Sports
Related: About this forumIf that pass had been completed we'd be talking about what a gutsy call Pete Carroll made ...
just like the TD pass he called that ended the first half.
It's too easy to second guess.
Speaking of bad calls ... Greg Roman/Jim Harbaugh (49ers) repeated calls to throw to Michael Crabtree in SB 47 and the 2014 NFC Conference game were far worse IMO.
But we'd be wrong
Still, let's also acknowledge that Butler just made a great, great play on the ball. Great recognition, very aggressive move - Wilson made a good throw, and given the situation and route that's probably a TD 8 times out of 10.
What makes it a bad call is that there are too many risks associated with a throw and nothing forcing you to do it. And lots of reason to believe you can pick up a yard on the ground. Sure, if you run and don't pick up the TD you have to burn a time out and throw on 3rd down. But if you still don't pick up the TD (assuming an incomplete pass) you can run any play in your playbook on 4th down. Either way, you're looking at running at least one pass play among the four downs. Your best bet on 2nd & goal on the one is to run the least risky play likely to score a TD, and there are more ways for a pass to turn sour than a run.
Auggie
(31,184 posts)it points out the hypocrisy of our second-guessing.
I appreciate the response, caraher. But we'd be saying different things had the play succeeded.
TSIAS
(14,689 posts)The play call at the end of the first half was different. He had the time to go for a FG had the play not worked.
That pass at the end of the game makes no sense, which is precisely why it has led to so many conspiracy theories. Not just the casual fan, but football people are befuddled over the play call.
There's just too many other bad things (sack, fumble) that could have gone wrong with that play. If he loses because Lynch can't get a yard that's more acceptable than the INT.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)They're going to have to throw on ONE of them, since they only have 1 timeout left. The decision to throw was questionable, but the real issue was Wilson's decision to throw a pass to THAT receiver. If Wilson had rolled out, or looked for a corner fade where he could throw a ball that would either be a TD or INC, I don't think as many people would be talking about what an awful idea it was to pass, because they'd still have 2 more chances from the 1 yard line to run it to Lynch. I wouldn't have screwed around with the pass there, but I can sort of understand the call for a pass. I'd put more of this on Wilson who should have known not to throw THAT pass.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)That slant has to get out of Wilson's hands pretty quickly to work. And because of that he doesn't do a big drop back so he's not really in a position to buy more time and he's solidly in the pocket so he can't throw it away.
I even get why Caroll called pass play. Pats had their run defense out. Because of course. So a pass makes sense. Why Bevell chose that pass (and we could also discuss that the play is designed to go to a guy who doesn't even have double digit catches) is a fucking mystery. If Bevell calls a roll out, Wilson can ditch the ball if he doesn't have a receiver or he can run it in or he can look for someone else.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)and given the type of pass (as you said, needs to be quick), I guess it couldn't be a check-down, so you're right. I was speculating that the receiver was Wilson's choice, but you make a good point. With that kind of play, it had to be the default.
Corner fade would have been okay. Roll out would have been better for pass plays. It wasn't like there was 5 seconds left, so they had plenty of time for a roll out to develop and still get two runs to Lynch in, given they had a timeout.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)but I don't think that the was play call. receivers are running inside slants, its designed to arrive there quick.
Corner fade is tricky but I would have preferred because it is designed to be thrown over the receivers shoulder but I don't think that was the play call. I fault Bevall for the playcall, why do it?
R B Garr
(16,975 posts)Now where have we heard that before. Hmmmm.
I never paid much attention to SpyGate before, but now I see how it can come into play. Not my thought, but what I've been reading around is that people are suspicious that NE knew what was coming. And they have good reason with NE's history of cheating.
Anyway, I got trolled pretty bad by a creep in the Lounge over a benign comment about Brady not being invincible since I first watched him in Super Bowl 2008. Otherwise, I don't watch NE because they are not near me and I have no history with them whatsoever, but now that I've been trolled by a creepy fan for no reason, I can see why the Pats are hated and suspect (constant controversy).
bluedigger
(17,087 posts)It is possible that he knew what he was doing after all.
But, oddly, Belichick didnt call timeout. He let the Seahawks run the clock all the way down to 0:26, which is when Russell Wilson threw the fateful pass to Ricardo Lockette that was picked off by Pats rookie Malcolm Butler.
Unless you have a DeLorean, flux capacitor, and a crazy, wild-eyed scientist, theres no way to know what would have happened if Belichick had called timeout with 1:02 left on the clock. But we do know that Seattle was backed into a corner with Belichicks game of clock chicken.
It starts with Seattles lone remaining timeout. If the Seahawks had run on second down with 26 seconds left and not scored a touchdown, they wouldve had to call their final timeout to stop the clock. That almost ensures that both third and fourth down would be passes, a theoretical advantage for New England. (Or it might have had the reverse effect: With New England playing for a pass, theres more room for Russell Wilson to run.)
But calling timeout back at 1:02 probably likely would have caused Seattle to run the ball on 2nd and 1 to either score a touchdown or flush out Belichicks final timeout. A pass would have been almost out of the question since it would have stopped the clock with, say, 0:56 remaining and put Seattle into a third down with New England still holding two timeouts. (Although, given Bevells night, I suppose every play call, including a punt, was on the table.) The Patriots would have been certain to get the ball back with around 0:45, but with no timeouts.
By the Pats not calling timeout, Seattle had the opportunity to throw the ball without fear of New England regaining possession. In essence, Belichick dared the Seahawks to make the most ill-advised pass in NFL history and the Seahawks were all too happy to comply.
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/02/bill-belichick-timeouts-super-bowl-seattle-interception-new-england-patriots-brilliant-seattle-sehawks
hughee99
(16,113 posts)Auggie
(31,184 posts)just the reaction to it had it been a success rather than failure.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)that every time someone refers to a "gutsy call", it's one that most people disagree with at the time, but it ends up working out okay. I actually agree with you completely.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)JonLP24
(29,322 posts)I like a play that buys time but it was a heck of a play by Butler. Inches.