Poll: "Surprise pick for which play Seattle should have run"

[mikeak]

They ran it down to 26 seconds because that was the shortest amount of time you could leave while still guaranteeing three more shots at the endzone. Obviously, the concern was leaving Brady too much time to tie if they scored on 2nd down. They definitely over-thought it, but running it down to :26 was intentional.

It was the Atlanta game that doomed us. They left :34 for Matt Ryan. Wanted to leave less for Brady.

and the first half where Seahawks went the lenght of the field and scored in what 29 seconds...... NE only needed a FG to tie

 

[scutterhawk]

I think everyone criticizing the coaching staff for making this call are only doing so simply because the result didn't go our way.

Simply not true, I wanted to see Marshawn Lynch pound it in.
It was an unnecessary risk play, especially when you factor in putting Lockette in there to make the catch.
AND you have to remember that the Seahawks still had a time out ,should Lynch not made it in.
The Patriots hadn't kept Lynch from getting at MINIMUM 1 Yard all game long, and they wouldn't have been able to stop him IF they would have given him a crack at it....He only had to cross the goal line, and he had 26 seconds, and a time out to get it done.
Run first Offense my butt.

 

[Mick063]

There is nothing scientific about the OP poll. Because of that, it cannot be used for credible argument.

If you are a fan of the Patriots, or wanted the Patriots to win, the concept of Lynch potentially winning the game diminishes the legitimacy of the Patriot win. Of course you would vote that the pass play was the right call.

It is no different than a poll that asks to choose from either Seattle losing the game or the Patriots winning the game. No difference at all, just a subtle difference of asking the same question.

 

[netskier]

Belichick had Boston practice defending that slant repeatedly until Butler could read it instantly. I think I read that the day after on NFL.com, but don't recall for sure, and I would like to reread this.

Someone interviewed Malcolm Butler, who said that Garafolo best him badly the first time, and then Belichick told Butler exactly how to read that play and to defend it. Then they practiced until their defense was perfect against it.

 

[netskier]

It was as if Belichick knew the slant was coming.

 

[Silver Hawk]

Belichick had Boston practice defending that slant repeatedly until Butler could read it instantly. I think I read that the day after on NFL.com, but don't recall for sure, and I would like to reread this.

Someone interviewed Malcolm Butler, who said that Garafolo best him badly the first time, and then Belichick told Butler exactly how to read that play and to defend it. Then they practiced until their defense was perfect against it.

I think that is correct but why?? Just a play that Seattle ran in practice but not in games? Any game film with Seattle running this? I could be forgetting something but I can't recall Seattle actually running this exact play in the last 2 years. Certainly not to the extent it would have led to being so high on NE's radar screen.

 

[NorCalHawk12]

Ricardo should have been stronger to the ball.

 

[CANHawk]

Pete just out thought himself. He wanted to score with as little time as possible on the clock to prevent Brady from marching down field for the counter score. Unfortunately he forgot the most important part...... you have to make sure you score first.

With the #1 defense in the league, I'd have just pounded it in and taken my chances.

 

[DavidSeven]

The Patriots hadn't kept Lynch from getting at MINIMUM 1 Yard all game long

They stuffed him on 3rd-and-1 earlier in the game.

 

[Threedee]

I assumed at the moment of the snap that a pass play was coming. It made sense to me. I just didn't anticipate a slant that the Seahawks demonstrated in the previous game that they have issues with.

 

[netskier]

Let's not be too hard on Ricardo. He has only something like eighteen NFL catches in his life, runs notoriously poor routes, is a member of Tokadubs scholarship group, and should never have been selected by Bevell for that play.

 

[netskier]

Silverhawk, I wonder how Belichick knew too. Two things come to mind: human spies, and surveillance drones. Maybe Browner said something.

 

[Silver Hawk]

Silverhawk, I wonder how Belichick knew too. Two things come to mind: human spies, and surveillance drones. Maybe Browner said something.

Well, I wasn't intending to scratch at the notion of any skullduggery.

It's just that there has been all this talk about how the Patriots practiced for that play but it's not a goal line play that I am used to seeing the Seahawks run.

If they have run it, how many times could it be? If it's not something that they ran much of at all in the last few years, I have a hard time figuring out why the Patriots would put an emphasis on practicing it, even if Browner knew it was in the playbook. I don't have any good answer for it.

 

[Optimus25]

ok dude. i only wanna say this one more time. the quick slant statistics are garbage. throw them out the freaking window. for about 10 reasons, but here are the top 2:

1. seattle's formation was recognizable. even a no name rookie who is now a new england legend recognized the formation, and if you think about if you were in his shoes, you would have seen it coming also. if bevell were able to strategize out of the box, the best outcome of this formation would have been for kearse to fight out, then go in, followed by lockette faking the slant, and taking an out, kind of like edelman's whirl routes that toasted simon. butler rockets in the second lockette goes in, therefore if lockette fakes in and runs a hard out underneath kearse, he's all alone in the flat probably taking on a recovering butler head on at the 1 millimeter line, if not completely all alone. but....

2. how many combo rub quick slants are ran at the 1? why does your wonderful stat not include that? it shouldn't be included on the play sheet whatsoever at the 1 yard line. it gives the receivers no space to work. it almost guarantees the inside receiver will get jammed. its dumb. even when the seahawks successfully ran this play against the saints a couple years ago, it was from the 2. that extra yard opens up a world of wriggle room for the undercut.

if one more person tells me how many quick slants in the nfl did not get intercepted this year....

let alone how many "quick slants" has seattle even successfully converted this year? So, let's use a play we have almost zero practical use from this year

(i mean honestly, was the failed slant to lynch at carolina and the succesful td slant to lynch our only ones of the year?)

so you are wrong. i am not criticizing because "it didn't work". i am criticizing because in the most epic moment in franchise history bevell leaves his brain in the hotel and goes with a play we don't call almost ever. almost 75% of our passing attack i would estimate is off of playaction. i know bevell thought the receivers getting seperation was a problem for playaction, but guess what, when russ's quick drop slants or stick routes total about 5% of our total offense on the year, you just don't do it. you have russ get out of the pocket, run around, and see if Doug can shake free. if not, throw it away, or try for the pylon with russ scrambling.

This was EXACTLY like Navy a couple 5 or 6 years back. they came in to Ohio State, opening day, when the buckeyes were like the 6 seed. in the 2nd half Navy had ohio state on the ropes because they could not defend the triple option. so navy, down 8, on the oh state like 7 yard line, with about 2 mins left, lines up on i believe 3rd down, IN A PRO SET, which mind you they hadn't done literally all day long. All day they ran a triple option offense and by the 2nd half Ohio State was looking stupid trying to defend it. Navy ran some kind of combo route just like seattle, and got it picked off. oh state takes it to the house. game. if you lose with wishy washy bullcrap because the other teams' "goal line defense" psyched you out, shame on you. i don't care what pete says, i freaking love the guy, i don't care what the public says, i don't care what blount says,
ON THE 1 YARD LINE YOU RUN THE BALL WHEN YOU HAVE A FRANCHISE RECORD HOLDING RUSHING OFFENSE WITH 30 SECS LEFT IN THE SUPER BOWL, WITH MARSHAWN LYNCH.
Debate over. Pete was wrong. Bevell was wrong. Please stop with the bullcrap pseudo arguments. We'll rise from the ashes because Pete is a terrific coach. i also take the points at the half. that is why pete is a head coach and i fix airplanes. but he is not God, and he is not perfect, and we can't expect him to be. he was wrong. it's ok. the million ways we defend a decision always seem to make it tolerable. for the cold hard facts, read the ALL CAPS again.

 

[Optimus25]

My biggest issue with the called play is that it was one that Brandon Browner instantly recognized and as is now known, had the Pats' D completely prepared for. With 2 weeks leading up to the game and knowing you'd be facing a very good corner that had been on your team the past few seasons, it blows my mind that they wouldn't have something "new" for that situation. Can someone give me a sensible answer to that so I can resume sleeping more than 3-4 hours a night?

I'm fully aware that I shouldn't let it affect me to that degree, but it is what it is. Thanks.

I'm with you friend. all the way. but you gotta like all the "new" things bevell threw at the patriots for the super bowl! like, uh, well, oh, that formation where twins receivers go to the wide sides of the field on both sides of the ball with Russ and Marshawn in the pistol. well, that's not a new look, but it was the first time we ran it in the red zone. which makes no sense. didn't help when the pats just stacked the box and stuffed our predictable run and forced a field goal. ummm, this is also one of the first games i don't recall seeing Turbin at least a couple times early, so when he breaks the 19 yard run on his first rush to set up our end of the first half score, that was great. i was glad he didn't get touches either. oh, was this the first time we didn't run 1 screen? or at least dump pass to lynch in the flat....that's "new". didn't target a tight end either. that's probably "new". so hey, bevell threw all kinds of new things out, just not for the last play i guess.

 

[Seafan]

Pete just out thought himself. He wanted to score with as little time as possible on the clock to prevent Brady from marching down field for the counter score. Unfortunately he forgot the most important part...... you have to make sure you score first.

With the #1 defense in the league, I'd have just pounded it in and taken my chances.

That #1 defense was MIA. He still should have handed the ball to Lynch. He out thought it. With the way RW had been passing lately there was no way I wanted to see him throw it. Bad call and poor execution by several players including Russ. But I expected that. Hand the ball to the most reliable person on the team. Extremely frustrating but after the San Diego game I wasn't expecting a repeat. The offense and coaching staff have veered away from the philosophy that got them to SB48. Attention to detail has also seemed to have been lost along the way. Frustrating.

That's what separates Belicheck from Carroll.

 

[DavidSeven]

Pete just out thought himself. He wanted to score with as little time as possible on the clock to prevent Brady from marching down field for the counter score. Unfortunately he forgot the most important part...... you have to make sure you score first.

With the #1 defense in the league, I'd have just pounded it in and taken my chances.

That #1 defense was MIA. He still should have handed the ball to Lynch. He out thought it. With the way RW had been passing lately there was no way I wanted to see him throw it. Bad call and poor execution by several players including Russ. But I expected that. Hand the ball to the most reliable person on the team. Extremely frustrating but after the San Diego game I wasn't expecting a repeat. The offense and coaching staff have veered away from the philosophy that got them to SB48. Attention to detail has also seemed to have been lost along the way. Frustrating.

That's what separates Belicheck from Carroll.

Ridiculous. If SEA scores on the last play, the media hangs Belichick for not using his last timeout. Instead, it's a "ballsy" move that has little logical basis, just as passing to score would've been for Seattle if it worked. Belichick had his own "San Diego" game against Kansas City, except it was far more embarassing and far more people wrote him off. Last play aside, SEA had a historic rushing offense and top defense. It didn't lose it's identity.

Carroll and Belichick are the cream of the crop. One game, one decision does not define their coaching acumen. For any "fan" to be frustrated with having either as their head coach is patently absurd. Look around the league, man.

 

[kearly]

I liked everything they did in terms of clock management. I just hated the decision with regards to personnel and the playcall. Call two running plays in the huddle out of run heavy and snap it between 25-30 seconds. You could easily run again with the second pre-called run option and call a timeout before time expired. And if anything goes unexpectedly- you have a timeout in your pocket if necessary.

I feel that if Bill Belichick were coaching the Seahawks with Wilson and Lynch, there's very little chance he isn't running it on 2nd and 1 with about 25-30 seconds left.

I can almost prove it too, and not just because of Belichick's history of turning to his best players in the biggest moments in games. But because Belichick saw what Seattle was doing, realized their mistake, and opted not to call a timeout. Had he called a timeout, he would have risked Carroll and Bevell wising up and going for 3 runs.

I think it was an interesting SB in that both Carroll and Belichick lived up to their reputations. One a big picture guy who stumbles on little details, and the other guy being probably the most meticulous coach in history. The two best coaches in the game, clearly. It would be fun to see them get a SB rematch.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

106 quick slants were thrown, but how many into a congested goal line defense? And how many teams have the league's best running game?

Teams threw at the opponent's 1 yard line 66 times last year, and only the Hawks got picked. It was a freakish interception with a combination of flukey factors. The play call was good. We had to pass once in the sequence or lose the fourth down opportunity.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

I don't have a problem with a pass play in the situation, my problem is with the slant play. It should have been a play that gave Wilson the option to throw away the ball, avoiding the risk. The clock stops and you still have one timeout left to stop it if they don't score on third down.

If Pete choose this particular slant play, then he deserves all the criticism, but I don't think he did, I believe he ordered pass play, but not this specific play, and I think Bevell choose it.

But Alas, this one will take some time to heal.

Wilson had the option of throwing the ball away.