If the Steelers lost a SB like that.....

[deljzc]

I'm not trying to justify the play call, but I'm not burying the guy like many here are either. First, there's a lot of information on the sequence of plays leading up to this whole thing:

1. The clock did stop on Ricardo Lockett's incredible catch to the 5 yard line (out of bounds), but Seattle wanted to set up their plays so I guess that's the reason they used their 2nd timeout with 1:06 left. You think this is a lot of time left (plenty for 4 plays) but it gets interesting:

2. Seattle decided on 1st and goal from the 5 to use 11 personnel with Lynch, a TE and 3 WR's. New England counters with a HEAVY package with only 3 DB's on the field (I think they had 4 DL and 4 LB). I think Seattle was hoping to catch NE's defensive setup trying to match their 11 personnel and give Marshawn more room to run. The Patriot's didn't fall for it and stopped the run.

3. Lynch ran for about 3 1/2 yards. It was a definite "long one" yard left to the endzone.

4. After the run, Seattle was very slow setting up the next play, taking 40 seconds from the Lynch run to the interception play (that's a lot and means after the 5 second run, it's using up the entire 35 second play clock). There might also have been some thought not to let Brady have any time left (in fact, when I was watching it live, I thought New England maybe should have let Lynch score on this play and give Brady a minute left and 2 TO's to get a tying field goal). When NE stopped Lynch short, Seattle was in no rush to get off another play (possibly thinking this exact thing).

5. The logic now is that in order to have enough time to run ALL THREE remaining plays (2nd, 3rd and 4th down), either 2nd down or 3rd down HAD to be a pass. They only had one time out left to stop the clock.

6. There was also a LOT of logic that the pass play should happen on 2nd down. First, by refusing to substitute any players, Seattle MAINTAINED the advantage of having 11 personnel on the field vs. New England's heavy defense with only 3 DB's. That's a matchup that favors the offense (normally).

7. It is not crazy to think Darryl Bevel and Pete Carroll considered all these factors. They did have a time out at 1:06 left before the Lynch run.

8. I honestly don't think Bevel or Carroll even considered a turnover was possible on that play. A correct down and outside throw makes an interception almost impossible. And even the WR should have executed and fought for the ball better. It was a GREAT play by the defender. A one-in-a-thousand play.

9. I am almost positive if the pass play didn't work, with :20 seconds on the clock and one timeout, Seattle sets themselves up to run Lynch TWICE to win the game. Remember, they can't do this on 2nd and 3rd down because if it doesn't work, you can't stop the clock for a 4th down try.

In summary, attempting a pass on 2nd or 3rd down was the only way to guarantee THREE shots at the endzone, which should increase your chances of victory. Because Seattle had a favorable matchup of 11 personnel vs. a heavy defense, they choose to pass on this down rather than make substitutions and allow the Patriots to adjust their defense.

It really wasn't as bad a call as some are saying. There was actually a lot of logic in it when you break it down. The play was not executed well and in my opinion was intercepted on a one-in-a-thousand defensive play.

 

[nitsuj1225]

I'm not trying to justify the play call, but I'm not burying the guy like many here are either. First, there's a lot of information on the sequence of plays leading up to this whole thing:

1. The clock did stop on Ricardo Lockett's incredible catch to the 5 yard line (out of bounds), but Seattle wanted to set up their plays so I guess that's the reason they used their 2nd timeout with 1:06 left. You think this is a lot of time left (plenty for 4 plays) but it gets interesting:

2. Seattle decided on 1st and goal from the 5 to use 11 personnel with Lynch, a TE and 3 WR's. New England counters with a HEAVY package with only 3 DB's on the field (I think they had 4 DL and 4 LB). I think Seattle was hoping to catch NE's defensive setup trying to match their 11 personnel and give Marshawn more room to run. The Patriot's didn't fall for it and stopped the run.

3. Lynch ran for about 3 1/2 yards. It was a definite "long one" yard left to the endzone.

4. After the run, Seattle was very slow setting up the next play, taking 40 seconds from the Lynch run to the interception play (that's a lot and means after the 5 second run, it's using up the entire 35 second play clock). There might also have been some thought not to let Brady have any time left (in fact, when I was watching it live, I thought New England maybe should have let Lynch score on this play and give Brady a minute left and 2 TO's to get a tying field goal). When NE stopped Lynch short, Seattle was in no rush to get off another play (possibly thinking this exact thing).

5. The logic now is that in order to have enough time to run ALL THREE remaining plays (2nd, 3rd and 4th down), either 2nd down or 3rd down HAD to be a pass. They only had one time out left to stop the clock.

6. There was also a LOT of logic that the pass play should happen on 2nd down. First, by refusing to substitute any players, Seattle MAINTAINED the advantage of having 11 personnel on the field vs. New England's heavy defense with only 3 DB's. That's a matchup that favors the offense (normally).

7. It is not crazy to think Darryl Bevel and Pete Carroll considered all these factors. They did have a time out at 1:06 left before the Lynch run.

8. I honestly don't think Bevel or Carroll even considered a turnover was possible on that play. A correct down and outside throw makes an interception almost impossible. And even the WR should have executed and fought for the ball better. It was a GREAT play by the defender. A one-in-a-thousand play.

9. I am almost positive if the pass play didn't work, with :20 seconds on the clock and one timeout, Seattle sets themselves up to run Lynch TWICE to win the game. Remember, they can't do this on 2nd and 3rd down because if it doesn't work, you can't stop the clock for a 4th down try.

In summary, attempting a pass on 2nd or 3rd down was the only way to guarantee THREE shots at the endzone, which should increase your chances of victory. Because Seattle had a favorable matchup of 11 personnel vs. a heavy defense, they choose to pass on this down rather than make substitutions and allow the Patriots to adjust their defense.

It really wasn't as bad a call as some are saying. There was actually a lot of logic in it when you break it down. The play was not executed well and in my opinion was intercepted on a one-in-a-thousand defensive play.

If they HAD to pass it on one down, at least throw a fade to 1 of your 2 huge WR's (Matthews or Kearse), not to Lockett over the middle where the entire defense was. Not only should they not have called a pass and just ran the ball, they chose the exact wrong pass play to run.

Also point #1, Kearse caught the long miraculous catch on his back...not Lockett.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

I don't see how the Seahawks can bring their OC back next year.

 

[SteelerSask2]

What's even worse is Caroll's explanation as a throwaway play, to run more time off the clock. That makes no damn sense. NONE! You run the ball if you are going to take time off the clock. Run Lynch to the outside or a bootleg with Wilson to the outside. You don't throw the ball at the goal line, in traffic. . . to take seconds off the clock. Terrible! Still can't believe they blew it.

You misunderstood his strategy. It wasn't a throw away play. When the Pats did not stop the clock the goal became to win the game in the remaining three plays. They had ran on first and the Pats didn't stop the clock (which was shocking). Now the goal became to make sure you get three more plays if necessary. Had they run on second down and been stopped they would have been forced to use their last time out and then the Pats would have known they were throwing on third. They felt their best chance to throw it in was on second down (which was correct because the Pats were in goal line defense). They got the look they wanted with the corner 7 yards off. Wilson should have thrown it on his body. Instead he lead him inside. The receiver not expecting the ball there didn't go up strong to shield the corners angle to the spot.
Carrol played chess when he should have played checkers and relied upon his defense.

 

[deljzc]

Sorry about the mistake.

Yes. The big critique might not be the pass (although most are just arguing they should have run Lynch), but the CHOICE of a slant.

That's a tough thing to nit-pick about really. If you've accepted a pass under the circumstances, then you can't argue the "WORST CALL EVER" mantra just because a guy who's film study probably indicates this works against NE (I'm sure they had a list of passes for this player package and this down/distance). In hindsight a fade does sound better, but NE has some tall CB's too - especially since they started using Browner in. And I don't think Matthews was part of the 11 personnel package in the game. It was Kearse, Lockett and Baldwin. So you can't make that substitution.

A fade isn't a guarantee either. Just 12 months ago, Seattle intercepted a fade pass to get into the Super Bowl vs. San Francisco.

Normally a 2 yard slant is almost impossible to intercept. A good throw is all it takes. And a WR should do a better job running through the rout.

It was just a whirlwind of the worst things possible on that play. I just think the media, fans (and many here) are just WAY over-reacting to the play call itself. What a surprise for this group though....

 

[SteelerSask2]

It was really a **** storm of circumstance. Much like the NFC when the short kick happened, I think you use time outs, talk to everyone and GET it RIGHT. When it got down to 40 seconds which would have been hard to consider the Pats getting into field goal in under 40 seconds, I'd have called time out and FULLY designed the end game. We run on second. If stopped we line up read option on third. and throw it away if we can't get the look we want. Then we go goal line with lynch again on fourth. Even Pros make mistakes in the heat of the moment.

 

[Steel G]

1. The clock did stop on Ricardo Lockett's incredible catch to the 5 yard line (out of bounds), but Seattle wanted to set up their plays so I guess that's the reason they used their 2nd timeout with 1:06 left.

They had to burn that 2nd timeout because the play clock had dropped to 1 during all the commotion of that circus catch by Kearse. They were just preventing a 5 yard penalty. At that timeout was when they came up with the strategy that failed miserably.

 

[deljzc]

It was really a **** storm of circumstance. Much like the NFC when the short kick happened, I think you use time outs, talk to everyone and GET it RIGHT. When it got down to 40 seconds which would have been hard to consider the Pats getting into field goal in under 40 seconds, I'd have called time out and FULLY designed the end game. We run on second. If stopped we line up read option on third. and throw it away if we can't get the look we want. Then we go goal line with lynch again on fourth. Even Pros make mistakes in the heat of the moment.

I think they did exactly that.

You come out of the timeout with 1:06 on the clock at the 5 yard line. It's still a little far away for "heavy" personnel grouping, so you trot out your 11 personnel with the playcall a run to Lynch to see what New England is going to do.

And wouldn't you know it, Belichick doesn't bite at all and trots out his heavy personnel knowing you guys want to run it all the way.

Now you're stuck (in a good way) on 2nd and a long 1. You have the PERFECT matchup of personnel groupings for a pass if you don't substitute, but your gut says run it. The clock says you HAVE to pass it one time on 2nd or 3rd down in order to get three shots at the endzone.

They choose to pass it, hope for the best but thinking (incorrectly) that there is extremely LITTLE risk of anything bad happening on a 2 yard slant play that should take 3-4 seconds to run.

All the while knowing after this one insignificant play (to them), they would come back at the 1 1/2 yard line with their big personnel and have TWO plays to run it with Lynch for the win.

That's why Carroll is calling it a throw-away play. It's like a free bee. You only get TWO runs, but by passing it you get TWO runs AND a pass play to try and win.

 

[deljzc]

They had to burn that 2nd timeout because the play clock had dropped to 1 during all the commotion of that circus catch by Kearse. They were just preventing a 5 yard penalty. At that timeout was when they came up with the strategy that failed miserably.

I kind of thought that's why. Any time you have a crazy catch like that where no one even knows if it's good or not or whether it's being reviewed AND have to run the whole offense up to the line 30 yards away AND make personnel changes it's hard to do that in 35 seconds.

In all honesty, had they had TWO timeouts at the 5 yard line, they likely would have just run it 4 straight times to try and win, but they didn't.

 

[Steel G]

What gets lost a little bit is that the rookie Butler made another key play. He was aware enough to realize that Kearse did make the catch and got him out of bounds before he could score. I've seen many a player over the years that probably would have slacked off on that play and just sit and watch.

 

[deljzc]

Also remember, if they run out of 11 personnel vs. New England's heavy defense you might actually LOSE yardage.

These are all split second decisions.... Clocks running after the Lynch run.... Do you change personnel? Do you run again with the bad personnel vs. New England heavy defense? Do you pass? Which pass play?

Easiest to do the day after, easier to do from our couch, very hard to do in real time when the lights are on you....

 

[deljzc]

What gets lost a little bit is that the rookie Butler made another key play. He was aware enough to realize that Kearse did make the catch and got him out of bounds before he could score. I've seen many a player over the years that probably would have slacked off on that play and just sit and watch.

Butler is now the great example of why young players have to study film and how important it is.

He said after the game when he saw the "double stack", he knew from film study what the play was (a pick and slant under) and the ONLY way to defend that is be super aggressive and go downhill as hard and fast as you can and beat the receiver to the spot. Someone coached that kid INCREDIBLE well.

 

[diver]

Also remember, if they run out of 11 personnel vs. New England's heavy defense you might actually LOSE yardage.

These are all split second decisions.... Clocks running after the Lynch run.... Do you change personnel? Do you run again with the bad personnel vs. New England heavy defense? Do you pass? Which pass play?

Easiest to do the day after, easier to do from our couch, very hard to do in real time when the lights are on you....

I understand what you are trying to say.

However, you have the best short yardage back in the league who has run against heavy personnel quite a bit while in Seattle, I am sure, as Wilson isn't exactly Brady back there yet. Lynch has probably seen that a lot, yet still goes for yards. It was just a dumb, dumb playcall.

I think coaches get all caught up in matchups and situations, which is important most of the time. But there are times when you just have to not worry about that **** and say my guy is better than yours, and slam it up in there. That was one of those times.

 

[Vader]

The matchup was always horrible for that play call. You're taking the worst personnel on the offense (Wilson throwing to a nobody) and leaving your best personnel to watch the play (Lynch and the OL). I'm not trusting Wilson and WR #2 to win a SB. I'm going to blow NE off the line and let Lynch walk into the EZ. They had plenty of time and 1 TO left. Trying to say otherwise is just trying to make excuses for something that was obviously a huge **** up.

 

[Litos]

Also remember, if they run out of 11 personnel vs. New England's heavy defense you might actually LOSE yardage.

These are all split second decisions.... Clocks running after the Lynch run.... Do you change personnel? Do you run again with the bad personnel vs. New England heavy defense? Do you pass? Which pass play?

Easiest to do the day after, easier to do from our couch, very hard to do in real time when the lights are on you....

I doubt anyone is calling for the run one day after, with total hindsight. Most of us were like WTF? when they didn't run it. You don't need to be a mastermind to go for a run or a play-action with an athletic QB like Wilson is

 

[Vader]

This isn't Monday morning QBing. EVERYBODY including the announcers were saying "WTF was that?". How many people in the game thread said it was the worst play call in NFL history. I know I said it more than once. I'm sure every Seachicken said it during the play. You could see Sherman saying WTF? Hell a high school coach knew what to do there. This isn't brain surgery.

 

[Coryea]

Mine too. We were miles the better team.

We weren't miles ahead of them, they played in a tougher division, had a tougher schedule, and beat us that year. They had the 5th ranked offense and 9th ranked defense. I don't know why everyone continues to think that team was just some crap team that we should've rolled over.

 

[Steel G]

We weren't miles ahead of them, they played in a tougher division, had a tougher schedule, and beat us that year.

You can't use that game as any barometer. Steelers playoff spot was wrapped up and they were playing backups for a lot of the game. Fred McAfee and Steve Avery were in the back field at times for crying out loud. That's why for the playoff matchup, they were a 9 or 10 point favorite. But they choked and the Chargers got *** raped by the Niners.

 

[Wingman]

Our great defenses back when we won our Super Bowls used to get dinked and dunked to death by Brady too. It's hard to defend because they are actually doing everything right: keep things in front of them, force 3rd downs, make the offense make 10 plays in a row without a penalty or mistake...

and cheating

 

[Wingman]

It doesn't matter what they'd have called. The **'s defense knew the playcall before Wilson did.

The NFL is already spinning the deflated footballs and sweeping the **'s **** under the rug. They're going to let Brady and Belichick walk without ever talking to Brady at all about it.

it's ******* sickening. It's not football anymore. It's scripted entertainment. That's all it is. It's not worth your time or money.

If I hear one more ******* guy compare Tom Brady with one of the top quarterbacks though...

sorry wig says must spread it around great post.

 

[mightyguru]

That call was soooo bad....I still can't believe they didn't run Lynch and win the game....so much for their OC getting an HC job.

 

[ExUSAF]

Well, it could have been worse. Kick the field goal and go for the onside kick to try another field goal.

 

[Hines57]

I'm not trying to justify the play call, but I'm not burying the guy like many here are either. First, there's a lot of information on the sequence of plays leading up to this whole thing:

1. The clock did stop on Ricardo Lockett's incredible catch to the 5 yard line (out of bounds), but Seattle wanted to set up their plays so I guess that's the reason they used their 2nd timeout with 1:06 left. You think this is a lot of time left (plenty for 4 plays) but it gets interesting:

2. Seattle decided on 1st and goal from the 5 to use 11 personnel with Lynch, a TE and 3 WR's. New England counters with a HEAVY package with only 3 DB's on the field (I think they had 4 DL and 4 LB). I think Seattle was hoping to catch NE's defensive setup trying to match their 11 personnel and give Marshawn more room to run. The Patriot's didn't fall for it and stopped the run.

3. Lynch ran for about 3 1/2 yards. It was a definite "long one" yard left to the endzone.

4. After the run, Seattle was very slow setting up the next play, taking 40 seconds from the Lynch run to the interception play (that's a lot and means after the 5 second run, it's using up the entire 35 second play clock). There might also have been some thought not to let Brady have any time left (in fact, when I was watching it live, I thought New England maybe should have let Lynch score on this play and give Brady a minute left and 2 TO's to get a tying field goal). When NE stopped Lynch short, Seattle was in no rush to get off another play (possibly thinking this exact thing).

5. The logic now is that in order to have enough time to run ALL THREE remaining plays (2nd, 3rd and 4th down), either 2nd down or 3rd down HAD to be a pass. They only had one time out left to stop the clock.

6. There was also a LOT of logic that the pass play should happen on 2nd down. First, by refusing to substitute any players, Seattle MAINTAINED the advantage of having 11 personnel on the field vs. New England's heavy defense with only 3 DB's. That's a matchup that favors the offense (normally).

7. It is not crazy to think Darryl Bevel and Pete Carroll considered all these factors. They did have a time out at 1:06 left before the Lynch run.

8. I honestly don't think Bevel or Carroll even considered a turnover was possible on that play. A correct down and outside throw makes an interception almost impossible. And even the WR should have executed and fought for the ball better. It was a GREAT play by the defender. A one-in-a-thousand play.

9. I am almost positive if the pass play didn't work, with :20 seconds on the clock and one timeout, Seattle sets themselves up to run Lynch TWICE to win the game. Remember, they can't do this on 2nd and 3rd down because if it doesn't work, you can't stop the clock for a 4th down try.

In summary, attempting a pass on 2nd or 3rd down was the only way to guarantee THREE shots at the endzone, which should increase your chances of victory. Because Seattle had a favorable matchup of 11 personnel vs. a heavy defense, they choose to pass on this down rather than make substitutions and allow the Patriots to adjust their defense.

It really wasn't as bad a call as some are saying. There was actually a lot of logic in it when you break it down. The play was not executed well and in my opinion was intercepted on a one-in-a-thousand defensive play.

So the pass should have been a Wilson roll-out with the option to run it in if he beats the spy/pass rush, hit the open receiver if there is one or throw the ball out of bounds to kill the clock. Then its 3rd down with two chances to run. Not throw a slant that could have been tipped up and intercepted without the play that actually happened. You have a mobile QB who is evasive and you ask him to throw a slant with lots of bodies in the box. The play they called wasn't the right play call. Even if it had worked we'd all still be wondering why they didn't just run Lynch. Its like when Arians would run a damn reverse on 1st and goal from the 8.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

That call was soooo bad....I still can't believe they didn't run Lynch and win the game....so much for their OC getting an HC job.

Would have been funny if he'd already been tabbed for one.
Based on what I read on their board, I think the Seahawks will have to fire the OC before the fans burn his house down.

 

[Steel G]

For me, if I'm passing on that down I'm faking it to Lynch and rolling Wilson out and giving him an option to pass and if ain't there, throw it in the stands. Then it's Lynch on 3rd down, if that doesn't go, timeout and then Lynch again on 4th. If your best player can't get it in from the one on multiple cracks then you don't deserve to win. But throwing a slant in the middle of the field was just dumb, dumb, dumb. It'd be different if they had a stud WR with some of the best hands in the game. But they were throwing to a guy who had a total of 11 freaking catches on the year.