Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 4:37:19 GMT
www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7rPIg7ZNQ8This must be painful for Seahawks fans. Detach yourself and look at this logically. Was the pass a bad call? First consider- it was unexpected. 2nd and goal at the one yard line with 27 seconds left in the game. A running play or a quarterback sneak was expected. Second- more fumbles occur on running plays in this situation than at any other time. Every defensive player that had a chance to tackle the runner would also do everything in his power to tackle the ball. Slap, punch, elbow the ball to force a fumble. It is different from tackling the runner on regular plays. So you see more fumbles on these running plays than usual. It sure looks like a bad call. I'm not sure it was even though it was unsuccessful. I also don't know what happened exactly. Was there miscommunication between Wilson and the receiver? Did Wilson just throw a bad pass?
|
|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Oct 25, 2017 5:34:42 GMT
Darrell Bevell should have been Fired exactly 10 seconds after that Game Ended.
That Horrible 1 Yard Line Call first came from Him!
|
|
GiantFan1980
Junior Member
@scifi1980
Posts: 3,418
Likes: 4,482
|
Post by GiantFan1980 on Oct 25, 2017 6:32:39 GMT
Watching it live, it looked like Wilson saw an open shot at the end zone and decided against better judgement and tried to pass it but it was a trap. Butler just rocketed in there and stole it away!
I still can't believe Wilson threw on that play when they were so close! The most anticlimactic ending to any Super Bowl I have seen. It looked like a sure thing TD, then Butler puts the breaks on so fast it gave everybody watching whiplash!
They had 1 timeout left, and they had Lynch on the 1 yard line. They could of at least tried one more ground attack, called the time out and either pound it in or go for the pass. Personally, I would of tried handing it off twice because it is very tough for a defense to hold at the goal line.
I thought Wilson outsmarted himself but others have said he was told by the coaches to do it.
|
|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Oct 25, 2017 7:01:04 GMT
Yeah, I'm pretty sure the play call came from the sidelines. It was not a bad call. You can call any play that results in a negative for your team a bad call.
Defense blitzes on 3rd down and forever. Receiver gets open, makes the first down. Bad call?
Defense plays prevent on 3rd down and forever. Quarterback has time, finds receiver for the first down. Bad call?
The play is really the problem. The problem sometimes is execution. Other times it is a great f--king play by the defense/offense.
If they run it 3 more times and fail, people wonder why they did the same exact thing over and over again.
If they run it twice, then pass and fail, people wonder why they didn't run it all 3 times.
If they run on second then throw on 3rd and 4th and fail, people wonder why they did the obvious thing.
If any of those plans succeed, it's a good call, but if they don't succeed, it's a bad call?
I don't think that's how it works. It all comes down to execution and game planning. Malcolm Butler was better at both on that play. Simple. As. That.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 25, 2017 12:30:47 GMT
It's only a bad call because it didn't work. IF they score on that play, Pete Carroll is a genius for passing in a situation where everyone on the Earth is expecting a run. The problem was the Patriots had scouted that very play and Butler was burned for a TD in practice on it. He was told to never let that happen again (four letter words edited for your mother's reading consideration). It's like a scene from a movie, I can only imagine what was going through Butler's head when he saw them line up in that formation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 14:53:49 GMT
It's only a bad call because it didn't work. IF they score on that play, Pete Carroll is a genius for passing in a situation where everyone on the Earth is expecting a run. The problem was the Patriots had scouted that very play and Butler was burned for a TD in practice on it. He was told to never let that happen again (four letter words edited for your mother's reading consideration). It's like a scene from a movie, I can only imagine what was going through Butler's head when he saw them line up in that formation. "...Butler was burned for a TD in practice on it." I don't understand that comment. Burned for a TD in practice? What does that mean? If Butler didn't like the formation he had 2 or more options. He could change and charge forward in a Quarterback sneak. The OL was expecting a pass but he could have made the line of scrimmage or lost a yard or two. Possibly (unlikely) scored a touchdown. Cradle the football to prevent a fumble. Or he could have burned his one timeout left to discuss the formation with the coach. Instead he went ahead with the pass play. What formation and what TD in practice? Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 25, 2017 16:40:10 GMT
It's only a bad call because it didn't work. IF they score on that play, Pete Carroll is a genius for passing in a situation where everyone on the Earth is expecting a run. The problem was the Patriots had scouted that very play and Butler was burned for a TD in practice on it. He was told to never let that happen again (four letter words edited for your mother's reading consideration). It's like a scene from a movie, I can only imagine what was going through Butler's head when he saw them line up in that formation. "...Butler was burned for a TD in practice on it." I don't understand that comment. Burned for a TD in practice? What does that mean? If Butler didn't like the formation he had 2 or more options. He could change and charge forward in a Quarterback sneak. The OL was expecting a pass but he could have made the line of scrimmage or lost a yard or two. Possibly (unlikely) scored a touchdown. Cradle the football to prevent a fumble. Or he could have burned his one timeout left to discuss the formation with the coach. Instead he went ahead with the pass play. What formation and what TD in practice? Thank you. Butler is the Pats CB who made the INT. He was burned for a TD on that play in practice and recognized the play when he saw the formation, hence the jump he got on the ball (along with Browner blowing up the attempted pick play by the other receiver). Did you think I was talking about Wilson?
|
|
|
Post by klawrencio79 on Oct 25, 2017 17:31:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by NJtoTX on Oct 25, 2017 17:33:54 GMT
I didn't think a pass was a bad call, but at that spot it has to be near the ground so that only the WR has a shot at it.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Oct 25, 2017 21:01:40 GMT
I mean when u have lynch you have to run.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 23:17:45 GMT
"...Butler was burned for a TD in practice on it." I don't understand that comment. Burned for a TD in practice? What does that mean? If Butler didn't like the formation he had 2 or more options. He could change and charge forward in a Quarterback sneak. The OL was expecting a pass but he could have made the line of scrimmage or lost a yard or two. Possibly (unlikely) scored a touchdown. Cradle the football to prevent a fumble. Or he could have burned his one timeout left to discuss the formation with the coach. Instead he went ahead with the pass play. What formation and what TD in practice? Thank you. Butler is the Pats CB who made the INT. He was burned for a TD on that play in practice and recognized the play when he saw the formation, hence the jump he got on the ball (along with Browner blowing up the attempted pick play by the other receiver). Did you think I was talking about Wilson? "Did you think I was talking about Wilson?" Yes. A quick read. I was distracted. My mistake. You were talking about Butler (CB) seeing the formation. OK, that makes sense. He was either lucky, made a great read on the formation or a combination of both. He got in there and stole the pass for an interception. The Seahawks still had 27 seconds left and a timeout. Plenty of time for at least 2 running plays. With that much time left maybe they should have called their last remaining timeout and planned 2 plays. One play for if the first run didn't make it and a second play. Possibly running would have been their best option even if the first attempt failed. They had Marshawn Lynch who was an elite running back.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 23:24:25 GMT
Interesting analysis. I don't know how he can come up with such a precise figure as "3.1% chance of interception" when there are so many variables to consider? That seems dubious. Plus the Seahawks had Marshawn Lynch. I'm not saying it was a bad call. It did not succeed and looks to many like a bad call.
|
|
|
Post by NewtJorden on Oct 26, 2017 15:38:34 GMT
If they would have had a terrible RB, then it would have been the play to call. But they had one of the best in Marshawn Lynch, so theres no reason to call a pass play.
|
|
|
Post by klawrencio79 on Oct 26, 2017 15:44:37 GMT
Butler is the Pats CB who made the INT. He was burned for a TD on that play in practice and recognized the play when he saw the formation, hence the jump he got on the ball (along with Browner blowing up the attempted pick play by the other receiver). Did you think I was talking about Wilson? "Did you think I was talking about Wilson?" Yes. A quick read. I was distracted. My mistake. You were talking about Butler (CB) seeing the formation. OK, that makes sense. He was either lucky, made a great read on the formation or a combination of both. He got in there and stole the pass for an interception. The Seahawks still had 27 seconds left and a timeout. Plenty of time for at least 2 running plays. With that much time left maybe they should have called their last remaining timeout and planned 2 plays. One play for if the first run didn't make it and a second play. Possibly running would have been their best option even if the first attempt failed. They had Marshawn Lynch who was an elite running back.If they called a timeout there and ran a running play on first down, there is no guarantee they'd be able to get a second play off. Goal line plays often results in pile-ups which can take 15-20 seconds to break up before getting to line up again. People love to play Monday morning QB like they know better than the coaches. Fact is, if Seattle completes the pass and scores the TD, then it's hailed as a brilliant play. If they handed off to Lynch and he didn't score, people would be claiming that it was too predictable and obvious and thus they shouldn't have done that. It's ridiculous. You can't let the result dictate whether the decision was good or bad, particularly in this instance where the statistical analysis backs up the decision and completely undermines the notion that a 1-yard handoff is some sort of gimme.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Oct 26, 2017 16:14:02 GMT
First consider- it was unexpected. 2nd and goal at the one yard line with 27 seconds left in the game. A running play or a quarterback sneak was expected. Second- more fumbles occur on running plays in this situation than at any other time. Every defensive player that had a chance to tackle the runner would also do everything in his power to tackle the ball. Slap, punch, elbow the ball to force a fumble. It is different from tackling the runner on regular plays. So you see more fumbles on these running plays than usual. It sure looks like a bad call. I'm not sure it was even though it was unsuccessful. I also don't know what happened exactly. Was there miscommunication between Wilson and the receiver? Did Wilson just throw a bad pass? Unexpected, except the Patriots had their defense ready to cover goal line personnel, so really only unexpected by everyone else. They've showed the Patriots practice footage as often as the play itself, to show Butler missing in practice & adjusting when the play came. I suppose it's cheating though eh, watching Seahawks tv footage lols. Seems Lynch was not a full decoy with the alignment... www.bing.com/videos/search?q=super+bowl+xlix+slow+motion&&view=detail&mid=2303D3AED6917B3795C62303D3AED6917B3795C6&FORM=VRDGAR Had Seattle lined him up in a more conventional run set, maybe the Patriots commit more to him than they did as you watch that play unfold. Again, the play was on tape & goal line D was prepared. Hindsight 20-20, the game essentially now ends once Hightower tackles Lynch the play prior. That play as a Patriots fan still gives me a heart pulse... it was Lynch's TD to lose & it was that f'n close. As for Wilson, he doesn't look as locked in throughout the play as say we've seen Brady & the Patriots' history of mandatory 2 point conversions. Wilson looked a bit I dunno how to say it, reactive like he's throwing into the dark? The play wasn't bad, it just seems like Carroll & the Seahawks simply didn't have a guaranteed score play in their books they should've figured out back in the summer. So yes, I'll side that the play call was poor.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Oct 26, 2017 16:18:50 GMT
I mean when u have lynch you have to run. The play exposed Carroll & the Seahawks that they truly didn't buy into that fully. That angle seems to be overshadowed by bs conspiracy theories that they wanted Wilson to be game MVP instead of Lynch.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Oct 26, 2017 17:21:02 GMT
I mean when u have lynch you have to run. The play exposed Carroll & the Seahawks that they truly didn't buy into that fully. That angle seems to be overshadowed by bs conspiracy theories that they wanted Wilson to be game MVP instead of Lynch. yikes thats the conspiracy? not that the NFL wanted the Pats.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 26, 2017 17:49:29 GMT
The play exposed Carroll & the Seahawks that they truly didn't buy into that fully. That angle seems to be overshadowed by bs conspiracy theories that they wanted Wilson to be game MVP instead of Lynch. yikes thats the conspiracy? not that the NFL wanted the Pats. Why would the NFL want the Pats to win? It was the height of the Deflategate nonsense saga. It would've been better for the league if that story gets overshadowed by another team winning the championship. And how could that outcome have been manufactured by the league? Did they hack into the Seahawks coms and call that play instead of a run? Wanting Wilson as MVP over Lynch is a much more believable story, even if I don't buy into it.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Oct 26, 2017 17:54:59 GMT
yikes thats the conspiracy? not that the NFL wanted the Pats. Why would the NFL want the Pats to win? It was the height of the Deflategate nonsense saga. It would've been better for the league if that story gets overshadowed by another team winning the championship. And how could that outcome have been manufactured by the league? Did they hack into the Seahawks coms and call that play instead of a run? Wanting Wilson as MVP over Lynch is a much more believable story, even if I don't buy into it. I remember some people theorizing, not saying I believe they wanted the Pats to win, I am saying I am surprised that isn't the predominant conspiracy.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Oct 26, 2017 23:19:49 GMT
yikes thats the conspiracy? not that the NFL wanted the Pats. Why would the NFL want the Pats to win? It was the height of the Deflategate nonsense saga. It would've been better for the league if that story gets overshadowed by another team winning the championship. And how could that outcome have been manufactured by the league? Did they hack into the Seahawks coms and call that play instead of a run? Wanting Wilson as MVP over Lynch is a much more believable story, even if I don't buy into it. Face it, ppl believe the Patriots very existence is a conspiracy by now. It's tired out, white noise.
|
|