The worst play call in NFL history (1 Viewer)

[cowboyz1]

Haven't heard anyone else make this point (apologies if it was already covered in one of the previous nine pages): I don't think passing there was automatically a dumb play call, but I think the slant was particularly dumb. I would much rather have seen a play-action to Lynch (which the Pats would have had to respect), a Wilson rollout, and then he can either find someone open, run it in, or toss it into the stands. Pretty much zero risk, with all of the attendant benefits Carroll mentioned when he was justifying the call.

And on top of all that, it raises the possibility of some no-name backup TE scoring the SB-winning TD.

ETA: Reminds me a little of Carroll's other bone-headed coaching move, when he took Reggie Bush out of the game on 4th and 2 in the Rose Bowl. At least force the defense to account for your best weapon.

You may have a point there about Carroll cracking under pressure. Sitting Bush was also a very bad decision. Consider this though:

Sappy's SB Slant never should have gotten passed being called. Someone, anyone, should have gone crosseyed and stopped the play from being run. Last time out be damned. If Carroll called the pass, then Bevell should have slapped the snot out of his head coach making his headset fly off on national television. If Bevell goes along with the call, someone on the sidelines that heard the two commiserating on throwing the ball and the game away, should have slapped both of them to the ground on national tv.

Now if by some crazy chance that doesn't happen, Russell Wilson surely should have looked over to the sidelines wondering why both of them are still standing with headsets on and not slapped silly, then change the call to a run, roll out option, or naked boot. Now if that play call gets passed Carroll, Bevell, all the teammates on the sideline, Russell and gets called in the huddle. The entire offense should have stood up and called for the trainers to come in and check Russell for concussion like symptoms.

Now if all that takes place and somehow, someway, the Seattle Seahawks line up and run the slant play. They deserve to get beat, laughed at, cursed at, put down and watch the Patriots swim in a sea of Seahawk tears (as another poster put it). Inexcusable call no matter how anyone frames it. The fact that no one stopped it from happening may be Belichicks genius once again. By not calling a time out he didn't allow the Seahawks coaches or players to act on their sure suspicions on how stupid a play call that was and issued a "press to test" if you will, on the championship nerve of the Seahawk organization. Needless to say, they FAILED miserably.

 

[The Westin]

Haven't heard anyone else make this point (apologies if it was already covered in one of the previous nine pages): I don't think passing there was automatically a dumb play call, but I think the slant was particularly dumb. I would much rather have seen a play-action to Lynch (which the Pats would have had to respect), a Wilson rollout, and then he can either find someone open, run it in, or toss it into the stands. Pretty much zero risk, with all of the attendant benefits Carroll mentioned when he was justifying the call.

And on top of all that, it raises the possibility of some no-name backup TE scoring the SB-winning TD.

ETA: Reminds me a little of Carroll's other bone-headed coaching move, when he took Reggie Bush out of the game on 4th and 2 in the Rose Bowl. At least force the defense to account for your best weapon.

You may have a point there about Carroll cracking under pressure. Sitting Bush was also a very bad decision. Consider this though:

Sappy's SB Slant never should have gotten passed being called. Someone, anyone, should have gone crosseyed and stopped the play from being run. Last time out be damned. If Carroll called the pass, then Bevell should have slapped the snot out of his head coach making his headset fly off on national television. If Bevell goes along with the call, someone on the sidelines that heard the two commiserating on throwing the ball and the game away, should have slapped both of them to the ground on national tv.

Now if by some crazy chance that doesn't happen, Russell Wilson surely should have looked over to the sidelines wondering why both of them are still standing with headsets on and not slapped silly, then change the call to a run, role out option, or naked boot. Now if that play call gets passed Carroll, Bevell, all the teammates on the sideline, Russell and gets called in the huddle. The entire offense should have stood up and called for the trainers to come in and check Russell for concussion like symptoms.

Now if all that takes place and somehow, someway, the Seattle Seahawks line up and run the slant play. They deserve to get beat, laughed at, cursed at, put down and watch the Patriots swim in a sea of Seahawk tears (as another poster put it). Inexcusable call no matter how anyone frames it. The fact that no one stopped it from happening may be Belichicks genius once again. By not calling a time out he didn't allow the Seahawks coaches or players to act on their sure suspicions on how stupid a play call that was and issued a "press to test" if you will on the championship nerve of the Seahawk organization. Needless to say, they FAILED miserably.

I did wonder what the reaction was in the huddle when the play call came in . I'm assuming people looking at each other confused.

 

[RUSF18]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability.

He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Actually I'm using Marshawn Lynch's entire career as a sample size, because you'd have to be a moron to think that the same attributes that make a guy one of the best power RBs of his generation would make him unable to gain a single yard because of how he fared in five situations over the past 4 months.

Because if you used his whole career as an example, you would have been guaranteed that he would have been able to convert each of those previous one yard scenarios, right?

Oh, wait. They didn't quite work out like his career as a whole indicated, did they?

There are NO sure things on the football field. You'd have to be a moron to think there are.

I never said anything was guaranteed. But let's backtrack a bit...

For someone who has performed a certain act more than 2000 times in a career (carrying the ball), because a certain outcome has taken place only one time in five unique and specific instances, it does not mean that the *odds* of something occurring is 20%.

 

[Wingnut]

Haven't heard anyone else make this point (apologies if it was already covered in one of the previous nine pages): I don't think passing there was automatically a dumb play call, but I think the slant was particularly dumb. I would much rather have seen a play-action to Lynch (which the Pats would have had to respect), a Wilson rollout, and then he can either find someone open, run it in, or toss it into the stands. Pretty much zero risk, with all of the attendant benefits Carroll mentioned when he was justifying the call.

And on top of all that, it raises the possibility of some no-name backup TE scoring the SB-winning TD.

ETA: Reminds me a little of Carroll's other bone-headed coaching move, when he took Reggie Bush out of the game on 4th and 2 in the Rose Bowl. At least force the defense to account for your best weapon.

You may have a point there about Carroll cracking under pressure. Sitting Bush was also a very bad decision. Consider this though:Sappy's SB Slant never should have gotten passed being called. Someone, anyone, should have gone crosseyed and stopped the play from being run. Last time out be damned. If Carroll called the pass, then Bevell should have slapped the snot out of his head coach making his headset fly off on national television. If Bevell goes along with the call, someone on the sidelines that heard the two commiserating on throwing the ball and the game away, should have slapped both of them to the ground on national tv.

Now if by some crazy chance that doesn't happen, Russell Wilson surely should have looked over to the sidelines wondering why both of them are still standing with headsets on and not slapped silly, then change the call to a run, roll out option, or naked boot. Now if that play call gets passed Carroll, Bevell, all the teammates on the sideline, Russell and gets called in the huddle. The entire offense should have stood up and called for the trainers to come in and check Russell for concussion like symptoms.

Now if all that takes place and somehow, someway, the Seattle Seahawks line up and run the slant play. They deserve to get beat, laughed at, cursed at, put down and watch the Patriots swim in a sea of Seahawk tears (as another poster put it). Inexcusable call no matter how anyone frames it. The fact that no one stopped it from happening may be Belichicks genius once again. By not calling a time out he didn't allow the Seahawks coaches or players to act on their sure suspicions on how stupid a play call that was and issued a "press to test" if you will, on the championship nerve of the Seahawk organization. Needless to say, they FAILED miserably.

 

[davearm]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability.

He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

 

[dhockster]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

On the first one the patriots never put a safety over the top of Matthews when he out sized the corner back by a lot. The second drive was a lucky hail mary to kearse. Wilson is a more athletic Trent Dilfer.

Either you don't watch much football or you are trolling with very stinky bait.

 

[jon_mx]

I think this was one of the great chess matches in Super Biwl history. Carroll had just taken the queen and had Belichick cornered. Belichick did not do what Carroll expected throwing him off plan and into a mistake. Belichick was both brilliant and lucky.

 

[cstu]

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

How many times has he been stopped three straight times at the 1?

 

[cstu]

I did wonder what the reaction was in the huddle when the play call came in . I'm assuming people looking at each other confused.

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2013-10/enhanced/webdr05/18/12/anigif_enhanced-buzz-10939-1382113093-18.gif

 

[The General]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

On the first one the patriots never put a safety over the top of Matthews when he out sized the corner back by a lot. The second drive was a lucky hail mary to kearse. Wilson is a more athletic Trent Dilfer.

Think it's you who keeps repeating this Dilfer BS. If so, you are a ####### moron. Hope you enjoy getting a bite on your obvious fishing trip.

 

[The General]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

I think Belichick saw Seattle did not have the goal line offense in the game and did not call the TO because he did not want to give them a chance to change. Bill almost called the timeout, but saw something and stopped.

Carroll has admitted he thought Belichick was going to call a timeout. Belichick through a wrench into things by not doing it and Carroll got stuck with the wrong offense on the field.

I didn't see any comments on Belicheck talking about the play. Honestly didn't really want to read about it too much. If that's right then damn, guy is a robot. He gave the Pats the best chance to win there, which no matter what he does there the chances are really slim.

Hit the right combo of skill, preparation, and luck.

Seattle didn't execute on all levels there. Dangerous pass play, a fraction too late from Russell, having the receiver be Lockette.

 

[davearm]

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

How many times has he been stopped three straight times at the 1?

The only time Lynch was given the ball three straight times from the 1, he failed to score. November 14, 2010 vs. Arizona.

 

[ShamrockPride]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

And instead, he threw the entire season away by tossing the ball into the most crowded area of the field to a horrible WR. I'd say Russ got what he deserved.

That was the called play wasn't it? Like I've said before, wanna blame Russ go ahead. He should have never been asked to make that play.

 

[zftcg]

Haven't heard anyone else make this point (apologies if it was already covered in one of the previous nine pages): I don't think passing there was automatically a dumb play call, but I think the slant was particularly dumb. I would much rather have seen a play-action to Lynch (which the Pats would have had to respect), a Wilson rollout, and then he can either find someone open, run it in, or toss it into the stands. Pretty much zero risk, with all of the attendant benefits Carroll mentioned when he was justifying the call.

And on top of all that, it raises the possibility of some no-name backup TE scoring the SB-winning TD.

ETA: Reminds me a little of Carroll's other bone-headed coaching move, when he took Reggie Bush out of the game on 4th and 2 in the Rose Bowl. At least force the defense to account for your best weapon.

You may have a point there about Carroll cracking under pressure. Sitting Bush was also a very bad decision. Consider this though:

Sappy's SB Slant never should have gotten passed being called. Someone, anyone, should have gone crosseyed and stopped the play from being run. Last time out be damned. If Carroll called the pass, then Bevell should have slapped the snot out of his head coach making his headset fly off on national television. If Bevell goes along with the call, someone on the sidelines that heard the two commiserating on throwing the ball and the game away, should have slapped both of them to the ground on national tv.

Now if by some crazy chance that doesn't happen, Russell Wilson surely should have looked over to the sidelines wondering why both of them are still standing with headsets on and not slapped silly, then change the call to a run, roll out option, or naked boot. Now if that play call gets passed Carroll, Bevell, all the teammates on the sideline, Russell and gets called in the huddle. The entire offense should have stood up and called for the trainers to come in and check Russell for concussion like symptoms.

Now if all that takes place and somehow, someway, the Seattle Seahawks line up and run the slant play. They deserve to get beat, laughed at, cursed at, put down and watch the Patriots swim in a sea of Seahawk tears (as another poster put it). Inexcusable call no matter how anyone frames it. The fact that no one stopped it from happening may be Belichicks genius once again. By not calling a time out he didn't allow the Seahawks coaches or players to act on their sure suspicions on how stupid a play call that was and issued a "press to test" if you will, on the championship nerve of the Seahawk organization. Needless to say, they FAILED miserably.

My understanding is that Bevell made the call and Carroll has been taking the heat for him (as a HC should in that situation).

I think it was on Slate's Hang Up and Listen podcast where they made the point that that's the difference between a Brady/Peyton and a third-year QB like Wilson. The vets probably have more authority to change that call.

 

[Old Smiley]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

I think Belichick saw Seattle did not have the goal line offense in the game and did not call the TO because he did not want to give them a chance to change. Bill almost called the timeout, but saw something and stopped.

Carroll has admitted he thought Belichick was going to call a timeout. Belichick through a wrench into things by not doing it and Carroll got stuck with the wrong offense on the field.

I didn't see any comments on Belicheck talking about the play. Honestly didn't really want to read about it too much. If that's right then damn, guy is a robot. He gave the Pats the best chance to win there, which no matter what he does there the chances are really slim.

Hit the right combo of skill, preparation, and luck.

Seattle didn't execute on all levels there. Dangerous pass play, a fraction too late from Russell, having the receiver be Lockette.

I would love to know more about this. It sure makes more sense than "Belichick froze" or whatever other stories all the smart guy columnists are telling. It would be one more feather in Bill's cap if he was this far out in front.

And it does make sense. Given the matchup, the odds of Seattle getting stuffed and pushed back leaving 3rd and 4 go up -- maybe even a fair bit.

Maybe Bill saw on tape that Seattle doesn't like the boot action runs in short yardage. Plus a poor result on a play like that where so much happens so far behind scrimmage and maybe you lose six yards and then all of a sudden it's 3rd and 7.

And that takes me right back to my original impression: Wilson was to make one read and then throw the ball away. Then sub in the bigs and run twice. But the young QB forced it. I was waiting for Belichick to confuse that kid all day.

I love it.

 

[pizzatyme]

There appears to only be 1 "salty hater" in this thread. Maybe he consumed what was deflated from the Patriots balls??

 

[Anarchy99]

Talk about some swings in momentum and win probability at the end of the game.

Here were the probability of the Seahawks winning at various points in the second half . . .

Halftime - 50%

First lead at 17-14 - 63%

Scoring to take 24-14 lead with 5:00 left in Q3 - 90%

Start of Q4 - 96%

8 minutes left up 24-21 - 75%

2 minutes left after NE took 28-24 lead - 6%

After 31 yard pass play to Lynch - 25%

After back to back incompletions and 1:50 to go - 11%

After 11 yard pass to Lockette - 34%

After Kearse miracle catch - 85%

After Butler INT - 0.2%

 

[fred_1_15301]

Talk about some swings in momentum and win probability at the end of the game.

Here were the probability of the Seahawks winning at various points in the second half . . .

Halftime - 50%

First lead at 17-14 - 63%

Scoring to take 24-14 lead with 5:00 left in Q3 - 90%

Start of Q4 - 96%

8 minutes left up 24-21 - 75%

2 minutes left after NE took 28-24 lead - 6%

After 31 yard pass play to Lynch - 25%

After back to back incompletions and 1:50 to go - 11%

After 11 pass to Lockette - 34%

After Kearse miracle catch - 85%

After Butler INT - 0.2%

What about the probability after Lynch took it to the one? Can that not be calculated because the clock was running?

 

[Old Smiley]

Talk about some swings in momentum and win probability at the end of the game.

Here were the probability of the Seahawks winning at various points in the second half . . .

Halftime - 50%

First lead at 17-14 - 63%

Scoring to take 24-14 lead with 5:00 left in Q3 - 90%

Start of Q4 - 96%

8 minutes left up 24-21 - 75%

2 minutes left after NE took 28-24 lead - 6%

After 31 yard pass play to Lynch - 25%

After back to back incompletions and 1:50 to go - 11%

After 11 pass to Lockette - 34%

After Kearse miracle catch - 85%

After Butler INT - 0.2%

That's totally about how it felt...

 

[GoFishTN]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability.

He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

In the Super Bowl he's 0-0 from the 1 yard line.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

I think Belichick saw Seattle did not have the goal line offense in the game and did not call the TO because he did not want to give them a chance to change. Bill almost called the timeout, but saw something and stopped.

Carroll has admitted he thought Belichick was going to call a timeout. Belichick through a wrench into things by not doing it and Carroll got stuck with the wrong offense on the field.

I didn't see any comments on Belicheck talking about the play. Honestly didn't really want to read about it too much. If that's right then damn, guy is a robot. He gave the Pats the best chance to win there, which no matter what he does there the chances are really slim.

Hit the right combo of skill, preparation, and luck.

Seattle didn't execute on all levels there. Dangerous pass play, a fraction too late from Russell, having the receiver be Lockette.

I would love to know more about this. It sure makes more sense than "Belichick froze" or whatever other stories all the smart guy columnists are telling. It would be one more feather in Bill's cap if he was this far out in front.

And it does make sense. Given the matchup, the odds of Seattle getting stuffed and pushed back leaving 3rd and 4 go up -- maybe even a fair bit.

Maybe Bill saw on tape that Seattle doesn't like the boot action runs in short yardage. Plus a poor result on a play like that where so much happens so far behind scrimmage and maybe you lose six yards and then all of a sudden it's 3rd and 7.

And that takes me right back to my original impression: Wilson was to make one read and then throw the ball away. Then sub in the bigs and run twice. But the young QB forced it. I was waiting for Belichick to confuse that kid all day.

I love it.

You could see the uncertainty in Bellichick's face as it was all going down. He was clearly second guessing not calling the timeout but knew that it would be almost as dumb to call it then after letting a bunch of time run off, so he just stubbornly stuck with it and got lucky.

 

[humpback]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability.

He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

Common sense says he would have had more than 1 attempt (if necessary).

 

[davearm]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability.

He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

Common sense says he would have had more than 1 attempt (if necessary).

Now you're moving the goalposts.

The number Mike Francesa was looking for isn't 100%, and it isn't 90% either. It's 41.7%.

FWIW, prior to Sunday, in the same situation, Russell Wilson had converted 7 of 15 chances (4 rush TDs, 3 pass TDs) for a 46.7% success rate.

 

[cstu]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability.

He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

Common sense says he would have had more than 1 attempt (if necessary).

Now you're moving the goalposts.

The number Mike Francesa was looking for isn't 100%, and it isn't 90% either. It's 41.7%.

FWIW, prior to Sunday, in the same situation, Russell Wilson had converted 7 of 15 chances (4 rush TDs, 3 pass TDs) for a 46.7% success rate.

During his career before the SB when behind and throwing inside the 3, Wilson was 5 of 7 with 4 TD's - and one INT.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Running the ball when the whole world knows you're running the ball and imposing your will on the opponent is what football is all about. Worst play call I can remember. Pats may even have let them score once they were on the 1. Mind boggling.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

On the first one the patriots never put a safety over the top of Matthews when he out sized the corner back by a lot. The second drive was a lucky hail mary to kearse. Wilson is a more athletic Trent Dilfer.

Unpossible. Nobody is more athletic than Trent Dilfer with the possible exception of Trey Wingo or Trey's brother Quad Wingo.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability. He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

Common sense says he would have had more than 1 attempt (if necessary).

Now you're moving the goalposts.

The number Mike Francesa was looking for isn't 100%, and it isn't 90% either. It's 41.7%.

FWIW, prior to Sunday, in the same situation, Russell Wilson had converted 7 of 15 chances (4 rush TDs, 3 pass TDs) for a 46.7% success rate.

During his career before the SB when behind and throwing inside the 3, Wilson was 5 of 7 with 4 TD's - and one INT.

The INT brings light to one dynamic that seems to be getting overlooked by those of which who are defending the pass call there. Even if Wilson has a slightly better success rate at passing the ball in the end zone at goal line situations--it doesn't take high football IQ to understand that the possibility/probability of a catastrophic failure are also much higher. It is all about risk/reward here. The reward of getting the ball in the endzone whether it is by a Wilson pass or a Marshawn td are equal (a Super Bowl victory)--but the risk between those two play calls is vastly different. If Marshawn doesn't make it in--Seattle calls a timeout and still has opportunities to win the game. Wilson throwing one int in 7 goal line passing situations basically would indicate almost a 15% chance of epic failure. I don't have the numbers in front of me--but my best guess is that there is a far less than 15% probability that Marshawn fumbles in goal line situations. This play call was so horrid because it was unnecessarily high risk. This is part of the reason why I am a believer in the conspiracy theory that the Seahawks were hoping and trying to make Wilson their hero.

 

[Anarchy99]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability. He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

Common sense says he would have had more than 1 attempt (if necessary).

Now you're moving the goalposts.

The number Mike Francesa was looking for isn't 100%, and it isn't 90% either. It's 41.7%.

FWIW, prior to Sunday, in the same situation, Russell Wilson had converted 7 of 15 chances (4 rush TDs, 3 pass TDs) for a 46.7% success rate.

During his career before the SB when behind and throwing inside the 3, Wilson was 5 of 7 with 4 TD's - and one INT.

The INT brings light to one dynamic that seems to be getting overlooked by those of which who are defending the pass call there. Even if Wilson has a slightly better success rate at passing the ball in the end zone at goal line situations--it doesn't take high football IQ to understand that the possibility/probability of a catastrophic failure are also much higher. It is all about risk/reward here. The reward of getting the ball in the endzone whether it is by a Wilson pass or a Marshawn td are equal (a Super Bowl victory)--but the risk between those two play calls is vastly different. If Marshawn doesn't make it in--Seattle calls a timeout and still has opportunities to win the game. Wilson throwing one int in 7 goal line passing situations basically would indicate almost a 15% chance of epic failure. I don't have the numbers in front of me--but my best guess is that there is a far less than 15% probability that Marshawn fumbles in goal line situations. This play call was so horrid because it was unnecessarily high risk. This is part of the reason why I am a believer in the conspiracy theory that the Seahawks were hoping and trying to make Wilson their hero.

IMO, all the numbers for such a small sample size need to be tossed. For example, if Wilson only through one pass in that situation before, would that mean that he had a 0% chance this time?

 

[jvdesigns2002]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability.

He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

Common sense says he would have had more than 1 attempt (if necessary).

Now you're moving the goalposts.

The number Mike Francesa was looking for isn't 100%, and it isn't 90% either. It's 41.7%.

FWIW, prior to Sunday, in the same situation, Russell Wilson had converted 7 of 15 chances (4 rush TDs, 3 pass TDs) for a 46.7% success rate.

During his career before the SB when behind and throwing inside the 3, Wilson was 5 of 7 with 4 TD's - and one INT.

The INT brings light to one dynamic that seems to be getting overlooked by those of which who are defending the pass call there. Even if Wilson has a slightly better success rate at passing the ball in the end zone at goal line situations--it doesn't take high football IQ to understand that the possibility/probability of a catastrophic failure are also much higher. It is all about risk/reward here. The reward of getting the ball in the endzone whether it is by a Wilson pass or a Marshawn td are equal (a Super Bowl victory)--but the risk between those two play calls is vastly different. If Marshawn doesn't make it in--Seattle calls a timeout and still has opportunities to win the game. Wilson throwing one int in 7 goal line passing situations basically would indicate almost a 15% chance of epic failure. I don't have the numbers in front of me--but my best guess is that there is a far less than 15% probability that Marshawn fumbles in goal line situations. This play call was so horrid because it was unnecessarily high risk. This is part of the reason why I am a believer in the conspiracy theory that the Seahawks were hoping and trying to make Wilson their hero.

IMO, all the numbers for such a small sample size need to be tossed. For example, if Wilson only through one pass in that situation before, would that mean that he had a 0% chance this time?

okay--throw the sample size away and look at things with a blank slate. Generally speaking-- what is a higher risk play: 1) a stud power running back trying to run the ball in from the 0.5 yard line 2) throwing a pass from the shotgun formation from the 0.5 yard line where the defensive players are tightly packed in a small area? The sample size here just validates common sense--it's not a necessary metric to back this risk/reward dynamic.

 

[Old Smiley]

Belichick defends Seattle's Playcall

 

[parrot]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

And instead, he threw the entire season away by tossing the ball into the most crowded area of the field to a horrible WR. I'd say Russ got what he deserved.

That was the called play wasn't it? Like I've said before, wanna blame Russ go ahead. He should have never been asked to make that play.

If media speculation is accurate, they're about to make him the highest paid player in the league. Why is it so unthinkable they'd put the game in his hands there?

 

[Anarchy99]

okay--throw the sample size away and look at things with a blank slate. Generally speaking-- what is a higher risk play: 1) a stud power running back trying to run the ball in from the 0.5 yard line 2) throwing a pass from the shotgun formation from the 0.5 yard line where the defensive players are tightly packed in a small area? The sample size here just validates common sense--it's not a necessary metric to back this risk/reward dynamic.

I don't disagree that the play that was called was dumb (and have posted that opinion like a half dozen times in this and other threads). Why risk throwing the ball into traffic and risk the interception? But there are other passing plays or run/option plays where the risk of a turnover is very minimal.

 

[TobiasFunke]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

And instead, he threw the entire season away by tossing the ball into the most crowded area of the field to a horrible WR. I'd say Russ got what he deserved.

That was the called play wasn't it? Like I've said before, wanna blame Russ go ahead. He should have never been asked to make that play.

If media speculation is accurate, they're about to make him the highest paid player in the league. Why is it so unthinkable they'd put the game in his hands there?

That's kind of a weird argument, no? Context is kind of important. I mean Adrian Peterson more money than Teddy Bridgewater and the Vikings WR corps combined but it would still be pretty stupid if they called a running play on 4th and 15.

 

[Old Smiley]

More from Belichick

"We put our goal-line defense in probably around the same time they were sending in their multiple receiver group, and that's kind of what we wanted to be in there, to make sure they didn't run the ball in," Belichick said, per ESPN.com's Mike Reiss.

"I'd like to think had they tried to run the ball against our goal-line defense, with three receivers on the field -- we couldn't ask for any more than that in terms of trying to stop the running game," Belichick said. "We saw that matchup and we certainly gave some consideration to taking a timeout there and leaving some time on the clock. I don't know if that would have been a bad thing to do. It might have been a good thing to do. But it just seemed like -- in the flow of the game -- that we were OK with where we were."

 

[parrot]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

And instead, he threw the entire season away by tossing the ball into the most crowded area of the field to a horrible WR. I'd say Russ got what he deserved.

That was the called play wasn't it? Like I've said before, wanna blame Russ go ahead. He should have never been asked to make that play.

If media speculation is accurate, they're about to make him the highest paid player in the league. Why is it so unthinkable they'd put the game in his hands there?

That's kind of a weird argument, no? Context is kind of important. I mean Adrian Peterson more money than Teddy Bridgewater and the Vikings WR corps combined but it would still be pretty stupid if they called a running play on 4th and 15.

Yeah, that's a pretty similar scenario.

The Patriots have a pretty good power back in Blount, but when they needed a TD on 2nd and goal from the 2, they had Brady throw it. Manning throws from the 1 a lot. The Pack would throw it there, the Colts would throw it there... If this guy is really an "elite" QB, why not let him throw it there, like other elite QBs do all the time?

 

[Old Smiley]

A lot of these numbers guys and professional analysts just revert to "drunk sports fan in a bar" mode.

Hindsight -- helluva drug.

 

[dhockster]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

And instead, he threw the entire season away by tossing the ball into the most crowded area of the field to a horrible WR. I'd say Russ got what he deserved.

That was the called play wasn't it? Like I've said before, wanna blame Russ go ahead. He should have never been asked to make that play.

If media speculation is accurate, they're about to make him the highest paid player in the league. Why is it so unthinkable they'd put the game in his hands there?

That's kind of a weird argument, no? Context is kind of important. I mean Adrian Peterson more money than Teddy Bridgewater and the Vikings WR corps combined but it would still be pretty stupid if they called a running play on 4th and 15.

Yeah, that's a pretty similar scenario.

The Patriots have a pretty good power back in Blount, but when they needed a TD on 2nd and goal from the 2, they had Brady throw it. Manning throws from the 1 a lot. The Pack would throw it there, the Colts would throw it there... If this guy is really an "elite" QB, why not let him throw it there, like other elite QBs do all the time?

Wasn't Brady's throw a back shoulder throw on the outside to Edelman? Very hard pass to intercept. The mistake wasn't letting him throw, it was the pass play they called.

 

[parrot]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

And instead, he threw the entire season away by tossing the ball into the most crowded area of the field to a horrible WR. I'd say Russ got what he deserved.

That was the called play wasn't it? Like I've said before, wanna blame Russ go ahead. He should have never been asked to make that play.

If media speculation is accurate, they're about to make him the highest paid player in the league. Why is it so unthinkable they'd put the game in his hands there?

That's kind of a weird argument, no? Context is kind of important. I mean Adrian Peterson more money than Teddy Bridgewater and the Vikings WR corps combined but it would still be pretty stupid if they called a running play on 4th and 15.

Yeah, that's a pretty similar scenario.

The Patriots have a pretty good power back in Blount, but when they needed a TD on 2nd and goal from the 2, they had Brady throw it. Manning throws from the 1 a lot. The Pack would throw it there, the Colts would throw it there... If this guy is really an "elite" QB, why not let him throw it there, like other elite QBs do all the time?

Wasn't Brady's throw a back shoulder throw on the outside to Edelman? Very hard pass to intercept. The mistake wasn't letting him throw, it was the pass play they called.

That I can agree with to a point, but a lot of people are incredulous that they would pass at all there. It's like they haven't been watching football for the last 10 years. And one retort I would give is that the pass that was intercepted was a very hard pass to intercept as well. How often do you see a 1 yard slant with a pick intercepted? I would say almost never. It was a GREAT play by Butler, partly due to having been coached up on that play.

 

[Yenrub]

A lot of these numbers guys and professional analysts just revert to "drunk sports fan in a bar" mode.

Hindsight -- helluva drug.

I disagree with calling it hindsight

I know that everyone at the Super Bowl party I was watching the game were questioning the play call the moment they didn’t fake or give the ball to Lynch.

If you are going to go with a pass play there why not the play action fake to Lynch with the TE Willson sneaking out. I would imagine that every Patriot LB would bite on the fake

 

[humpback]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability.

He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

Common sense says he would have had more than 1 attempt (if necessary).

Now you're moving the goalposts.

The number Mike Francesa was looking for isn't 100%, and it isn't 90% either. It's 41.7%.

FWIW, prior to Sunday, in the same situation, Russell Wilson had converted 7 of 15 chances (4 rush TDs, 3 pass TDs) for a 46.7% success rate.

I'm not moving anything. I didn't hear Francesa so I don't know what he was talking about specifically, but it's moot to talk about the odds of converting on only one chance when they would have had more.

 

[Old Smiley]

A lot of these numbers guys and professional analysts just revert to "drunk sports fan in a bar" mode.

Hindsight -- helluva drug.

I disagree with calling it hindsight

I know that everyone at the Super Bowl party I was watching the game were questioning the play call the moment they didn’t fake or give the ball to Lynch.

If you are going to go with a pass play there why not the play action fake to Lynch with the TE Willson sneaking out. I would imagine that every Patriot LB would bite on the fake

That was a pretty quick hitting play. Your friends are fast reactors.

 

[Yenrub]

A lot of these numbers guys and professional analysts just revert to "drunk sports fan in a bar" mode.

Hindsight -- helluva drug.

I disagree with calling it hindsight

I know that everyone at the Super Bowl party I was watching the game were questioning the play call the moment they didn’t fake or give the ball to Lynch.

If you are going to go with a pass play there why not the play action fake to Lynch with the TE Willson sneaking out. I would imagine that every Patriot LB would bite on the fake

That was a pretty quick hitting play. Your friends are fast reactors.

It doesn’t take a whole day to recognize sunshine

Almost all played at least on the high school level (2 in college) and at least 2 in the room are HS coaches plus a couple of pop warner coaches

They snapped the ball

Lynch wasn’t involved

"WTF are they doing"

Interception

 

[Road Warriors]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

And instead, he threw the entire season away by tossing the ball into the most crowded area of the field to a horrible WR. I'd say Russ got what he deserved.

That was the called play wasn't it? Like I've said before, wanna blame Russ go ahead. He should have never been asked to make that play.

If media speculation is accurate, they're about to make him the highest paid player in the league. Why is it so unthinkable they'd put the game in his hands there?

That's kind of a weird argument, no? Context is kind of important. I mean Adrian Peterson more money than Teddy Bridgewater and the Vikings WR corps combined but it would still be pretty stupid if they called a running play on 4th and 15.

Yeah, that's a pretty similar scenario.

The Patriots have a pretty good power back in Blount, but when they needed a TD on 2nd and goal from the 2, they had Brady throw it. Manning throws from the 1 a lot. The Pack would throw it there, the Colts would throw it there... If this guy is really an "elite" QB, why not let him throw it there, like other elite QBs do all the time?

Wasn't Brady's throw a back shoulder throw on the outside to Edelman? Very hard pass to intercept. The mistake wasn't letting him throw, it was the pass play they called.

but his first was a slant to Lafell, and not out of a stacked / rub formation. Ball was delivered right at the bottom of the 19. No chance for a pick where the ball was delivered.

The throw was too high and too far in front, Browner did a fantastic job of jamming Kearse to keep the rub off Butler, and Butler read the play and broke with abandon to beat Lockette to the spot. Any one of those 3 things don't happen perfectly, and the pick doesn't happen.

 

[jon_mx]

I think Carroll is one of the better NFL coaches. But Belichick is head and shoulders above all others. It is not even close. Belichick won that game. He knew Seattle was backed into a corner with their effort to run out the clock and needed to do a pass play. He saw what Seattle players they had out there, put in the right personnel to counter (a player who worked against that exact same play during the week of preparations), and everything worked out. Great coaching, great preparations, great understanding of the situation. Belichick can think on the fly and has thought about numerous scenarios ahead of time. It is second nature to him, while other coaches need time to process and make mistakes under the pressure.

 

[RUSF18]

I think Carroll is one of the better NFL coaches. But Belichick is head and shoulders above all others. It is not even close. Belichick won that game. He knew Seattle was backed into a corner with their effort to run out the clock and needed to do a pass play. He saw what Seattle players they had out there, put in the right personnel to counter (a player who worked against that exact same play during the week of preparations), and everything worked out. Great coaching, great preparations, great understanding of the situation. Belichick can think on the fly and has thought about numerous scenarios ahead of time. It is second nature to him, while other coaches need time to process and make mistakes under the pressure.

2nd and goal from inside the 1 with over a minute left and a timeout, and a chance to take the lead in the Super Bowl.

You have an odd definition of "backed into a corner".

 

[General Tso]

You are at the one. The ONE.

You run a really risk/high reward type of play on 2nd down. Run, rollout, fade.............if the roll out isn't there right away or the fade doesnt look great, throw it away.

This isn't hindsight, this is common sense at the time, and the same for ANY game with 30 seconds left with 2nd and goal at the 1.

High risk? Teams threw from the 1 119 times this season with zero turnovers. Statistically speaking it's less risky than a run there.#### happens.

 

[jon_mx]

I think Carroll is one of the better NFL coaches. But Belichick is head and shoulders above all others. It is not even close. Belichick won that game. He knew Seattle was backed into a corner with their effort to run out the clock and needed to do a pass play. He saw what Seattle players they had out there, put in the right personnel to counter (a player who worked against that exact same play during the week of preparations), and everything worked out. Great coaching, great preparations, great understanding of the situation. Belichick can think on the fly and has thought about numerous scenarios ahead of time. It is second nature to him, while other coaches need time to process and make mistakes under the pressure.

2nd and goal from inside the 1 with over a minute left and a timeout, and a chance to take the lead in the Super Bowl.

You have an odd definition of "backed into a corner".

He was backed into a corner when he let the clock run down below 30 seconds. He limited his options to where he had to throw to stop the clock and he did not have his goal line offense on the field to pound it in. It wasn't that calling a timeout did not cross Belichick's mind, because it did, he almost signaled for a timeout. But then realized the clock was on his side and decided against it.

 

[davearm]

Mike Francesa is absolutely crucifying Carroll for that call. Says it's the "worst play all in the history of sports". At one point Mike asked, "What are the odds of Lynch running it in there from 1 yard out? 100%? 90%?"

No Mike, we actually have those odds based on facts. It was 20% this year. Lazy reporting yet again.

Lazy would be taking a sample size of five and using that as a probability.

He had just taken the ball from the 5 to inside the 1. Give me a break.

So you are advocating a sample size of 1, from a less analogous scenario, as your proof?

Common sense says it's closer to 90% than 20%. That's all I need.

Your common sense is wrong.

Over his career, Lynch has had 36 carries from the opponent’s 1-yard line. More often than not, he didn’t reach the end zone. He scored on 15 of those carries, or 41.7 percent of the time. On 12 of those carries, he did not gain a yard. On nine of them, he lost yardage.

How do Lynch’s numbers from the 1 stack up against other running backs in the league? Not all that great. “Among 39 running backs with at least 10 carries from the 1-yard line in the past 5 seasons (incl. playoffs), Lynch’s touchdown percentage (45 percent) ranks 30th,” reports ESPN Stats and Info.

Common sense says he would have had more than 1 attempt (if necessary).

Now you're moving the goalposts.

The number Mike Francesa was looking for isn't 100%, and it isn't 90% either. It's 41.7%.

FWIW, prior to Sunday, in the same situation, Russell Wilson had converted 7 of 15 chances (4 rush TDs, 3 pass TDs) for a 46.7% success rate.

I'm not moving anything. I didn't hear Francesa so I don't know what he was talking about specifically, but it's moot to talk about the odds of converting on only one chance when they would have had more.

LOL

"I don't know what you're talking about but I'm sure I'm not talking about something different."

Alrighty then.

 

[lod01]

I think Carroll is one of the better NFL coaches. But Belichick is head and shoulders above all others. It is not even close. Belichick won that game. He knew Seattle was backed into a corner with their effort to run out the clock and needed to do a pass play. He saw what Seattle players they had out there, put in the right personnel to counter (a player who worked against that exact same play during the week of preparations), and everything worked out. Great coaching, great preparations, great understanding of the situation. Belichick can think on the fly and has thought about numerous scenarios ahead of time. It is second nature to him, while other coaches need time to process and make mistakes under the pressure.

Belicheck was the winning coach but he had it gift wrapped to him. I actually liked the end result. The Seahawks blew it and the Patriots didn't deserve it. Seattle didn't win and New England knows they didn't deserve to win.

 

[TobiasFunke]

After Lynch gets down to the one Seahawks win that game probably 90% of the time.

Bill not calling a time out probably raised it maybe 5% in my mind. All this stuff about making Carroll do this or that is moot if they just ran the ball. Bill would be taking all kinds of heat if not for the Hawks crapping the bed with that call. Sucks to say as a Seattle fan but that's what they did.

Boiling game down to the last few seconds Bill deserves all the credit in the world for having coached Butler up to know what to do and that kid made a truly amazing play. Not calling the TO though was a mistake. My 2 cents.

Still can't believe Seattle lost that game.

Not only this, everyone would be calling Russ an elite quarterback instead of being again somehow reduced to just a game manager. Think about it. Minus the worst call in NFL history, he conducted not one, but two perfect 80 yard two minute drills against Bill Belichicks defense.

And instead, he threw the entire season away by tossing the ball into the most crowded area of the field to a horrible WR. I'd say Russ got what he deserved.

That was the called play wasn't it? Like I've said before, wanna blame Russ go ahead. He should have never been asked to make that play.

If media speculation is accurate, they're about to make him the highest paid player in the league. Why is it so unthinkable they'd put the game in his hands there?

That's kind of a weird argument, no? Context is kind of important. I mean Adrian Peterson more money than Teddy Bridgewater and the Vikings WR corps combined but it would still be pretty stupid if they called a running play on 4th and 15.

Yeah, that's a pretty similar scenario.

The Patriots have a pretty good power back in Blount, but when they needed a TD on 2nd and goal from the 2, they had Brady throw it. Manning throws from the 1 a lot. The Pack would throw it there, the Colts would throw it there... If this guy is really an "elite" QB, why not let him throw it there, like other elite QBs do all the time?

Because the 2 is not the same as the 1. Because 2nd down when a FG is an option for you isn't the same as 2nd down when you know you'll be using all three downs to try to score a TD and you get a benefit from progressing towards the goal line via a run play even if you don't cross the line Because the middle of a quarter where the defense knows they need to avoid a PI/holding call in the end zone giving you a new set of downs isn't the same as an end of game scenario where the defense knows that PI/holding doesn't really hurt them too badly b./c the clock won't allow more than 3 plays anyway. Because throwing in goal line situations can be helpful if you want to keep defenses on their toes in the future but that's a non-factor when there's 26 seconds left in the season. Because Blount and Lacy, are not Lynch. And yes, because Wilson is not Brady (or Rodgers or Luck), at least when it comes to pocket passing. There are lots and lots of reasons that this was a terrible call.

I didn't mean to suggest that this situation was similar to 4th and 15, only that it's silly to suggest that salaries should guide play calls.