New look at the Interception...

[Grahamhawker]

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.

I disagree. In fact I think the opposite argument could be made: 99 times out of 100 (exaggeration!) something BAD happens on that play with the personnel involved.

I don't think the pick was some incredibly random miracle play by Butler. He did his job, sure; but knowing it was coming along with the matchups involved (Browner jammed Kearse :shock: - Surprise!) made it pretty easy to make that play. Have any of Lockette's 18 catches been slants? I can't remember one...

Execution aside, that's what makes the playcall the definition of horrible .

 

[idahohawk]

They knew the exact play that was coming. End of story. I agree, if that play is run 100 times it ends badly a majority of the time. You can tell by the body language they knew it was coming. The formation and shift gave it away, and it was one read & jump it... ballgame.

Maybe I need another break from .net. This sucks.

 

[Hawk-A-Loogie]

No matter how you look at it, passing was wrong here. Passing just puts the ball in the air and gives the defense a higher chance of something going wrong. Going for the ball in traffic could also result in the ball being deflected up into the air. Very-very small chance of a fumble if we were to run. Of all games of being conservative this was the game and time to be 100% conservative. Even with the result of a TD, a bunch of us would have questioned if that was the right call looking back.

 

[Ruminator]

Sheesh. If you showed that picture to someone who didn't see the game, most would probably say there is NO WAY anyone but Lockett could come down with it. Butler must've had a supernatural turbo boost to wind up being the recipient.

 

[AgentDib]

I'll never like the play call either but it is silly to act like Bevell directly called a quick slant to Lockette. He called a passing play where the QB has at least 4 options and Russ went to Lockette because 1) he looked open and 2) Russ has shown unfailing optimism in his receivers. Russ could have thrown the ball towards the sideline for any of the other three guys but he thought Lockette had it and he didn't.

 

[nwHawk]

I think we all can agree that the play call was horrible. That being said, it looked like it was there in all the replays. The DB just made one hell of a break on the ball and went harder to the ball.

As horrid as the play call was, it STILL should have been a TD. It required a phenomenal play from Butler to get the INT, and Lockette was the last WR I would want in that position for that play.

Now think about what the outcome would have been like with a TE running that route instead of Lockette. No doubt about it.

 

[nwHawk]

I think we all can agree that the play call was horrible. That being said, it looked like it was there in all the replays. The DB just made one hell of a break on the ball and went harder to the ball.

As horrid as the play call was, it STILL should have been a TD. It required a phenomenal play from Butler to get the INT, and Lockette was the last WR I would want in that position for that play.

Now think about what the outcome would have been like with a TE running that route instead of Lockette. No doubt about it.

 

[ivotuk]

Worst call ever!

Everybody knows that when the game is on the line, you give the ball to your best player(s). NOT Ricardo Lockettes!

If you must throw it, throw it to Baldwin or Kearse!!!!! Ricardo Lockette has never demonstrated good/great hands.

And you don't count on anybody putting a block on the leagues toughest defensive back! You know, the one that kicked so much ass during his 2 years as a Seahawk....

They obviously neglected to scout the patriots defensive backfield or else they wouldn't have expected a positive outcome from such a complicated play call! Too many moving parts!

I HATE Bevell!

 

[NFSeahawks]

Read option, game over.

But I've moved on, I suggest you let your wounds heal.

I heard Percy Harvin's available for WR.

 

[theincrediblesok]

I'll never like the play call either but it is silly to act like Bevell directly called a quick slant to Lockette. He called a passing play where the QB has at least 4 options and Russ went to Lockette because 1) he looked open and 2) Russ has shown unfailing optimism in his receivers. Russ could have thrown the ball towards the sideline for any of the other three guys but he thought Lockette had it and he didn't.

I thought it was Bevell's direct call for the slant, and that Russell couldn't audible out of it. The ball was out quick and he didn't even look at any other receivers. The Patriots ran against that play in practice, Butler and Browner saw it coming, props to them. It was the personnel on the field that I have a hard time swallowing, it seemed like that quick slant was made more for Richardson. I think leaving the time on the clock for Brady might of forced the team to do a quick pass to chew time, horrible ending but it is what it is now.

 

[plyka]

I think we all can agree that the play call was horrible. That being said, it looked like it was there in all the replays. The DB just made one hell of a break on the ball and went harder to the ball.

As horrid as the play call was, it STILL should have been a TD. It required a phenomenal play from Butler to get the INT, and Lockette was the last WR I would want in that position for that play.

Not to bring this up over again --but Butler had ZERO choice other than to take a risk and jump the route. If the Seahawks decide to run, it's a 90% chance that they lose. The ONLY chance the Patriots had was to bring out an ultimate goal line package, daring the Hawks to do the idiotic, so they had a semblance of a chance. The Hawks did the idiotic, they didnt take the sure victory and opened the door. Once the Hawks opened the door by passing, then it is a take your chance because the worst case scenario (Hawks score a TD) is an automatic result if they just run, so you have nothing to lose. A defensive pass interference is meaningless and you have 1 chance --so what if you guess incorrectly and jump the route and end up wrong? In that case the result is what would happen on the next play anyway, which is a TD run by Lynch.

Once the Hawks were duped into doing the idiotic and giving the Patriots a CHANCE when they had zero chance --at that point you have to jump the route because there is nothing to lose.

It's comparison would have been if the Patriots, after the interception and the 5 yard offsides call ---if at that point they decided to take a shot down field because they had their WR in 1 on 1 coverage, instead of taking a knee and winning the game.

I think any reasonable person would call it the worst call in NFL history and there is no close second.

 

[NFSeahawks]

I'll never like the play call either but it is silly to act like Bevell directly called a quick slant to Lockette. He called a passing play where the QB has at least 4 options and Russ went to Lockette because 1) he looked open and 2) Russ has shown unfailing optimism in his receivers. Russ could have thrown the ball towards the sideline for any of the other three guys but he thought Lockette had it and he didn't.

I thought it was Bevell's direct call for the slant, and that Russell couldn't audible out of it. The ball was out quick and he didn't even look at any other receivers. The Patriots ran against that play in practice, Butler and Browner saw it coming, props to them. It was the personnel on the field that I have a hard time swallowing, it seemed like that quick slant was made more for Richardson. I think leaving the time on the clock for Brady might of forced the team to do a quick pass to chew time, horrible ending but it is what it is now.

What's with all these people talking about time... I mean I guess Brady would have had some where in the range of thirty seconds and I guess it's been known Belichick lets teams score when he has to.

I suppose the LOB could have given up enough yards for the Patriots to kick a fg, but I would have taken my chance with that defense all day had we scored.

Once again, too much thinking. If we do this, then they do that, if we do that, then they do this. This also tells me that giving the ball to Lynch would have resulted in a TD and the universe exploding.

 

[plyka]

Russ took the shot because that was the call, and there's no way he burns our final timeout, KNOWING we ultimately want to run it in.

It was still a terrible call, not only in general but from a personnel standpoint too.

Look, we've benefitted from our coaches for 3 years now, and from our players, and from taking chances--but this one backfired at the most awful time imaginable.

People bring up this "we've benefited from our coaches...and from taking chances" blah blah blah. I think people are missing the point. It's not about risk or taking a chance. It's about risk VERSUS REWARD!!! I want to yell this from the building tops. It almost feels like the guys on 710 radio simply do not understand this simple concept. The risk taken before the first half ended made sense, because the reward was enough to JUSTIFY the risk. Whats the risk and what's the reward? The risk is that you get sacked or throw an interception, and lose out on a field goal oppportunity. The reward is that you get 7 points instead of 3. The most likely scenario if its not there is that there is an incompletion and you get the FG anyway. This is why the risk is worth taking.

At the end of the SB, the risk is not worth it because there is no reward. If you just run you get a TD --there is no point to open up the possibility of losing via interception. Why? It makes absolutely no sense in any world. Just run the freakin ball.

 

[NFSeahawks]

I think we all can agree that the play call was horrible. That being said, it looked like it was there in all the replays. The DB just made one hell of a break on the ball and went harder to the ball.

As horrid as the play call was, it STILL should have been a TD. It required a phenomenal play from Butler to get the INT, and Lockette was the last WR I would want in that position for that play.

Not to bring this up over again --but Butler had ZERO choice other than to take a risk and jump the route. If the Seahawks decide to run, it's a 90% chance that they lose. The ONLY chance the Patriots had was to bring out an ultimate goal line package, daring the Hawks to do the idiotic, so they had a semblance of a chance. The Hawks did the idiotic, they didnt take the sure victory and opened the door. Once the Hawks opened the door by passing, then it is a take your chance because the worst case scenario (Hawks score a TD) is an automatic result if they just run, so you have nothing to lose. A defensive pass interference is meaningless and you have 1 chance --so what if you guess incorrectly and jump the route and end up wrong? In that case the result is what would happen on the next play anyway, which is a TD run by Lynch.

Once the Hawks were duped into doing the idiotic and giving the Patriots a CHANCE when they had zero chance --at that point you have to jump the route because there is nothing to lose.

It's comparison would have been if the Patriots, after the interception and the 5 yard offsides call ---if at that point they decided to take a shot down field because they had their WR in 1 on 1 coverage, instead of taking a knee and winning the game.

I think any reasonable person would call it the worst call in NFL history and there is no close second.

Logically I think a read option has a higher probability of a score with both Wilson/Lynch than does a run up the middle, but I would have probably bet my life saving on Lynch scoring. It would have been one of those epic, gets hit, keeps fighting, gets in, goes down in history as the greatest goal line run of all time. I buy a photograph of it on ebay, put it on my wall, stare at it sometimes.

How close can you be to the most epic feeling ever, only to have it ripped away like that.

Worst play call of all time, easy. Sorry, my Seahawks.

 

[DavidSeven]

A run at the 1 isn't a guaranteed score. Marshawn has fumbled at the goaline just as many times as Russell has thrown an INT, if not more. He was also 1 for 5 in those situations this season leading up to that point.

That being said, yes they should've ran and yes Belichick was wise to force at least one pass. Bevell called the wrong pass and Butler made the greatest individual defensive play in SB history. But let's stick to real facts here. That pass was nowhere near "likely" to get picked off, and Marshawn was not "guaranteed" to score or not fumble on any single run. We made a pretty bad choice that ended in a worst case scenario that was actually statistically unlikely to happen. Bad call, yes. Worst call, no.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

If they were gonna' pass, they should have done it on 3rd down. Run Beast on 2nd, if they stop it, call timeout, THEN do a pass.

 

[jammerhawk]

I think we all can agree that the play call was horrible. That being said, it looked like it was there in all the replays. The DB just made one hell of a break on the ball and went harder to the ball.

As horrid as the play call was, it STILL should have been a TD. It required a phenomenal play from Butler to get the INT, and Lockette was the last WR I would want in that position for that play.

Much rather Lockette be blocking on that play, the beastquake run against the Cards this season Lockette played a major roll in getting out and blocking because he is fairly strong I think he could have gotten a better jam on Browner. I think he was surprised and knocked off balance that Butler was there at that point, that said I'd strongly prefer Mathewes, Baldwin or Kearse maybe even Willson, Lynch, or Turbin to be the target on that play.

If Lockette was the blocker on the play then 'sure hands Kearse' would have been the WR in the player grouping on the field. Then a tipped ball would then have been an even higher possibility.

It was a high risk play where the DB made a tremendous play and snatched victory from likely defeat if the play had been more low risk. Fricken awful result to a drive that would have been historic for Seahawks fans and a SOS result once again.