Stupidity Rules the Day!!!!

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

BTW, I disagree that the first-half ending play was a bad decision. If you can't get a 20 yard pass play done within 5 seconds you are no Super Bowl QB. I guess there was some risk of INT depending on the type of pass play (SEE BONEHEAD DECISION AT END OF GAME), but the strategic decision was fine by me. I didn't think it would work and they'd have to settle for 3, but as a neutral fan who doesn't like either team I thought the decision to go for it was fine.

I also agree that the call at the end of the half wasn't bad. IMO it was really gutsy and definitely risky, but I've always seen R Wilson as a guy who has incredible situational awareness. I'm guessing they've practiced those sorts plays with a clock and know nearly exactly how quickly they can execute certain routes. 6 seconds is really tight, and I expect most teams (80%+) in the league would kick there. However Carroll had total trust in Wilson to execute the throw if it was there, and throw it away if not... no progression, no running around, just cut it loose... in this case guessing it was to find a one on one matchup pre-snap, throw to the back shoulder if the DB is off, over top if he beats him, or out of bounds. What's amazing, they still had 2 seconds left after.

As mentioned before, I think the call at the end was definitely questionable, but I think there's more to this. Was thinking about it more today, and Carroll was so defensive he was almost on the offensive (in a classy way). He repeated the same thing almost verbatim many many times. If anyone's seen "The Lives of Others" one of the points the lead character, an East German Stasi interrogator says, is that when someone's lying, they repeat the same phrases and sentences over and over. Now, I don't really think he's fully lying or there's some great conspiracy, but I do think he was covering for Bevell (or someone) big time.

The Pats acknowledged they weren't in true goal line (they had 3 DBs), but according to Carroll the Seahawks subbed to a 3 receiver set to counter the Pats' goal line D (2 DBs). This means someone in the booth (usually assistant to OC upstairs with binocs) didn't recognize the Pats' personnel package correctly. They also subbed really late, as they'd had a full back and I think 2 TEs on the prior 1st down run.. this is why 30+ seconds ran off. Once all the players were on the field, Wilson still had to shift Lynch and Baldwin to the left just prior to the snap, so I think things were in flux until the last moments, which makes me think there was a lot of indecisiveness in their play calling booth. As for Wilson's "decision" to hit the slant on that play... I'd think this is probably almost as pre-determined as a throw gets (similar to a screen pass). It's a pick play, so it's all about timing up with that pick.. and he wants to hit the slant immediately after he crosses the guy setting the pick (which is very illegal). From Wilson's POV, I think he saw the route quickly develop like he'd expect and Lockette with space in front, just had no idea Butler would cover that much ground, or didn't see him at all. I don't fault him.. I think he probably throws that ball unless his guy falls down, or there's someone directly in front of him.

What still gets me most about the play, is why didn't they try to sell a run fake???????? Everyone on the field, in the stands, at home, expects a run. If you want to slip in a pass (perfectly reasonable on one of the next two downs), do it after using a hard play action fake... and if that's your thinking, you just leave in the prior play's big personnel, to even better sell the run fake. If it's not there, Wilson throws it out of the end zone, and you get exactly what Carroll alluded to post game.. a clock stoppage and time to regroup for 3rd down. Or better yet, you let Wilson boot away or roll toward the play fake and isolate a Pat DB in that always perfect situation--- force him to either come up on Wilson who's running, or stay on his guy in the end zone. Wilson is the perfect QB in that situation and has proven it many times. If they are set on passing, I have no idea why you neutralize Wilson's greatest strengths?

Or of course, just pound it between the tackles with Lynch.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

I also agree that the call at the end of the half wasn't bad. IMO it was really gutsy and definitely risky, but I've always seen R Wilson as a guy who has incredible situational awareness.

Agreed. Akin to the fake field goal touchdown pass against Green Bay. I was against that one as well, but these things seem to work out for Seattle.

Originally Posted by itjclarke

What still gets me most about the play, is why didn't they try to sell a run fake???????? Everyone on the field, in the stands, at home, expects a run. If you want to slip in a pass (perfectly reasonable on one of the next two downs), do it after using a hard play action fake... and if that's your thinking, you just leave in the prior play's big personnel, to even better sell the run fake. If it's not there, Wilson throws it out of the end zone, and you get exactly what Carroll alluded to post game.. a clock stoppage and time to regroup for 3rd down. Or better yet, you let Wilson boot away or roll toward the play fake and isolate a Pat DB in that always perfect situation--- force him to either come up on Wilson who's running, or stay on his guy in the end zone. Wilson is the perfect QB in that situation and has proven it many times. If they are set on passing, I have no idea why you neutralize Wilson's greatest strengths?

Or of course, just pound it between the tackles with Lynch.

You are right. All I remember thinking when Wilson started in the shotgun was being totally confused and figuring it would be a deep handoff or roll-out, neither of which made sense to me. It was a WTF moment for sure. But I don't feel as bad about the call after stewing for over a day. We have seen fumbles in those sorts of situations as well - were the odds any better of that particular pass being intercepted, than Lynch or Wilson getting stripped of the ball? I don't know. The interception was a horror for Seattle fans, but a fumble would have been just as gut-wrenching.

As an older fan of a team that has been in a lot of big games in my lifetime (Cowboys), I can tell the younger fans that you will go through this many more times in your life. It comes with the games on the opposite end of the spectrum (remember just two weeks ago?). I felt much worse when Lynn Swann made that catch in the Super Bowl against Dallas, or when Jackie Smith dropped the pass from Staubach, or 'the catch' by the blasted 49'ers. I just wish Bart Starr had passed in the 1967 NFC Championship game

[vintagetoppsguy]

You're only saying the play call at the half wasn't bad because it worked out. What if it hadn't worked out? Is it still a good call then?

Just because a play call works out doesn't make it a good call. Likewise, just because a play call doesn't work out make it a bad call.

Edited to add: What if the interception near the end of the game would have been a Seahawks TD instead? Is it still a bad play call then or a good play call? I'm confused how you distinguish between the two???

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You're only saying the play call at the half wasn't bad because it worked out. What if it hadn't worked out? Is it still a good call then?

Just because a play call works out doesn't make it a good call. Likewise, just because a play call doesn't work out make it a bad call.

Edited to add: What if the interception near the end of the game would have been a Seahawks TD instead? Is it still a bad play call then or a good play call? I'm confused how you distinguish between the two???

I'm not sure if this is addressed to me, but if so.. no I am not, and no I am not. I feel like I know the game relatively well.. I've watched it all my life, played it much of my life... even now have a NFL coach in the family as an in law. This being said, I think I know myself well enough to know when I like or dislike a call, independent of outcome.

If Carroll and the Seahawks are confident Wilson will get rid of the ball within 2-3 seconds, I'm all for it. Most teams would not trust their O to execute and I know I wouldn't trust Colin Kaepernick in that situation, but I can definitely see why the Hawks' staff trusts Wilson. If it doesn't work, I still respect their willingness to show that confidence in their players... similar to how I respect Osborne's going for 2 in that Orange Bowl. And whether it works or not, I'm sure the players appreciate their coaches' trust as well.

At the end of the game, I'm pretty much OK with their passing (if they had needed and gotten all 4 downs, I'd guess 1 or 2 are passes), but in that situation, I think they failed to capitalize on a tremendous opportunity by not using play action. If you get one guy to bite, you have a wide open receiver. Their earlier TD pass to Baldwin (though he was screened open by the ref) is a great example... I formation, play fake, 2-3 guys bite up on the run and are non factors on the play. Why not revisit that general concept when at the 1???

If comments not addressed to me.. disregard my post

[BigRedOne]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You're only saying the play call at the half wasn't bad because it worked out. What if it hadn't worked out? Is it still a good call then?

Just because a play call works out doesn't make it a good call. Likewise, just because a play call doesn't work out make it a bad call.

Edited to add: What if the interception near the end of the game would have been a Seahawks TD instead? Is it still a bad play call then or a good play call? I'm confused how you distinguish between the two???

If this is the case maybe its best if you stop watching Football. Trying to compare two TOTALLY different game situations. You are correct about one thing, you are confused.

#1 (As stated previously) The Play at the half doesn't lose the game. It was also a highly safe pass on a mismatched defender. What part of that don't you get? It was more than worth the risk at that point. So YES even if it fails its still a good call.

#2 They still get the 3 points even if the pass fails there, as there was still 2 seconds left.

#3 With 6 seconds? Risky? maybe, But its a no brainer that top playoff teams are all likely going to run a play for a TD chance in that situation.

So to answer your question.... YES, even if the most horrible play call in SB history had somehow been successful, it would still be a highly ill advisable and dumb call.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by BigRedOne

The Play at the half doesn't lose the game.

The play at the half looses the game if its unsuccessful because instead of trailing by 4 with 2 minutes to go, they're trailing by 11. I know that's a 'what if' scenario, but its no more of a 'what if' than saying to give the ball to Lynch 3 more times to try and pound it in.

[packs]

I don't see how anyone could view that call as anything but the worst possible thing you could do in that situation. Throwing the ball on the half yard line to try to trick a defense is something you do in Madden. It's not something you do in real life. That play is your entire season. You can't lose on an interception.

[HRBAKER]

...............a friend sent me this and I found it funny:

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't see how anyone could view that call as anything but the worst possible thing you could do in that situation. Throwing the ball on the half yard line to try to trick a defense is something you do in Madden. It's not something you do in real life. That play is your entire season. You can't lose on an interception.

Deception and trickery is 100% a part of football.... this is why coaches pro and college will hold 2, even 3 separate personnel packages on the sideline as the play clock runs down before they send one on the field, goal being to trick the D coordinator into sending the wrong defensive personnel package on the field... or Peyton Manning making hundreds of meaningless signals in a game... or linebackers faking a blitz (at risk of being caught out of position at the snap)... etc.

I agree that the play as called was terrible, but I don't have much issue with them passing on that down. However if you're going to do so, go all in on the deception... get Wilson under center, line up in the I with a fullback and 2 TEs, and sell the run via play action. In that situation, especially its being on 2nd down, I'd guess most/all Pats would have been fooled... and if not all, you'd at least catch one out of position, which is all you really need.

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by Runscott

As an older fan of a team that has been in a lot of big games in my lifetime (Cowboys), I can tell the younger fans that you will go through this many more times in your life. It comes with the games on the opposite end of the spectrum (remember just two weeks ago?). I felt much worse when Lynn Swann made that catch in the Super Bowl against Dallas, or when Jackie Smith dropped the pass from Staubach, or 'the catch' by the blasted 49'ers. I just wish Bart Starr had passed in the 1967 NFC Championship game

Well, as an older fan this Cowboy memory will make you happy. One of my coaches in HS was the guy (Larry Schreiber) who scored 3 TDs against the Cowboys in the '72 Divisional round game, to put the Niners up 21-6... but Staubach came in late and lead a crazy 4th quarter comeback, including on side kick, to win 30-28. I think that's when the nickname "Captain Comeback" was coined, right?

Re- comments about Seattle fans, I'm not speaking in reference to any of these ridiculous videos, or conspiracy theories (coaches didn't want Marshawn to win MVP?? Please), but my personal experience at games in Seattle has been incredible. I've been to 3 Niner games there, including the NFC Champ game last year. Each time, I wore my red Niner gear, and never once did someone try to instigate a fight. I got a few light hearted heckles, but the kind where we're both smiling while talking trash. One thing about the Seattle fans I've seen, they don't seem to try and escalate the situation, and if you don't wanna take their sh*t they just leave you alone. Niner fans (at Candlestick) on the other hand have been an embarrassment for the last decade or so. I've seen so many people just egg and egg opposing fans until a fight breaks out. I've been to a few of the recent Packer games, and remember watching a group of fans across the parking lot follow a cheese head, knock off his hat, step on it... then knock it off again and again and again. The Packer fan (nicest fans ever) just kept walking away, but those situations often got uglier. So dumb, it's just a football game.