EPT2015 Super Bowl - Page 35
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
ElMeanYo
United States1032 Posts
| ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
| ||
|
MstrJinbo
United States1251 Posts
On February 03 2015 05:06 ElMeanYo wrote: I'm a real football newb but I did see the end of the superbowl. From what I understand, the Seahawks were one yard from scoring and instead of pushing the ball 1 yard they threw and were intercepted. Can someone explain to me why? Throwing in that situation adds risk. Usually goal line passes are thrown to the edges of the field or back of the end zone to reduce the risk of interception. A pass in the crowded middle of the field is inexplicably risky. To put it in starcraft terms, Seattle sent in an oracle and killed a bunch of SCVs and followed it up by trying to take a hidden expo at the gold, all in the most important game all year. | ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37017 Posts
On February 03 2015 06:13 MstrJinbo wrote: Throwing in that situation adds risk. Usually goal line passes are thrown to the edges of the field or back of the end zone to reduce the risk of interception. A pass in the crowded middle of the field is inexplicably risky. To put it in starcraft terms, Seattle sent in an oracle and killed a bunch of SCVs and followed it up by trying to take a hidden expo at the gold, all in the most important game all year. Errr... He didn't ask if someone could explain what it is that they did, he wanted to know why. To be honest, no one really knows why they made such a call. That's actually the most frustrating issue right now. They had pretty much no logical reason to go for such a risky play when so much was on the line. The only thing that people can logically conclude to right now is the fact that Seahwaks wanted to do something unpredictable and make NE think that they were going for the run play and try to catch them off guard with that pass play. Had it paid off, it would have been a beautiful move. But it didn't pay off, so now chairs and tables are being flipped over left and right. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
Just because ex-NFL players (typically idiots, even when it comes to football) don't like it doesn't mean the OC made a mistake. He got them the look they needed to win the game, and if Wilson were a better QB they would have. Lynch is hard to take down but he's not the goal line beast everyone is thinking - there was nothing automatic about a 1 yard run up the middle and the stats prove it. Watch the whole last series again, and you'll see most of the blame should be put in Wilson. He horribly mismanaged the clock and then put the ball in the worst possible spot without recognizing Butler coming in. ![[image loading]](http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--60BxHW7h--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/n6d2zx9kxkyuoktyogku.gif) No one wants to put the blame on the franchise QB they're about to throw money at, but he really cost them and dumb luck didn't bail him out this time. | ||
|
Elurie
4716 Posts
On February 03 2015 06:43 Seeker wrote: Errr... He didn't ask if someone could explain what it is that they did, he wanted to know why. Well, he could have been more specific about his "why".  (1) Why did Darrell Bevell call that particular play at that particular time? (2) Why didn't Pete Carroll veto Bevell's decision on that particular play? Unless we can read their minds, no one knows for sure. We also don't know, with 100% certainty, that Seattle would've gotten the ball in by running. They could still fumble, get sacked, get stopped etc. Yes, statistics favor the run heavily; but statistics is not foolproof... or NE would've already had their 4th ring on Feb 2008. Basically, the hindsight excuse is, they saw NE defense formation, and decided not to waste their "epic run play" on 2nd down. And at the same time chew up more clock, not letting Brady get the ball back with enough time for couple quick long throws + game-tying field goal (which means Overtime). In their minds, worst case is an incomplete pass. They can still do their epic run play on 3rd/4th down. They did not count on the ball being intercepted by a rookie. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the risk of the throw is suffering from a lot of post hoc confirmation, but it is still not a good look to run a route to the middle of the field. they could have thrown a fade to the side/corner. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On February 03 2015 08:17 oneofthem wrote: lynch's goalline conversion is pretty good, and the patriots run defense is pretty soft. they could have ran it in without a question. even carroll believed this. the risk of the throw is suffering from a lot of post hoc confirmation, but it is still not a good look to run a route to the middle of the field. they could have thrown a fade to the side/corner. I believe the Seahawk's goal line pass play conversion rate is better than Lynch's this season. The Patriots D has been soft but they still had the correct package for a run. If Seattle runs and gets stopped, then 3rd down is a 99% pass play. If it were an incomplete pass, they'd still have both options on 3rd down. It's not a risky pass if you throw it properly. It's relatively common in the modern NFL and goal line passes have an extremely low interception rate, IIRC. So does Wilson (about as high as Lynch's fumble rate.) The throw is supposed to be down and to the middle or behind the receiver, instead of up and at the inside corner. Maybe they could've run a fade instead but they had the receiver open so w/e. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
Essentially, the Seahawks' chances to score on 2nd down would've been higher with a run, but their chance to score before the end of the game is higher with the pass. An interception in that situation hadn't happened before. | ||
NonY
8748 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
“It’s man-to-man, you stack receivers like this,” he said, putting one fist in front of the other. “And boom!, you try to pick the guy. They had a good play, but we knew them, we watched them for two weeks.” Butler had seen the stacked-receiver look in practice, where he’d been beaten on the play by Josh Boyce. “I didn’t let it happen again,” he said. So what tipped Butler off on a quick slant in a situation where everyone was expecting run? “They called goal-line three receivers; goal-line usually has two receivers,” he said. “You still could pass either way, but three receivers? That’s kind of letting you know something. I’m a pass defender first, and I just jumped the route. “I don’t even remember who I was on. 83? I just knew it was stack and I jumped the route and that was the ball game.” http://mmqb.si.com/2015/02/02/super-bowl-49-darrell-bevell-play-call-interception/ | ||
|
iKill[ShocK]
Vietnam3530 Posts
I think the seahawks call this play in order to force BB to take his last timeout. They want to take away any chance of Tom Brady being Tom Brady in case they score. Everyone is expecting Lynch to get the ball so when they line up with 3 receivers it's just forcing BB to burn their last grasp on the game. But BB doesn't take the bait and 50 seconds turns into 25 and than they're thinking hell run the play. If we get a touchdown we are geniuses, if it's an incompletion we stop the clock. /u/Chavril on reddit sums up my thought. note: Patriots had their package on the field to stop the run, basically daring them to run the ball. (via Carroll's interview). Had pats called a timeout, Seattle probably would have switched to a different package? maybe? We'll never know. But seriously 4 people involved are to blame for this situation: Bevell, Caroll, Wilson, Lockette. | ||
|
woody60707
United States1863 Posts
On February 03 2015 05:06 ElMeanYo wrote: I'm a real football newb but I did see the end of the superbowl. From what I understand, the Seahawks were one yard from scoring and instead of pushing the ball 1 yard they threw and were intercepted. Can someone explain to me why? I can explain this. And there is some good logic to it. First, fumbles and interceptions happen, but the seahawks coach doesn't make play calls based on that happening. So the seahawks have three more downs (chances) to win the game with 26 secs left. A run won't stop the clock, but an incomplete will. So if they run it and fail to score, they will be boxed in to having to call a very obvious pass play. | ||
|
Durp
Canada3117 Posts
For your viewing pleasure: Honestly, I don't care for the rationale of killing time to not give Brady a shot... Twenty eight seconds is such little time, and the Seahawks had a top 10 special teams unit. They also have the best defense in the league. There's no excuse for throwing there. Run the ball. If you get stopped, run again. If your power run offense (that got you this far) can't get 1 yard in two tries, you don't deserve to win the Superbowl anyways. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On February 03 2015 07:35 Jibba wrote: They had plenty of reasons to go for it. Just because ex-NFL players (typically idiots, even when it comes to football) don't like it doesn't mean the OC made a mistake. He got them the look they needed to win the game, and if Wilson were a better QB they would have. Lynch is hard to take down but he's not the goal line beast everyone is thinking - there was nothing automatic about a 1 yard run up the middle and the stats prove it. Watch the whole last series again, and you'll see most of the blame should be put in Wilson. He horribly mismanaged the clock and then put the ball in the worst possible spot without recognizing Butler coming in. No one wants to put the blame on the franchise QB they're about to throw money at, but he really cost them and dumb luck didn't bail him out this time. For some reason, you've really been a Wilson hater recently. The fact is that he has reliable stats, is extremely confident with the ball, making good decisions and accurate throws, and is great at running the ball without being a liability like RG3. Wilson is a good QB, even if you want to be a hater. He's not like Brady or Rodgers, but he's definitely a quality QB. He didn't mismanaged the clock at all on that last drive and he was actually playing fairly well. The last play was a really bad throw but that entire drive was horribly managed from a playcalling perspective, which lands on the coaching staff. | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
| ||
|
Abominous
Croatia1625 Posts
Didn't this happen before? Should've given Lynch the chance tbh. | ||
|
JumpinJupiters
Brazil23 Posts
they did not need such a risk on 2nd down with timeout left as well they had time for 3 plays you could do it on 3rd down and maybe 4th down but not on fukin 2nd down fuck the surprise your a running team fucking run the fucking ball with lynch or wilson | ||
|
SweeTLemonS[TPR]
11739 Posts
On February 03 2015 07:35 Jibba wrote: They had plenty of reasons to go for it. Just because ex-NFL players (typically idiots, even when it comes to football) don't like it doesn't mean the OC made a mistake. He got them the look they needed to win the game, and if Wilson were a better QB they would have. Lynch is hard to take down but he's not the goal line beast everyone is thinking - there was nothing automatic about a 1 yard run up the middle and the stats prove it. Watch the whole last series again, and you'll see most of the blame should be put in Wilson. He horribly mismanaged the clock and then put the ball in the worst possible spot without recognizing Butler coming in. No one wants to put the blame on the franchise QB they're about to throw money at, but he really cost them and dumb luck didn't bail him out this time. Well, he didn't mismanage the clock, really. At least, I didn't think so. That's a very difficult situation to play in. On one hand, he has to burn as much time as he can, so that they don't give the Patriots another shot at scoring. On the other hand, if they're not moving down field fast enough, he has to make sure he doesn't run out of time. As it stands, they would have left the Pats about 20 seconds and two time outs. I'd take an 80 yard field with that defense, feeling confident that they wouldn't get more than 3. That said, you're right about the pass. It was off target. If the ball is 42" to the right, it's a TD, or they're right on the goal line. I think you're wrong in saying that it wasn't a mistake, though. Given the run that Lynch had the play before, I'd run him again right there. The pass has too high of a potential to get messed up. But, I will say this: I think it was a mistake because I don't think that Wilson is a very good pocket passer. He's incredible when plays break down, and his WRs adjust their routes probably better than any group in the league, but there is not a chance in hell I would have put the game in his hands down there. I don't think that I've ever said that I think he's a high level passer on here, and I know that I've argued this with friends and coworkers countless times. I've said this since the middle of last season, and I've added that I think he'll have the shortest career of the good, young QBs in the league right now because of his inability to pass from the pocket, and what appears to be a lack of development there. If nothing else, he really is too short to pass from the pocket effectively. The game plan for Wilson is always to stop the rush and contain him to the pocket. Why? Because he's not very effective from the pocket. That's easier said than done, but Carroll handed it to the Patriots on a fucking silver platter on that play. He intentionally put his QB in a position that least utilizes his skill set, and actually highlights his weakness. That's why it's a mistake. I just watched the play like six times (heart breaking every time, too), and I think that if Wilson is a better QB, it's a very good play call. The Patriots are definitely rushing 7, but one LB comes off of the blitz to cover Lynch on the flat route. If the ball is placed at the right hash, then 21 has to go through another DB and WR to get at the ball: the pick was set perfectly. A brilliant call would have had Wilson faking the hand off to Lynch up the gut, keeping the same setup otherwise. Why? It would have diverted the DBs attention just enough that the pass could have been slightly off and it would not have made a difference. They were expecting a run, which is why this was a good call, but that they only had to recognize that it wasn't a run made it too easy for the DBs, imo. I think PA is the most underused strategy at the goal line, especially from teams that have powerful HBs. I know there's an inherent risk that the D won't bite, and that they'll take a sack, but they had 20 seconds and a time out to handle a 3-5 yard loss. It makes the passing game a little easier, too, since it forces the DBs to cover more field. I would have liked a back shoulder to the tall WR whose name I can't remember because he never caught a ball before the Super Bowl too. A fade is the obvious throw, so the DB is probably going to play off of him a bit and wait for the jump ball. It's a simple read though. If the DB comes down, throw the fade, if the DB stays high, throw the back shoulder. If he gets doubled, throw it out of bounds and play another down. I don't know... the only thing I'm sure of is that all of our discussions will never make a difference, and that fucker Tom Brady got his fourth. I hope you're happy, DK! (If you're reading this.) And I know that I am sad as can be over that. | ||
| ||
