The worst play call in NFL history (1 Viewer)

[nobiz]

I'm hard pressed to think of any other calls that would even be in the conversation.

Only Pisarcik enters that convo.

Lockette went straight to the end zone but was blown up by Butler. Bevell is a complete loser.

And I'm fascinated by those who claim it's a TD if Wilson't pass is better. It was not- Lockette wasn't getting into the end zone.

Butler made one of the greatest plays in NFL history.

 

[PatsWillWin]

“It’s not the right matchup for us to run the football,” Carroll said. “So on second down, we throw the ball, really to kind of waste that play. If we score, we do. If we don’t, then we’ll run it on third and fourth down. Really, with no second thoughts or hesitation in that at all.”

Oof.

I would not have thought it possible, but this makes the call worse IMO. What the hell does that even mean? Waste a play. You have three chances to score a touchdown to win the Super Bowl and you think it's a good idea to waste a play? And your best idea of how to waste a play is to call a pass right into the middle of the defense?

I don't understand the personnel thing either. They had just ran on 1st and goal from the 5. What personnel were in then? What's the big deal about running a play out of a 3 WR set? The worst that happens is Lynch, maybe loses a yard, which takes more time off the clock, which is fine considering you still have a time out. Oh yeah, and the upside is that you can win the Super Bowl.

That's just brutal. I hope he's covering for the OC. If my team blew a Super Bowl like that on the 1 yard line, I'd at least like to think they did so while trying to win the game. No, not here. They were trying to waste a play. Down four points. By throwing a slant in the middle.

Bonkers.

I feel for Seahawk fans, I really do.

 

[pizzatyme]

Sorry #beastmode but this MVP goes to my boy #dangeruss...oops!

 

[nobiz]

There was hype of Bevell as a HC and I wonder if he wanted to be cute there. Anyway, blaming Lockette should put a red flag on him, even in the South.

 

[Wingnut]

When you don't give it to Marshawn from inside the 1, that's the result you're gonna get.

 

[Wingnut]

Carroll: We were gonna run the ball and win the game, but not on that down. And that was it. That was our full intention.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Carroll: We were gonna run the ball and win the game, but not on that down. And that was it. That was our full intention.

We were gonna win the game, just, you know, like later.

 

[gradin123]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

 

[Andrew74]

After sleeping on it - still dumbest call ever.

 

[Thunderlips]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

That's as good an explanation as any.

One for the ages.

 

[jon_mx]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

 

[TLEF316]

Still sick over this as a patriots despiser. What a freaking gift. Just awful

 

[Todem]

Yeah what is getting lost is the fact Wilson made the decision to attempt to squeeze that ball jnto the smallest of windows.

I think the call was bad....but Wilson's decision is not being given enough scrutiny. He made a bad read and could have flung it through the back of the end zone to live for another 2 plays.

 

[Todem]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

 

[jon_mx]

Yeah what is getting lost is the fact Wilson made the decision to attempt to squeeze that ball jnto the smallest of windows.

I think the call was bad....but Wilson's decision is not being given enough scrutiny. He made a bad read and could have flung it through the back of the end zone to live for another 2 plays.

Given that that was the play that was called, what choice did he have? Of course he had to thread the needle, they were at the goal line and the defense was all bunched in at the line of scrimmage. It is amazing the ball was not tipped or something. Just too many bodies to know and process where everybody was at. If you are going to throw, roll Wilson out and give him a chance to hit a wide open receiver, run it in, or throw it away.

 

[Tango]

Nothing wrong with a pass there.

Running a 2pt conversion pick-play, however...bad call.

It was man up with some safeties on WRs with no help anywhere. 3W vs GL. *If* you want to pass, and there was plenty of reason to do so, throw a fade. Catch or incomplete. Time not a consideration for the Hawks' play-calling under 30 seconds.

A fade was a perfectly acceptable option; as was running w/Lynch of course.

 

[jon_mx]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

You play the odds. It is called clock management. There is such a thing as scoring too soon and unnecessarily giving the opponents a chance to tie or win.

 

[Tango]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

You play the odds. It is called clock management. There is such a thing as scoring too soon and unnecessarily giving the opponents a chance to tie or win.

With 25 secs left and under...the clock is no longer a consideration for Seahawks' play-calling.

You do not take the points for granted. You get the points any way you can and if Brady manufactures a FGA with 20 seconds to work with....then God bless him.

Again, clock was a non-issue on that play-call for the Hawks.

 

[jon_mx]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

You play the odds. It is called clock management. There is such a thing as scoring too soon and unnecessarily giving the opponents a chance to tie or win.

With 25 secs left and under...the clock is no longer a consideration for Seahawks' play-calling.

You do not take the points for granted. You get the points any way you can and if Brady manufactures a FGA with 20 seconds to work with....then God bless him.

Again, clock was a non-issue on that play-call for the Hawks.

But there was more than 25 seconds and New England had their TO's, and that was the problem. Brady could have reasonably run 4 plays to get in FG position.

 

[fred_1_15301]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

You play the odds. It is called clock management. There is such a thing as scoring too soon and unnecessarily giving the opponents a chance to tie or win.

Completely disagree. In that situation, number one priority is to get the TD. If you give away a down like you're suggesting, a lot of things could go wrong on 3rd down (e.g false start penalty, sack, lynch stuffed for a loss, etc.).

 

[KarmaPolice]

A lot of hyperbole in this thread.

 

[jon_mx]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

You play the odds. It is called clock management. There is such a thing as scoring too soon and unnecessarily giving the opponents a chance to tie or win.

Completely disagree. In that situation, number one priority is to get the TD. If you give away a down like you're suggesting, a lot of things could go wrong on 3rd down (e.g false start penalty, sack, lynch stuffed for a loss, etc.).

I guess the play ended with about 20 seconds left, so that was probably a reasonable time to score. But there is a huge difference between given 30 seconds and 20 seconds, and you don't want to give 30 seconds. I would rather waste a down and take my chances.

 

[Tango]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

You play the odds. It is called clock management. There is such a thing as scoring too soon and unnecessarily giving the opponents a chance to tie or win.

With 25 secs left and under...the clock is no longer a consideration for Seahawks' play-calling.

You do not take the points for granted. You get the points any way you can and if Brady manufactures a FGA with 20 seconds to work with....then God bless him.

Again, clock was a non-issue on that play-call for the Hawks.

But there was more than 25 seconds and New England had their TO's, and that was the problem. Brady could have reasonably run 4 plays to get in FG position.

I dont follow: you call a play expecting the opponent to call timeout before you snap the ball?!?

You assume they wont and that would mean you are snapping it with under 30 seconds left.

The clock was no influence whatsoever on that play call if you're the Hawks. You get the points via run or pass...whatever. Clock is not a consideration there.

 

[PatsWillWin]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

You play the odds. It is called clock management. There is such a thing as scoring too soon and unnecessarily giving the opponents a chance to tie or win.

Completely disagree. In that situation, number one priority is to get the TD. If you give away a down like you're suggesting, a lot of things could go wrong on 3rd down (e.g false start penalty, sack, lynch stuffed for a loss, etc.).

I guess the play ended with about 20 seconds left, so that was probably a reasonable time to score. But there is a huge difference between given 30 seconds and 20 seconds, and you don't want to give 30 seconds. I would rather waste a down and take my chances.

You think it's worth trading 10 seconds for an opportunity to score a go-ahead touchdown? I think that's insane.

 

[Road Warriors]

A lot of hyperbole in this thread.

The most hyperbole EVER!

 

[IvanKaramazov]

A lot of hyperbole in this thread.

Not really, IMO. Given the stakes and the situation, I can't recall ever seeing a worse play call. I was literally struck speechless when this occurred last night.

Can you provide an example of a worse call? I'm sure folks have done stupider stuff in run-of-the-mill games, but I can't think of anything that compares once you factor in the context.

 

[jon_mx]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

You play the odds. It is called clock management. There is such a thing as scoring too soon and unnecessarily giving the opponents a chance to tie or win.

With 25 secs left and under...the clock is no longer a consideration for Seahawks' play-calling.

You do not take the points for granted. You get the points any way you can and if Brady manufactures a FGA with 20 seconds to work with....then God bless him.

Again, clock was a non-issue on that play-call for the Hawks.

But there was more than 25 seconds and New England had their TO's, and that was the problem. Brady could have reasonably run 4 plays to get in FG position.

I dont follow: you call a play expecting the opponent to call timeout before you snap the ball?!?

You assume they wont and that would mean you are snapping it with under 30 seconds left.

The clock was no influence whatsoever on that play call if you're the Hawks. You get the points via run or pass...whatever. Clock is not a consideration there.

According to Carroll it did. It was a cat and mouse game and Pete lost. You could see Belicheck thinking about a timeout or not. Carroll was not concerned about the number of plays, he was confident two plays from the one was more than enough, which is why he called that a wasted play. The biggest problem with that call was it was a very high risk pass in a very congested part of the field. A roll out or fade or something would have been smarter.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

A lot of hyperbole in this thread.

Not really, IMO. Given the stakes and the situation, I can't recall ever seeing a worse play call. I was literally struck speechless when this occurred last night.

Can you provide an example of a worse call? I'm sure folks have done stupider stuff in run-of-the-mill games, but I can't think of anything that compares once you factor in the context.

Right with you. Still the dumbest call ever.

The only thing I can think of that's even close is Grady Little leaving Martinez in during Game 7 of the ACLS.

But this is worse.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Big fan of the call

 

[GoBirds]

PatsWillWin, on 02 Feb 2015 - 04:49 AM, said:“It’s not the right matchup for us to run the football,” Carroll said. “So on second down, we throw the ball, really to kind of waste that play. If we score, we do. If we don’t, then we’ll run it on third and fourth down. Really, with no second thoughts or hesitation in that at all.”

Oof.

Haha, well he successfully wasted the play.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Yeah what is getting lost is the fact Wilson made the decision to attempt to squeeze that ball jnto the smallest of windows.

I think the call was bad....but Wilson's decision is not being given enough scrutiny. He made a bad read and could have flung it through the back of the end zone to live for another 2 plays.

Given that that was the play that was called, what choice did he have? Of course he had to thread the needle, they were at the goal line and the defense was all bunched in at the line of scrimmage. It is amazing the ball was not tipped or something. Just too many bodies to know and process where everybody was at. If you are going to throw, roll Wilson out and give him a chance to hit a wide open receiver, run it in, or throw it away.

I think the elite QBs handle that call and play differently. The point about Carroll getting squeezed when the Pats did not call a TO is a good one (and probably the truth) but the HC & QB have to be prepared for that, especially since unless he calls a TO it's out of the HC's hands once the play clock starts and the play is called.

I think the elite QBs either 1. audible on that one or 2. look off the main call and throw the fade - there was a guy open on the far left and there was a fade pattern behind that as well, no one seems to be mentioning that - or 3. most likely just throw it away.

Because the goal there according to Carroll is to use up the clock, see what's there, and get to 3rd and 4th down. So what you may say in the post further up is true (and I think it's what Carroll was saying) that eating clock and killing the Pats' final possession is worth it, but you have to get there.

I think this is an equally dumb play on Wilson. Elite QBs are difference makers, that's what happened here, one was, one was not.

 

[Tango]

According to Carroll it did. It was a cat and mouse game and Pete lost. You could see Belicheck thinking about a timeout or not. Carroll was not concerned about the number of plays, he was confident two plays from the one was more than enough, which is why he called that a wasted play. The biggest problem with that call was it was a very high risk pass in a very congested part of the field. A roll out or fade or something would have been smarter.

1) If time was a factor in the Hawks play-call on 2nd down, then that's idiotic.

2) Yes, a high-risk 2pt conversion styled play-call was not wise

3) A fade would have been a perfectly acceptable play-call there

 

[humpback]

Carroll and Bevell just making it worse with their "reasoning".

 

[Tango]

I think the elite QBs either 1. audible on that one or 2. look off the main call and throw the fade - there was a guy open on the far left and there was a fade pattern behind that as well, no one seems to be mentioning that - or 3. most likely just throw it away.

Im with you on that one.

A fade was just a good a call as going to Lynch on 2nd (if not better-obviously arguable)

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Carroll and Bevell just making it worse with their "reasoning".

I'll translate:

"We got outcoached. The Patriots put an alignment out there we didn't like, so we went away from what we do best. That's what Belichick always does -- try to take away your best player -- and we fell for it. In hindsight I wish we'd gone with Lynch. Win or lose it was the right call."

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Do we know it's Bevell that is being covered for here?

Do we know the actual play call? We don't?

Isn't it possible that Wilson was given the option to run, or throw the slant, or throw the fade (there were two WR's running on the left side of the end zone, one was very open), or throw it away?

 

[snogger]

PatsWillWin, on 02 Feb 2015 - 04:49 AM, said:“It’s not the right matchup for us to run the football,” Carroll said. “So on second down, we throw the ball, really to kind of waste that play. If we score, we do. If we don’t, then we’ll run it on third and fourth down. Really, with no second thoughts or hesitation in that at all.”

Oof.

WOW,, His first comment right after the game on "My fault, we probably should have run there" was perfect..

Why later he had to throw in the "Well, we were really just trying to waste a play there" is

 

[GoBirds]

Talk about going one extreme to the other after the great play call before the 2 min warning with the pass to Lynch and then you cap off the drive with that dumpster fire of a call.

 

[snogger]

Do we know it's Bevell that is being covered for here?

Do we know the actual play call? We don't?

Isn't it possible that Wilson was given the option to run, or or throw the slant, or throw the fade (there were two WR's running on the left side of the end zone, one was very open), or throw it away?

Bevel stated he made what he thought was the right call and then threw Lockette under the bus.

 

[The Westin]

Quick Question.

After Butler caught that, momentum kind of carried him into the endzone and he quickly dove to the 1 or 2 yard line.

If he had stayed in the endzone, would that have been considered a touchback because of momentum or a safety?

 

[Short Corner]

I think it's universally viewed as a very poor play call, but it's also 20/20 hindsight.

If Wilson threads the needle there - which he has done time and time again with only 7 INTs all year - people would have called it a gutsy play by a proven winner at QB.

It obviously backfired since they took Lynch out of the play, but sometimes games turn on a few plays. They're not even in that situation if Kearse doesn't do a Tyree two plays prior.

You don't thread the needle when you have two plays in your pocket.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Do we know it's Bevell that is being covered for here?

Do we know the actual play call? We don't?

Isn't it possible that Wilson was given the option to run, or or throw the slant, or throw the fade (there were two WR's running on the left side of the end zone, one was very open), or throw it away?

Bevel stated he made what he thought was the right call and then threw Lockette under the bus.

Yeah, horrible. - That's also coaching by the Pats. Butler made a legendary play but reality is you have to recognize it coming before it happens to do that.

 

[lod01]

PatsWillWin, on 02 Feb 2015 - 04:49 AM, said:“It’s not the right matchup for us to run the football,” Carroll said. “So on second down, we throw the ball, really to kind of waste that play. If we score, we do. If we don’t, then we’ll run it on third and fourth down. Really, with no second thoughts or hesitation in that at all.”

Oof.

Haha, well he successfully wasted the play.

Marshawn Lynch running like a man possessed. Pats couldn't stop him all day. Yep. this is the Pete Carroll I remember back with the Jets. Just pure stupid flowing from his mouth. I expect more stupidity going forward.

 

[JaxBill]

Cris Carter had a good point that the play was blown up because Browner wouldn’t let Kearse off the line to set the pick. So in a way, Seattle got out-Seahawked.

 

[fightingillini]

This issue started with the Seahawks getting too cute with the clock. You are down 4 points. You certainly don't need to rush after the first down run but you also shouldn't run the clock all the way down because with only one timeout left it limits your options a bit on a potential 3rd or 4th down and you have to remember you are still down by 4. If you are down by 3 and a field goal ties it, then letting the clock run down more makes more sense.

Pretty simple what you do. You keep your big formation in there, which was in there on 1st down. With about 39 seconds left you run the second down play with Lynch. If you get stuffed on the second down, you quickly get everyone back in formation and run another run play with Lynch or Wilson with like 20 seconds left. If you get stuffed again then you immediately call your last Timeout and you run the 4th down play which could be anything.

Under this scenario, if you score on 2nd down you are now up 3 with like 35 seconds left. You do kick deep and the Pats get the ball at about their own 20 with about 35 seconds left and 2 TO's. Could Brady drive down the field and tie it? Possibly, but worst case you are going to overtime.

I really believe the Seahawks put their 3 WR set out there on second down thinking the Pats would see that and immediately call a Timeout. They didn't and Seattle didn't really know what to do with the play. So they kept letting the clock run and went with the pass.

Letting the clock run makes perfect sense. Giving NE the ball with 45 seconds and only needing a FG to tie is about a 50-50 possibility of OT. Shoot, Seattle managed to get a TD in less time at the end of the 1st half. Ideally Seattle would have scored with under 15 seconds left on the clock, which would have meant waiting until 3rd down to score. So how do you do that? You run a play on 2nd down with about 40 seconds left, a play not intending to score like a QB sneak but intentionally stopping just short of the goal line. Then let the clock run down to about 15-20 seconds, handing the ball to Lynch. If he doesn't score, burn you last time out and run your last play, probably another run by Lynch. Even if Seattle would have converted that TD instead of throwing an INT, it would have given about 30 seconds and Brady a shot at tying the game.

Running a play with the intention to get stopped!!!!! Are you mad. This is the Super bowl. You run every play down there with intention to score and let the chips fall where they fall with your vaunted defense.Talk about horrendous strategy....my god Jon WTF are you talking about?

You play the odds. It is called clock management. There is such a thing as scoring too soon and unnecessarily giving the opponents a chance to tie or win.

Not sure how you can even think this is the right strategy. SEA has a better chance of winning the game if they try to score right away. Even if you score on the next play and give NE the ball with 20 or so seconds left, it's still 50-50 AT BEST for Brady to get it into FG range. It wasn't like NE was throwing the ball down the field that much. You have to give yourself the best chance of scoring the TD and letting the chips fall from there. Say Lynch gets stuffed for a 2 yard loss. You do that on 2nd down, you still have 2 plays with all your options open on 3rd down. Waste a play, now you have 4th down at th 3 yard line, which is an automatic passing play.

Best option is to run Lynch 3 times if you have to.

 

[Bad_Mo]

Hearing Carroll's explanation...I can see what he was trying to do. If they had 2 TOs left...it would have been Lynch to close it out. With 1 TO and 3 plays to score a TD, I can see trying to catch NE in a bad matchup. However, you don't throw in the middle of the field like that. I'd be OK with a pass to end zone, fade to #13 or Luke Willson where only they could make a play on the ball.

 

[lod01]

Do we know it's Bevell that is being covered for here?

Do we know the actual play call? We don't?

Isn't it possible that Wilson was given the option to run, or or throw the slant, or throw the fade (there were two WR's running on the left side of the end zone, one was very open), or throw it away?

Bevel stated he made what he thought was the right call and then threw Lockette under the bus.

But offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell said Lockette shares the blame.

Lockette "could have been stronger through the ball," Bevell pointed out to reporters multiple times

They haven't fired this moron yet? Ther are only 2 people to blame Bevell for calling the play and Wilson (slightly) for executing it. If you want to be an elite QB in this league you have to know to audible out of the dumbest play call in history.

Lockette can't even stand up for himself and call Bevell the idiot that he is because he will get cut. He can easily be replaced by Matthews or Richardson.

 

[GoBirds]

Bad_Mo, on 02 Feb 2015 - 09:01 AM, said:Hearing Carroll's explanation...I can see what he was trying to do. If they had 2 TOs left...it would have been Lynch to close it out. With 1 TO and 3 plays to score a TD, I can see trying to catch NE in a bad matchup. However, you don't throw in the middle of the field like that. I'd be OK with a pass to end zone, fade to #13 or Luke Willson where only they could make a play on the ball.

Or even throw the ball low where its your guy or no one. Then if incomplete you get 2 runs since you have a timeout. Still brutal play call after Lynch just got 4, line up quick and run it again.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Cris Carter had a good point that the play was blown up because Browner wouldn’t let Kearse off the line to set the pick. So in a way, Seattle got out-Seahawked.

Also true. But the QB can't assume the pick works.

 

[Tango]

PatsWillWin, on 02 Feb 2015 - 04:49 AM, said:“It’s not the right matchup for us to run the football,” Carroll said. “So on second down, we throw the ball, really to kind of waste that play. If we score, we do. If we don’t, then we’ll run it on third and fourth down. Really, with no second thoughts or hesitation in that at all.”

Oof.

Haha, well he successfully wasted the play.

Marshawn Lynch running like a man possessed. Pats couldn't stop him all day. Yep. this is the Pete Carroll I remember back with the Jets. Just pure stupid flowing from his mouth. I expect more stupidity going forward.

As correct as Carrol was in saying that- I mean, he's right in saying it was 3-wide vs goal-line and that's not an ideal match-up to run:

(1) a 2pt conversion pick-play call is not the right pass to run

(2) with such favorable pass match-ups and no defensive help at all. A one-move pass play is the right call: a fade, etc.

(3) running is still an option of course

The priority of idiots is as follows:

(1) Hawks coaching staff for running an over-complicated pass over the middle. The more real fear is an OPI (see FSU vs Clemson or was that ND?).

(2) All the fans and media and players saying the only option was running with Lynch.