irish eyes
Footballguy
Holy crap is anyone watching fat head Berman make an ### of himself. He is an absolute buffoon
An error occurredYou have reached your quota of positive votes for the dayOk, call it 80%. But when the pats play run, they must stop it at a slightly better clip, right? So if you run into their run d, maybe you convert less than 80% of the time. But if you run into their pass d, you convert slightly better than 80%. same thing if you pass into a pass d or pass into a run d.On that down, the patriots were "supposed to be" in a run d. your odds of converting a pass there were better than average.Lynch picked up the yardage 85% of the time this year, and the Pats gave it up 81% of the time. It's a terrible call.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
But if they had run it and failed, they would have had to use thwir last time out. And now they have to pass on the following down because if they don't, the game might be over before you get another shot.
so while i agree that the run is a higher percentage play, if you don't convert the run, you get a low percentage pass play and then all your chips are in on fourth down.
So while I agree that the run is the higher percentage play in a vacuum, I still think the pass made sense. Kudos to the pats for figuring it out and stopping it.
Just watched the replay. they just went back to the huddle and called the play pretty quickly. I don't think they'd have time to work in 3 rushing plays.Nope there was almost a minute left after Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle let 25 seconds or so run off the clock as they were lining up.That actually makes some sense. That last play occurred with only 25 seconds left. And that's why Belichek didn't call a time out.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
If it's me, I call a read option there and give Wilson an opp to throw the ball away if it's not there. Still, I don't think the call is terrible because the matchup favors them, normally. The thing is, pick plays are VERY successful against man coverage. They are designed to beat man cover as a matter of fact. There is no point picking zone D because they just pass the threat one to the next zone. NE was playing man coverage. You don't like the play call, fine. All this worst call in the world stuff is knee jerk hyperbole, though. Schematically, it wasn't a bad play call at all. They had skill advantage with 3 WR vs GL. They also had a play designed to beat man coverage and NE played man coverage. Butler just man an incredible play. It's a shame we've come to a point where good defense can't be appreciated. How would Lynch have had 3 shots? They only had 1 TO, correct? If he doesn't get it on that down they are pretty much locked into throwing the next few downs and maybe run again on 4th.The call was a bunch formation quick hit. Think of how many things can go wrong there. It's designed to make a split second decision; but they really had a bit more time than that. Check to an option and just extend the play and throw it away if there's nothing there. Or hand it to the guy the eats up large chunks of grass routinely late in the game. The call was just bad; but so was Russell's read.Why couldn't Wilson have thrown it away in the play called? It was essentially a 1 read play. Once it was clear Butler wasn't getting picked and is jumping the route he should have just chucked it out of the end zone.That formation was bunched so tight that there was a really ridiculously small window, by design. They should've gone read option because Russell would've had the option to chuck it out of bounds. Just a crazy call to dial up that formation. Brady would been checking to a QB sneak (unless Thatold Simon was in the slot).if you run and don't make it you have to use your t.o. then you cant afford to run again until fourth down. if you pass and don't make it you can do either. that's why he threw it. You want flexibility on every play to put maximum pressure on the defense.It was 2nd down and they had 1 TO, so not following you there.Props to carroll for owning that call.
Personally i think it was a great call - use up all the clock them take your shot. if it's incomplete, you still have all your time left and a timeout for lynch to run. If you run it you only get three more plays and youre forced to go for three passes in a row because the clock is ticking. But if you pass on first you give yourself an extra shot.
I also think that was belichicks motive for letting the clock run. He wanted to bait them into the pass and it worked.
Just an incredible chess match to watch.
Ok, call it 80%. But when the pats play run, they must stop it at a slightly better clip, right? So if you run into their run d, maybe you convert less than 80% of the time. But if you run into their pass d, you convert slightly better than 80%. same thing if you pass into a pass d or pass into a run d. On that down, the patriots were "supposed to be" in a run d. your odds of converting a pass there were better than average.Lynch picked up the yardage 85% of the time this year, and the Pats gave it up 81% of the time. It's a terrible call.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
But if they had run it and failed, they would have had to use thwir last time out. And now they have to pass on the following down because if they don't, the game might be over before you get another shot.
so while i agree that the run is a higher percentage play, if you don't convert the run, you get a low percentage pass play and then all your chips are in on fourth down.
So while I agree that the run is the higher percentage play in a vacuum, I still think the pass made sense. Kudos to the pats for figuring it out and stopping it.
The numbers thrown out are rather meaningless because there is not factoring in the success rate vs personal. That's how teams/coaches make real life decisions. They know the packages and personal groupings that favor them. What is the success rate for run/pass when it's 3 WR vs. GL? I'm guessing nobody here really knows but I assure you Sea and NE did. It's rather clear from post game that's what influenced Sea in their decision.Really? There was 59 seconds on the clock when Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle was in no hurry to run that 2 nd down play.Just watched the replay. they just went back to the huddle and called the play pretty quickly. I don't think they'd have time to work in 3 rushing plays.Nope there was almost a minute left after Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle let 25 seconds or so run off the clock as they were lining up.That actually makes some sense. That last play occurred with only 25 seconds left. And that's why Belichek didn't call a time out.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
I'm actually shocked that Al Michaels didn't recreate his famous "He did WHAT???" call during the replay. Collinsworth should have thought of it also.ffldrew said:That's what I was thinkingbeef said:Antonio freeman catch
No idea how accurate it is, but saw that Lynch converted 17/20 3rd or 4th and one/goals this year. And the Pats were dead last in stopping them (81% against). They had almost a minute and a timeout left after 1st down. Time to run Lynch three more times.Ok, call it 80%. But when the pats play run, they must stop it at a slightly better clip, right? So if you run into their run d, maybe you convert less than 80% of the time. But if you run into their pass d, you convert slightly better than 80%. same thing if you pass into a pass d or pass into a run d.On that down, the patriots were "supposed to be" in a run d. your odds of converting a pass there were better than average.Lynch picked up the yardage 85% of the time this year, and the Pats gave it up 81% of the time. It's a terrible call.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
But if they had run it and failed, they would have had to use thwir last time out. And now they have to pass on the following down because if they don't, the game might be over before you get another shot.
so while i agree that the run is a higher percentage play, if you don't convert the run, you get a low percentage pass play and then all your chips are in on fourth down.
So while I agree that the run is the higher percentage play in a vacuum, I still think the pass made sense. Kudos to the pats for figuring it out and stopping it.
He doesn't score every time.If Lynch gets the ball on the 1 to win the SB he scores on 2nd down, 3rd down, and 4th down, and you could run that play 50 more times and he scores every time.
It doesnt matter what the matchups said, the scheme or anything else. Football is a game of inches and no one is better equipped to get you 36 inches than the guy they had lined up that didnt get the ball.
One that was pretty boring and pretty poorly played for the most part.You do know the Super Bowl was on today. I'm not sure what game you watched.90% of that game was terrible. Itbjust wasn't all that interesting of a game. Last 5 minutes were awesome.
They could've gone no huddle and maybe saved 10 seconds but i still don't think they could've run 3 plays. Maybe, it would've been close and their play calls would've been rushed.Really? There was 53 seconds on the clock when Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle was in no hurry to run that 2 nd down play.Just watched the replay. they just went back to the huddle and called the play pretty quickly. I don't think they'd have time to work in 3 rushing plays.Nope there was almost a minute left after Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle let 25 seconds or so run off the clock as they were lining up.That actually makes some sense. That last play occurred with only 25 seconds left. And that's why Belichek didn't call a time out.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
steelers zonaTodem said:One of the best...yes. But not the best.I put SF/Cincy (88) and NYG/NE ahead of that one. Throw in Dallas/Pittsburgh (78) as well.FUBAR said:One of the best for sure.What else could you want?Todem said:Hell no.Old Smiley said:Seriously. Best Superbowl ever?
HOF QB, one of the best ever.
Rising QB
Great defense
guy from nowhere tearing it up
a couple huge WTF moments
Three plays in 45 seconds is easy with a time out.They could've gone no huddle and maybe saved 10 seconds but i still don't think they could've run 3 plays. Maybe, it would've been close and their play calls would've been rushed.Really? There was 53 seconds on the clock when Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle was in no hurry to run that 2 nd down play.Just watched the replay. they just went back to the huddle and called the play pretty quickly. I don't think they'd have time to work in 3 rushing plays.Nope there was almost a minute left after Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle let 25 seconds or so run off the clock as they were lining up.That actually makes some sense. That last play occurred with only 25 seconds left. And that's why Belichek didn't call a time out.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
Ah, I don't know. It's such a gut punch. Carroll runs them at a pretty high pitch.So nobody is talking about Seattle's classlessness at the end of the game? Ok
Typical dirty Seahawks. Glad to see them lose!So nobody is talking about Seattle's classlessness at the end of the game? Ok
maybe you're right.Three plays in 45 seconds is easy with a time out.They could've gone no huddle and maybe saved 10 seconds but i still don't think they could've run 3 plays. Maybe, it would've been close and their play calls would've been rushed.Really? There was 53 seconds on the clock when Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle was in no hurry to run that 2 nd down play.Just watched the replay. they just went back to the huddle and called the play pretty quickly. I don't think they'd have time to work in 3 rushing plays.Nope there was almost a minute left after Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle let 25 seconds or so run off the clock as they were lining up.That actually makes some sense. That last play occurred with only 25 seconds left. And that's why Belichek didn't call a time out.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
Brady = GOAT
Belichick = Greatest coach of all time
They can both ride off into the sunset now and I won't even care. #### "Spygate" and #### "Deflategate". The controversy is over.
I was wrong watched the highlights again on NFL.com and there was actually 59 seconds which should be plenty of time to get 3 plays in. I don't even mind a pass play but why not do a play action fake to Lynch and roll Wilson out with a run pass option? Butler, a rookie DB, knew that slant was coming and made a great play.They could've gone no huddle and maybe saved 10 seconds but i still don't think they could've run 3 plays. Maybe, it would've been close and their play calls would've been rushed.Really? There was 53 seconds on the clock when Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle was in no hurry to run that 2 nd down play.Just watched the replay. they just went back to the huddle and called the play pretty quickly. I don't think they'd have time to work in 3 rushing plays.Nope there was almost a minute left after Lynch was tackled on 1st down. Seattle let 25 seconds or so run off the clock as they were lining up.That actually makes some sense. That last play occurred with only 25 seconds left. And that's why Belichek didn't call a time out.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
Not even close. Nice try though.Brady = GOAT
Belichick = Greatest coach of all time
Just stop- it was a horrible play call.Ok, call it 80%. But when the pats play run, they must stop it at a slightly better clip, right? So if you run into their run d, maybe you convert less than 80% of the time. But if you run into their pass d, you convert slightly better than 80%. same thing if you pass into a pass d or pass into a run d.On that down, the patriots were "supposed to be" in a run d. your odds of converting a pass there were better than average.Lynch picked up the yardage 85% of the time this year, and the Pats gave it up 81% of the time. It's a terrible call.If a run is 60% likely to score and a pass 40%, you're better off running. No question. But if your choice is between two runs, or a pass and two runs, then you call a pass first. Because if you run first, you have to call a pass next or risk only getting two plays.
And if a pass on THAT down is more like 60% (because everyone expects a run), and only 40% on the following down (when you know its coming because they can't stop the clock again), then passing is the obvious choice. Its just good coaching.
And knowing all that, the pats were ready for the pass.
It's going to be quake forever, but I think it's good coaching on both sides.
But if they had run it and failed, they would have had to use thwir last time out. And now they have to pass on the following down because if they don't, the game might be over before you get another shot.
so while i agree that the run is a higher percentage play, if you don't convert the run, you get a low percentage pass play and then all your chips are in on fourth down.
So while I agree that the run is the higher percentage play in a vacuum, I still think the pass made sense. Kudos to the pats for figuring it out and stopping it.The numbers thrown out are rather meaningless because there is not factoring in the success rate vs personal. That's how teams/coaches make real life decisions. They know the packages and personal groupings that favor them. What is the success rate for run/pass when it's 3 WR vs. GL? I'm guessing nobody here really knows but I assure you Sea and NE did. It's rather clear from post game that's what influenced Sea in their decision.
DD, I was rooting for the Pats all the way, but damn, that one has to hurt as much as the Packer loss. Don't wish that kind of a loss on anyone.Doctor Detroit said:Congrats Pats fans
Who was better, Homer?Not even close. Nice try though.Brady = GOAT
Belichick = Greatest coach of all time
An error occurredYou have reached your quota of positive votes for the dayCarroll basically saying exactly what I just said in the post game interviews. He needed to get the plays, saw the pays bring in their goal line d, they brought out their the receiver set planning to run but decided to take advantage of the goal line look, and butler made a great play.
Great game, hate when a bad coaching decision makes a difference but Pats deserved to win. Thanks for the note.DD, I was rooting for the Pats all the way, but damn, that one has to hurt as much as the Packer loss. Don't wish that kind of a loss on anyone.Doctor Detroit said:Congrats Pats fans
I'm still not over it.
Great season.
Do we know if it was the call, or if Wilson changed it?wdcrob said:Bevell has a history of doing stupid #### at the goal line too.
Hard to top that play call.So nobody is talking about Seattle's classlessness at the end of the game? Ok
Carroll basically saying exactly what I just said in the post game interviews. He needed to get the plays, saw the pays bring in their goal line d, they brought out their the receiver set planning to run but decided to take advantage of the goal line look, and butler made a great play.
No one going to give this love? Special talent here.Q: Lions lose in gut wrenching fashion to Cowboys.
Cowboys lose in gut wrenching fashion to Packers.
Packers lose in gut wrenching fashion to Seahawks.
Seahawks lose in gut wrenching fashion to Pats.
—Chris, Austin
It's expected.So nobody is talking about Seattle's classlessness at the end of the game? Ok
The formation was pass from the get go, no way Wilson changed it. What QB doesn't want to throw a Super Bowl winning TD?Do we know if it was the call, or if Wilson changed it?wdcrob said:Bevell has a history of doing stupid #### at the goal line too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hoHds88SlkCarroll basically saying exactly what I just said in the post game interviews. He needed to get the plays, saw the pays bring in their goal line d, they brought out their the receiver set planning to run but decided to take advantage of the goal line look, and butler made a great play.![]()
lolCarroll basically saying exactly what I just said in the post game interviews. He needed to get the plays, saw the pays bring in their goal line d, they brought out their the receiver set planning to run but decided to take advantage of the goal line look, and butler made a great play.![]()
Going against Arrington...nah. He should keep it for now. Not as explosive against real CBsOn the bright side this Matthews kid should be able to quit his Foot Locker gig next season.
Brady and Wilson were pretty meh most of the game.I don't get anyone saying the game was sloppy or poorly played either, I thought both teams played a great game.![]()