Are you ready for some NFL Football? 2014 Edition.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

If it is Belichek, who's been in these situations more than most current coaches in the NFL, I wouldn't put it past him.

Would I trust Brady with less than one minute left. Yea I would.  That isn't to say he didn't trust Brady. Maybe Belichek went all Jedi Master on Pete Carroll there. Like watching some old time con artist just play the other guy like a fiddle. I wouldn't put it past Belichek to put it on the line like that.

In the end do you let them score to get the ball back with about 1 minute left. They would have to let them score on that 1st down play to give them the best shot. If you do then you live with that call if Brady fails to do a game winning drive against a defense that has forced the Patriots to average 9 plays, 3 minutes a 45 seconds per TD drive. Patriots did go 80 yards in 8 plays in a 1 min 45 seconds.

THOUGH, New England would only need to get a field goal to tie and go into over time. So there is that option as well. Do you trust Tom Brady to at least go 55 yards when you have one of the best place kickers in the NFL (95% this year with a long of 53 yards in a warm non-windy day)

The other option is, god forbid we think that Belichek happen to forget about the clock in that situation.

I don't know, it is tough to sit there and let a TD happen.

And this point was raised in the context of Belicheck explaining why he didn't call a time out, right?  He had one time out, right?  So he could have used it after first down, and there would have been 66 seconds left, but a run or two would have gotten the clock down anyway.  Maybe I'm missing the point but I'm not sure why his call was questioned at all.  I don't think you can let walk into the endzone since they needed 5 points.  Maybe if the game was tied and a FG would have gone ahead anyway.  I don't know.

I was thinking of it more from Pete Carroll's perspective, having run all that time off the clock.  I wouldn't want to give Brady the ball because he's so good in those situations, but I wouldn't let it affect which plays I call.  If I wanted to run the ball 3 times I would just do it, I wouldn't let the clock run down and put myself in a position where getting 3 plays off meant I had to pass on one of them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Seattle won the coin flip, went down and scored, game over.  Green Bay (save for their kicker) never touched the ball in the OT, and thus never had an opportunity to score.

Between two evenly matched teams, counting on OT is always going to be a figurative coin flip, but in that case, it was also a literal coin flip.

Oh, I see.  I guess its better than the old way but still not perfect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Ya know Dan, I'm trying to figure out what team you actually cheer for.  You seem more like the "anti-fan" and only talk about teams and players you don't like.  That cannot be fun.

Scott, I enjoy critical thinking and discussing topics that interest me with intelligent people who have different opinions.  If you want to pop in every now and then and call me a hater out of the blue that's fine, but I'm not going to waste my time correcting your confusion or defending myself against your strange and illogical comments.

So then what team do you cheer for?  My comments are not illogical.  They are an observation.  Most of your comments are negative toward a particular team or play in the last several posts.

[Golfingdad]

What would have been hilarious would be if they actually did run it and Lynch fumbled the ball. Then everyone would be blasting that play call as well.

And on the flip side, how many people would be praising Carroll and calling him a genius or other hyperbolic superlatives if the play worked.  It's just amazing to me that people can't step back and realize just how much they are letting their opinions of the decisions be clouded by the actual outcome.  Human nature though ... just like how players who hurt other players (all sports - Todd Bertuzzi comes to mind first) are punished more based on the severity of the injury than they are on the severity of the crime.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saevel25

What would have been hilarious would be if they actually did run it and Lynch fumbled the ball. Then everyone would be blasting that play call as well.

And on the flip side, how many people would be praising Carroll and calling him a genius or other hyperbolic superlatives if the play worked.  It's just amazing to me that people can't step back and realize just how much they are letting their opinions of the decisions be clouded by the actual outcome.  Human nature though ... just like how players who hurt other players (all sports - Todd Bertuzzi comes to mind first) are punished more based on the severity of the injury than they are on the severity of the crime.

There were so many great plays in the game and frankly in the playoffs.  I'd rather discuss them then go on endlessly about whether the pass was the right call.  No matter what we think, Pete Carroll is by far a better coach than we are in our minds .

[turtleback]

What would have been hilarious would be if they actually did run it and Lynch fumbled the ball. Then everyone would be blasting that play call as well.

It did happen, once before.  "The Fumble"  Cleveland Browns vs, Denver Broncos, 1987 AFC Championship play.  Ernest Byner fumbled at the 2 trying to score the game tying TD.  Denver goes on to lose the second of its three consecutive SBs.

There wasn't any big outcry about the play call.

[saevel25]

Different times. No social media. ESPN want nearly as big as it is now. Best news outlets where in big cities and local papers. Not many people can start the train that is the over exaggerated opinions of boisterous people In the modern world of social media and sports news back then.

[dsc123]

And on the flip side, how many people would be praising Carroll and calling him a genius or other hyperbolic superlatives if the play worked.  It's just amazing to me that people can't step back and realize just how much they are letting their opinions of the decisions be clouded by the actual outcome.  Human nature though ... just like how players who hurt other players (all sports - Todd Bertuzzi comes to mind first) are punished more based on the severity of the injury than they are on the severity of the crime.

I don't think you guys give the detractors enough credit when you assume their opinions are influenced by the result. I jumped out of my chair and yelled "why would you throw the ball?!" as soon as Wilson dropped back. Sure, if it worked I probably would have said something like, wow that was a ballsy call and that would be the end of it. Wed be talking about Kearse's catch and other things. But that doesn't mean I'd agree with the call. The fact that it was intercepted makes its the center of the story. That's the game.

[Slice of Life]

It did happen, once before.  "The Fumble"  Cleveland Browns vs, Denver Broncos, 1987 AFC Championship play.  Ernest Byner fumbled at the 2 trying to score the game tying TD.  Denver goes on to lose the second of its three consecutive SBs.

There wasn't any big outcry about the play call.

You shut your ***** mouth. The drive or the fumble are not to be mentioned ever.

[Golfingdad]

I don't think you guys give the detractors enough credit when you assume their opinions are influenced by the result. I jumped out of my chair and yelled "why would you throw the ball?!" as soon as Wilson dropped back.

Sure, if it worked I probably would have said something like, wow that was a ballsy call and that would be the end of it. Wed be talking about Kearse's catch and other things. But that doesn't mean I'd agree with the call. The fact that it was intercepted makes its the center of the story. That's the game.

Fair enough, I definitely believe you. However I disagree that that "was the game." If anything "was the game" it was the play butler made.

[dsc123]

Fair enough, I definitely believe you. However I disagree that that "was the game." If anything "was the game" it was the play butler made.

Dan

 R11s 10.5*, Adila RIP Phenom 60g Stiff
G20 3W
Diablo 3H
i20 4-U, KBS Tour Stiff
Vokey SM4 54.14 
Vokey :) 58.11
 Newport 2
Four 5

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsc123

I don't think you guys give the detractors enough credit when you assume their opinions are influenced by the result. I jumped out of my chair and yelled "why would you throw the ball?!" as soon as Wilson dropped back.

Sure, if it worked I probably would have said something like, wow that was a ballsy call and that would be the end of it. Wed be talking about Kearse's catch and other things. But that doesn't mean I'd agree with the call. The fact that it was intercepted makes its the center of the story. That's the game.

Fair enough, I definitely believe you. However I disagree that that "was the game." If anything "was the game" it was the play butler made.

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

[Gunther]

What would have been hilarious would be if they actually did run it and Lynch fumbled the ball. Then everyone would be blasting that play call as well.

They would not have been ripped for the play call in that situation because it was the right call. You think people would actually say, "he shoulda passed there!"? No way. Now, if they had run Lynch a couple times unsuccessfully and the clock ran out on them, that would have been rip-worthy. Not trying to punch it in with Beastmode.

[saevel25]

They would not have been ripped for the play call in that situation because it was the right call. You think people would actually say, "he shoulda passed there!"? No way.

Now, if they had run Lynch a couple times unsuccessfully and the clock ran out on them, that would have been rip-worthy. Not trying to punch it in with Beastmode.

Still if people are saying that Lynch was the best option, then he would be the best option on all three attempts right? If gets stuffed, lets say the ball stays inside the 3 yard line each time. Then Lynch's run is the best option on all three times.

Just saying no matter what the call, if Seattle failed to score a TD then there would be backlash for the play calling. Just how people see the media outlet. There is no "Right" call if the end result is a failure because people see results. If they ran Lynch 3 times in a row people would say, "Why were you so stubborn to run Lynch three times. You knew NEP was going to focus on Lynch. why not try a pass?"

In the end Lynch might have been the best call all three times. Yet, the result would have people asking why not a pass.

[Slice of Life]

Still if people are saying that Lynch was the best option, then he would be the best option on all three attempts right? If gets stuffed, lets say the ball stays inside the 3 yard line each time. Then Lynch's run is the best option on all three times.

Just saying no matter what the call, if Seattle failed to score a TD then there would be backlash for the play calling. Just how people see the media outlet. There is no "Right" call if the end result is a failure because people see results. If they ran Lynch 3 times in a row people would say, "Why were you so stubborn to run Lynch three times. You knew NEP was going to focus on Lynch. why not try a pass?"

In the end Lynch might have been the best call all three times. Yet, the result would have people asking why not a pass.

Wrong. You're over-simplifying.

They still had a timeout left, correct? The normal, knowledgeable football fan would say...ok, run it with Beast mode and if he doesn't get it in...call your timeout. Then look at the clock...how much time is left? Can you run again and still get another play off if you don't get it in? Yes? Run again. No? Start passing.

It's situational, and it's about timing. Throwing a quick slant with the formation the defense was in was ridiculous. I was dumbfounded as it was happening. If they'd have had Wilson roll out, and try to throw it to the outside...I would have understood the call. I wouldn't have agreed with it, but I would have understood. If it's incomplete, you can then run it and burn your TO if you don't get it in.

A quick slant into a ton of traffic from the 1 yard line? Ludicrous. Stupid.

[Gunther]

Wrong. You're over-simplifying. They still had a timeout left, correct? The normal, knowledgeable football fan would say...ok, run it with Beast mode and if he doesn't get it in...call your timeout. Then look at the clock...how much time is left? Can you run again and still get another play off if you don't get it in? Yes? Run again. No? Start passing. It's situational, and it's about timing. Throwing a quick slant with the formation the defense was in was ridiculous. I was dumbfounded as it was happening. If they'd have had Wilson roll out, and try to throw it to the outside...I would have understood the call. I wouldn't have agreed with it, but I would have understood. If it's incomplete, you can then run it and burn your TO if you don't get it in.  A quick slant into a ton of traffic from the 1 yard line? Ludicrous. Stupid.

You nailed it, on all fronts.

[saevel25]

Wrong. You're over-simplifying.

They still had a timeout left, correct? The normal, knowledgeable football fan would say...ok, run it with Beast mode and if he doesn't get it in...call your timeout. Then look at the clock...how much time is left? Can you run again and still get another play off if you don't get it in? Yes? Run again. No? Start passing.

It's situational, and it's about timing. Throwing a quick slant with the formation the defense was in was ridiculous. I was dumbfounded as it was happening. If they'd have had Wilson roll out, and try to throw it to the outside...I would have understood the call. I wouldn't have agreed with it, but I would have understood. If it's incomplete, you can then run it and burn your TO if you don't get it in.

A quick slant into a ton of traffic from the 1 yard line? Ludicrous. Stupid.

I am just saying that if they ran it three times in a row and got stuffed. I am sure there would be outcry by the media about why didn't they at least try to throw it once. The whole discussion was why not run Lynch because he is the best option.

Yea I get ya. I think Carroll got confused by NEP not calling a time out. I think they got confused in what they wanted to do. They didn't want to leave time on the clock for Brady. They also wasted too much time on 2nd down. It seems like Seattle forced their own hand into throwing the ball by thinking they had to stop the clock if they didn't score with out using a Time Out.

Again there was not a ton of traffic. The video shows there wasn't a lot of traffic. There was a clear throwing lane, and at the time of the release there was no one guarding the WR. The DB made a big time play. If they had to throw the ball I would have liked to see some sort of play action pass, either with a roll out or from the pocket. Though with that defense I am not sure the roll out would have worked because the Seattle O-line lost the edge with the outside linebackers.

I am not willing to say that Seattle HAD to run Lynch on that down. I am also not saying the slant is a terrible route to throw to on that down. I will say it wasn't the best call for that situation. For me the result is making the call worse than it seems.

[phan52]

Fair enough, I definitely believe you. However I disagree that that "was the game." If anything "was the game" it was the play butler made.

Bill M

[Golfingdad]

Wrong. You're over-simplifying.

They still had a timeout left, correct? The normal, knowledgeable football fan would say...ok, run it with Beast mode and if he doesn't get it in...call your timeout. Then look at the clock...how much time is left? Can you run again and still get another play off if you don't get it in? Yes? Run again. No? Start passing.

It's situational, and it's about timing. Throwing a quick slant with the formation the defense was in was ridiculous. I was dumbfounded as it was happening. If they'd have had Wilson roll out, and try to throw it to the outside...I would have understood the call. I wouldn't have agreed with it, but I would have understood. If it's incomplete, you can then run it and burn your TO if you don't get it in.

A quick slant into a ton of traffic from the 1 yard line? Ludicrous. Stupid.

See, and I think you're oversimplifying.  You're not saying a pass is a bad idea at the end there, just that you'd only do it a play or two later.  You're not giving him credit for thinking a play ahead and guaranteeing (barring catastrophe ;)) 3 chances to punch it in, rather than risking only getting two.

Besides, is it fair to criticize the play call BASED ON THE DEFENSIVE FORMATION when the play call comes in BEFORE the defense is in formation?  Also besides, it was actually a good call based on the formation - just not based on the fact that Butler was ready for it.  (Something the Seahawks couldn't have known)

Maybe not you, but if he had run there and managed only one more play afterwards and still not scored, many MANY people would be critisizing him ... "WHy didn't he pass on SECOND down and assure himself of all 3 chances??"

[phan52]

See, and I think you're oversimplifying.  You're not saying a pass is a bad idea at the end there, just that you'd only do it a play or two later.  You're not giving him credit for thinking a play ahead and guaranteeing (barring catastrophe ;)) 3 chances to punch it in, rather than risking only getting two.

Besides, is it fair to criticize the play call BASED ON THE DEFENSIVE FORMATION when the play call comes in BEFORE the defense is in formation?  Also besides, it was actually a good call based on the formation - just not based on the fact that Butler was ready for it.  (Something the Seahawks couldn't have known)

Maybe not you, but if he had run there and managed only one more play afterwards and still not scored, many MANY people would be critisizing him ... "WHy didn't he pass on SECOND down and assure himself of all 3 chances??"

The mistake was worrying about running the clock. If the Seahawks had just gone to the line of scrimmage to run the second down play, NE could not have got their goal line defense into the game and all of their options would have had a better chance of success. They could have run it three times without a problem if they wanted, or they still could have thrown the ball on any down. They limited their options by dawdling. Hell, Butler wasn't even in the game until they ran in the goal line defense.