawn's relative turnover ratios. There is also the possibility of a sack on the 3rd down play action (~9%), which would necessitate running to the line to get off one last play and would reduce the probability for success on the subsequent play. If we assume these very rough approximations are accurate, which they are not, then the total probability of scoring a TD on three tries from the one-yard line was 98.4%.

They gave Marshawn the ball on first down and he got stuffed. Against the GL package on second down a run would've been more like a %15 chance

Stuffed? He gained FOUR yards on 1st and 5 to get to the one-yard line. We needed one more yard!

New England was ranked 31st on the goal line and 32nd in power running situations (dead last).