Pete Mic'd Up

This puts to rest the fact that Pete is falling on the sword like a good leader for Bevell. Just before the final play you hear him ask the booth "What do we have going?"

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-am/0ap300 ... eo_carroll

White Devil":2lfbxk5y said:

This puts to rest the fact that Pete is falling on the sword like a good leader for Bevell. Just before the final play you hear him ask the booth "What do we have going?"

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-am/0ap300 ... eo_carroll

Click to expand...

That video doesn't do anything of the sort, but I'm fairly certain it's been talked out from every possible angle.

What I took from this video and made it worth the time to watch, was Britt going up to Pete and saying "like Marshawn would say...can we score some more points"

That was the best sound bite of that little clip.

"Oh No"

I didn't need to hear that.
I felt it in my stomach.

WARNING: I'm not sure what the point of the OP is but I recommend you push STOP, prior to the last 2 seconds.

It's heartbreaking for sure, but before the end is nothing but 100% Pete and why I love him as a coach.


Pete asking "What do we have going?" as the play is happening tells me he didn't know what the call was. Pete is the type of head coach that puts complete trust in his assistant coaches and coordinators. He doesn't make the offensive play calls. He doesn't stand over and 2nd guess his guys. He breeds confidence and decision making.

The call was Bevell's. That's the point of the post.

Gotcha.

That "oh no" is brutal though.

Yeah those last few seconds were hard to watch. Leading up to that they all believed they were going to win and knew they had the game right where they wanted it. You could just see the pain on Pete's face when it came crashing down.

White Devil":w8f4qk4v said:

It's heartbreaking for sure, but before the end is nothing but 100% Pete and why I love him as a coach.


Pete asking "What do we have going?" as the play is happening tells me he didn't know what the call was. Pete is the type of head coach that puts complete trust in his assistant coaches and coordinators. He doesn't make the offensive play calls. He doesn't stand over and 2nd guess his guys. He breeds confidence and decision making.

The call was Bevell's. That's the point of the post.

Click to expand...

I thought everyone knew the call was Bevell's. I think you are confusing Pete going to Bevell and saying to pass it here with Pete saying he called the play. Pete doesn't call plays. What he did was tell Bevell he thought we should pass it. It's something he does frequently (say we should run or we should pass) but Bevell still calls the actual play.

I agree with pmed that the last 2 seconds was pretty brutal.

Can't watch. Agree with the comments about the play call. Pete may have even said pass, but no way he picked the actual call.

White Devil":2zcy3795 said:

This puts to rest the fact that Pete is falling on the sword like a good leader for Bevell. Just before the final play you hear him ask the booth "What do we have going?"

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-am/0ap300 ... eo_carroll

Click to expand...

This is what a good leader does . . . he takes full responsibility for the failures of his subordinates. Pete has done this over and over again throughout his career. At SC, he took responsibility for Kiffin's decision to put Reggie Bush on the sideline on the 4th and 2 against Texas. And I remember he took responsibility for Sarkisian's decision to leave John David Booty in the game against Stanford, even with broken fingers in his throwing hand.

It sounds to me like Pete had no idea what Bevell's play call was the moment before the ball was snapped. And that makes sense because, as he said before, he does not like to interfere with the play calling mid-game.

What I would like to know is if Pete told Bevell to "throw the ball" , why didn't they have that on sound?

lukerguy":3ofblwnh said:

What I would like to know is if Pete told Bevell to "throw the ball" , why didn't they have that on sound?

Click to expand...

What they have on sound and what they play to the public are two different things. It may come out when they do the full super bowl version, but I'm not sure I can sit through it, at least not now.

Must have missed the video that has Pete telling Bevell to pass the ball here. I know that's what Pete has claimed to have said, but I haven't seen that proven beyond doubt. He knew what personnel were on the field, not claiming he's ignorant.

"Oh No", oh yes......... It hurts. This is my take on something that is often missing from our team/coaching in my humble opinion. I know it is easy to arm chair QB, but when they lined up in that final formation with a slant call, they have to anticipate that the other team has watched that play enough to know what is coming. Then you have to anticipate that when Browner, who normally lines up on the right side of the D formation lines up on the left, that he knows what is coming. Then you also have to anticipate that the Pats D has nothing to lose, they have to, in this situation, go out of character to make a play.

So where's the ingenuity to set the Pats D up?

My idea of a setup is to line up in the same formation, run the same play, but rather then throwing the slant, have the TE, who was essentially non existent all game, slip out behind Browner, get Wilson rolling right with the option to run it in, or hit the TE in the back of the end zone. If Russ doesn't like it, throw it away!

Again I know it's easy to second guess this, but my point is I often feel like our O is too predictable. Or plays in a box. Occasionally we'll see a wrinkle, like the RO pass to Lockett early in the season, and it catches everyone by surprise. I just think they need more of that in the offense at strategic times.

Looking forward already to next season!

This all belongs in the Shack

White Devil":1t2cdkvx said:

Must have missed the video that has Pete telling Bevell to pass the ball here. I know that's what Pete has claimed to have said, but I haven't seen that proven beyond doubt. He knew what personnel were on the field, not claiming he's ignorant.

Click to expand...

Like Kid just said above you.

I'd assume they record everything but what we get to hear and see, is what they make available.

White Devil":31hj1ip8 said:

Must have missed the video that has Pete telling Bevell to pass the ball here. I know that's what Pete has claimed to have said, but I haven't seen that proven beyond doubt. He knew what personnel were on the field, not claiming he's ignorant.

Click to expand...

Well generally speaking, a confession is usually proof beyond doubt for those who don't want to believe differently. Like I said, it's something Pete does often, even in regular season games. I've seen him (and heard him) say let's run it here or let's pass it here. It's just part of what he does. It would be abnormal for him NOT to have said it in that situation. Given that, and the fact that he admitted saying it, and Bevell admitted Pete said it while at the same time saying that he made the actual play call, tells me that it's true.

It may come out in a more complete version of the super bowl with sounds from players and coaches, but that is something I'm not really looking forward to watching anytime soon.

That "Oh no!" was a punch in the gut AND a kick in the throat...

At this point, it kind of doesn't matter to me who made that call, or why. I just wish Lockette would have attacked the ball and Wilson would have thrown it 1 inch to the right. Coaches call the play, players execute the play. Malcolm Butler made the play. </Play>

kidhawk":iibv1pma said:

Well generally speaking, a confession is usually proof beyond doubt for those who don't want to believe differently.

Click to expand...

While it is possible and even likely that Pete decided pass or run in this instance, I don't find the above statement to be true at all in general. For someone confessing to a criminal act it may largely be true because otherwise who would subject themselves to criminal penalties, and even in those cases the confession will be limited to the minimum they believe can be proven and will paint things in the best possible light.

For someone in position of leading any kind of team, or in any situation (family for example) where shifting blame to themselves serves to protect another, confessions are unreliable. Much less an NFL football coach who at every single turn is going to shift blame to himself to protect players either out of leadership instincts or fear of losing the locker room.

So using the above statement as a premise to needle disbelievers as having their own agenda seems unfair to me.

"What do we got going here" could be a reference to the Pats Defense...wondering how they were lined up.

hawk45":3r8rgu8r said:

kidhawk":3r8rgu8r said:

Well generally speaking, a confession is usually proof beyond doubt for those who don't want to believe differently.

Click to expand...

While it is possible and even likely that Pete decided pass or run in this instance, I don't find the above statement to be true at all in general. For someone confessing to a criminal act it may largely be true because otherwise who would subject themselves to criminal penalties, and even in those cases the confession will be limited to the minimum they believe can be proven and will paint things in the best possible light.

For someone in position of leading any kind of team, or in any situation (family for example) where shifting blame to themselves serves to protect another, confessions are unreliable. Much less an NFL football coach who at every single turn is going to shift blame to himself to protect players either out of leadership instincts or fear of losing the locker room.

So using the above statement as a premise to needle disbelievers as having their own agenda seems unfair to me.

Click to expand...

People who don't believe Pete wanted a pass play there, just want to believe it was all on Bevel. Now, Bevel may have already been thinking pass play and Pete's saying to pass there may have had zero impact, but there is no reason to doubt Pete with the history he has of telling Bevel when he prefers a run or when he prefers a pass. Anyone who's seen most of the Sound FX episodes have had to have seen pete say similar things in other games. The fact that he has the history, along with the fact that he admitted to doing it adds up to equal more than enough evidence that it's more than likely true. Just like the fact that Bevel said that even though Pete called for a pass, he calls the plays and it was his choice to call the slant with Lockette in that situation. With the evidence we have, believing it happened otherwise is looking at it with blinders on. If that makes people feel better, then so be it, but I prefer to go along with what the evidence points to, and then just move along, because whether Pete said the words or not, Bevel still made the call, and Pete supports him and he isn't going anywhere. Eventually we have to just move past it.