New look at the Interception...

[olyfan63]

I still hate Bevell for throwing Lockette under the bus about being stronger to the ball in the national media, right or not. I will give Bevell a bit more of a pass on it, because he was in fact right. It's just not something you call out your player on in that situation. Leave that to Green Bay; it was despicable the way they threw each other under the bus after the Rain City Resurrection.

I can't really fault Kearse for not beating Browner's jam to make the pick play work. We saw Browner in Seattle, and there's no more physical corner in the league. Just ask Cam Newton and Wes Welker among others.

However, it's a huge mistake to rely on a play that relies on ANYONE other than *maybe* a TE pushing Browner back to create a pick. So Bevell's thinking is messed up from that standpoint too.

 

[captSE]

Those who call this play a "horrible call" have the comfort of hindsight. BS, on any given day Daneruss can make the throw or will make the decision not to because that is Russell Wilson.
Not only that, Lockett got pinballed over in a play that could only happen if Butler played it perfect - which he did - but it took a incredible set of circumstance to do what happened.
"Horrible call" is a self serving claim that you could have done it or called it better. I doubt it.

 

[dumbrabbit]

The play was well executed. The DB just made a great play, he knew it was coming.

 

[45Hawker]

Looks like Browner is holding Kearse with his left hand...

 

[byau]

The more I watch, the more I am okay with the playcall.

I too would have preferred the Lynch run. Our whole room would have

But thinking back on it now, when I saw Russell drop back to pass, I was not in an "OH NO" moment. I was still expecting the TD. When Russell came out today with his thought process how he was thinking "TD. We got it", I realize I was the same

My shock and disbelief came when the INT came.

For me that means, I instinctively did not mind the play call

And it was lack of execution combined with supreme execution by the Pats that it turned out this way. Better team won that play, which ended up winning the game.

Btw, Hugh Millen breakdown of things that went wrong with that play aka poor execution

http://seattletimes.com/html/seahawks/2 ... 03xml.html

 

[chet380]

Those who call this play a "horrible call" have the comfort of hindsight. BS, on any given day Daneruss can make the throw or will make the decision not to because that is Russell Wilson.
Not only that, Lockett got pinballed over in a play that could only happen if Butler played it perfect - which he did - but it took a incredible set of circumstance to do what happened.
"Horrible call" is a self serving claim that you could have done it or called it better. I doubt it.

If Butler doesn't make a once-in-a-lifetime play, Lockette scores and the Hawks win SB2 -- unfortunately Butler makes that play -- give credit where credit is due.

 

[marko358]

Here's a video from the corner. It's clear that Butler knew what was going on based on the formation and gave Browner a head's up before the snap.

[youtube]RgloErF-H2c[/youtube]

 

[marko358]

Those who call this play a "horrible call" have the comfort of hindsight. BS, on any given day Daneruss can make the throw or will make the decision not to because that is Russell Wilson.
Not only that, Lockett got pinballed over in a play that could only happen if Butler played it perfect - which he did - but it took a incredible set of circumstance to do what happened.
"Horrible call" is a self serving claim that you could have done it or called it better. I doubt it.

If Butler doesn't make a once-in-a-lifetime play, Lockette scores and the Hawks win SB2 -- unfortunately Butler makes that play -- give credit where credit is due.

Not sure how "once in a lifetime" something is when you completely expect it to happen.

 

[chet380]

Those who call this play a "horrible call" have the comfort of hindsight. BS, on any given day Daneruss can make the throw or will make the decision not to because that is Russell Wilson.
Not only that, Lockett got pinballed over in a play that could only happen if Butler played it perfect - which he did - but it took a incredible set of circumstance to do what happened.
"Horrible call" is a self serving claim that you could have done it or called it better. I doubt it.

If Butler doesn't make a once-in-a-lifetime play, Lockette scores and the Hawks win SB2 -- unfortunately Butler makes that play -- give credit where credit is due.

Not sure how "once in a lifetime" something is when you completely expect it to happen.

99 times out of a hundred the worst that will happen is an incompleted pass and not a PI.

 

[brimsalabim]

definitely the wrong DB to attack in that scenario.

Was the play call bad? Yes

But this WAS the CB you wanted to attack out of the others that were on the field. From the snapshot in this pic, Baldwin wasn't going anywhere.

I believe he was referring to Browner being on that side to wreck the play. Remember Browner has seen us run this plenty of times in practice.

 

[Norn Iron man]

Honestly, if I had somehow known the playcall before it happened I would have been horrified - it's not hindsight. It was a needlessly risky area to throw to, and you're throwing it to basically a fifth string receiver. Twice against Green Bay those sorts of throws bounced off our reciever's hands and were picked off. It was senseless, you still had two more downs to punch it in.

I'm not totally opposed to throwing it in that situation but not to there. Why not fake the handoff, then roll Wilson out and give him the option of either throwing it away or running for the touchdown if the pass isn't on.

Also, can we stop saying Butler made some sort of miraculous play. They knew what was coming and he broke well for ball. It was a good play, but not come kind of freak reaction on his part.

It was a horrible call, no amount of revisionist rationalising of it will ever change that fact.

 

[Norn Iron man]

Honestly, if I had somehow known the playcall before it happened I would have been horrified - it's not hindsight. It was a needlessly risky area to throw to, and you're throwing it to basically a fifth string receiver. Twice against Green Bay those sorts of throws bounced off our reciever's hands and were picked off. It was senseless, you still had two more downs to punch it in.

I'm not totally opposed to throwing it in that situation but not to there. Why not fake the handoff, then roll Wilson out and give him the option of either throwing it away or running for the touchdown if the pass isn't on.

Also, can we stop saying Butler made some sort of miraculous play. They knew what was coming and he broke well for ball. It was a good play, but not come kind of freak reaction on his part.

It was a horrible call, no amount of revisionist rationalising of it will ever change that fact.

 

[50yrpatsfan]

as you look at the still, the play had no chance of success with Butler in that position. If he didn't intercept it, it's likely the ball would end up in the air for someone else to intercept it. Also there's a LB moving in from the right that would have tackled Lockette on the 1 even if he got past Butler somehow. Also, Butler did get a great jump but I don't see how Kearse would ever get over far enough to impede him.

The only way this works is if Butler really doesn't react well at all and lets Kearse run in front of him. Based on the way Butler had played the whole 2nd half - 5 passes defended if you count the miracle reception - the Hawks had no reason to think he'd play this one so badly. Watch the 2nd half and you'll see he was playing like an All-Pro.

 

[50yrpatsfan]

Honestly, if I had somehow known the playcall before it happened I would have been horrified - it's not hindsight. It was a needlessly risky area to throw to, and you're throwing it to basically a fifth string receiver. Twice against Green Bay those sorts of throws bounced off our reciever's hands and were picked off. It was senseless, you still had two more downs to punch it in.

I'm not totally opposed to throwing it in that situation but not to there. Why not fake the handoff, then roll Wilson out and give him the option of either throwing it away or running for the touchdown if the pass isn't on.

Also, can we stop saying Butler made some sort of miraculous play. They knew what was coming and he broke well for ball. It was a good play, but not come kind of freak reaction on his part.

It was a horrible call, no amount of revisionist rationalising of it will ever change that fact.

He made a miraculous play to CATCH it, but it wasn't miraculous for him to have defended it.

 

[jlwaters1]

As much as I hated the call at first and still somewhat do, I can see why Russ took this shot. Great play by the CB on this.

Just think it Lockette actually continued to run instead of stopping and waiting for the ball to arrive. I can't believe in the biggest game in the biggest play of his life and his doesn't ATTACK THE BALL, his lackadaisical effort is what sunk us.

 

[PackerNation]

This is a good breakdown of the play:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... that-play/

The Patriots did know it was coming....

 

[45Hawker]

i think it was a unnecessarily risky play call that was poorly executed (mostly by Lockette). The Pats capitalized and made one more play than the Seahawks. Congrats, to the Patriots and their fans.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still in pain...

 

[olyfan63]

as you look at the still, the play had no chance of success with Butler in that position. If he didn't intercept it, it's likely the ball would end up in the air for someone else to intercept it. Also there's a LB moving in from the right that would have tackled Lockette on the 1 even if he got past Butler somehow. Also, Butler did get a great jump but I don't see how Kearse would ever get over far enough to impede him.

The only way this works is if Butler really doesn't react well at all and lets Kearse run in front of him. Based on the way Butler had played the whole 2nd half - 5 passes defended if you count the miracle reception - the Hawks had no reason to think he'd play this one so badly. Watch the 2nd half and you'll see he was playing like an All-Pro.

When watching the video, it looks like Lockette sees LB #54, Dont'a Hightower, rushing to blow him up, and that affected his concentration, and thinking that after the catch, he'd have to turn upfield. I don't think Lockette ever saw Butler or knew he was there; his body flop from the Butler contact makes clear he was totally unprepared for that.

So, in a way, #54 Hightower's play was just as important as Butler's play. If Hightower isn't there, Lockette runs a little harder for the ball, maybe the 6 inches of difference between an incompletion and a pick.

Summing it up, 3 Patriots made terrific plays on that:

1) Browner, defeating Kearse's pick, jamming Kearse at the line. Unsurprising given he has 30 pounds of body weight and muscle over Kearse. Plus Browner knew what was coming and was determined to blow it up.

2) #54 Hightower - recognized the route and reacted and influenced the receiver, gave Lockette "alligator arms"

3) Butler - just a phenomenal play by the rook. Read it, reacted, executed, caught the pick.

Conversely, 3+ Seahawks were guilty of "fail' on that play:
1) Wilson, for placing the ball where he did, pickable, failing to see the DB. I really think Wilson was so busy celebrating his 2nd consecutive Lombardi, he mentally blocked out Butler's presence in that moment.

2) Kearse, for failing to driver Browner off the line enough to make the pick work. But really, how can you fault him, giving up 30 lbs to ultra-physical Browner? About all he could have done, was maybe take an inside release, to drag Browner into the path of Butler, but that has its own problems and I'm sure isn't what was practiced.

3) Lockette, but surprisingly, for not knowing where the DB was, and focusing on the LB that was coming to blow him up. Lockette has to learn to read the coverage and know where the DBs are going to be. He got all worried about #54 Hightower, and wasn't even aware of Butler's presence. A more polished WR would have known where the DB was, and been aware he needed to make sure a pick didn't happen. The reason Lockette wasn't strong to the ball is he was worried about #54 Hightower and totally unaware of Butler.

Of course, Bevell and the play design are a massive fail in this situation. At least let's go down fighting with our strengths. Let Russell make a real decision, let him run/pass decide. Wilson had next to no chance to make a quality read there, just plant and throw, bang-bang. Plus expecting Kearse to run Browner into a pick is a massive fail on Bevell's part.

 

[Mojambo]

Larry Fitzgerald running that route and it's a TD all day every day.

 

[idahohawk]

This never gets less painful to watch.

SB win on the line and they go to a play to our 3rd, possibly 4th receiver, one with speed, but the most undisciplined route runner with questionable discipline.

Shoot me.