Revisiting the call - last play of Super Bowl XLIX

[Siouxhawk]

This play wasn't some top secret navy seals offensive where nobody on earth would ever know what they were looking at but insiders. Every offense in the NFL runs this play, and even if Browner hadn't been on the team the Patriots coaches would have seen Seahawks film where they ran this at one point. I even pointed out the play that they ran previously 1 1/2 years ago - its not like any of us wouldn't know that this was in the playbook.

The playbook has hundreds of different plays, many of them similar to this with a myriad of variations to it and the Seahawks have run a myriad of variations of this play since Browner left. Teams play against other teams with former players all the time (how many free agents left the Hawks this year?). Are we going to reinvent the entire playbook because of it? Of course not.

Browner and Belichek guessed this one right. Kudos to them.

It's not a guess if you know it and specifically dialed things up for it out of hundreds and hundreds of plays in the playbook. They did not guess.


The argument is over, Pete will back Bevell cause he is a class guy, unlike Bevell who immediately thru Lockette under the bus as soon as he was challenged on it. Classy coach and guy using your players as a scape goat. He put him in a unfamiliar roll and position and then blames him for a call that should not have been made.

Just another reason people have an issue with him.

Would you show me the link to Bev supposedly throwing Lockette under the bus please.

 

[chris98251]

The vid is down but there are quotes in this link.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...ks-oc-bevell-blames-receiver-for-interception

 

[ivotuk]

Would it have been a bad play call if we would have scored? Would everyone be calling for Bevels head then? I think not. The only reason it was a failed play is because the DB mad a great play. Simple. They beat us on that play. It could also have been executed better as well but like I said the biggest factor on that play was the DB making a great read and jump on the ball. Plenty of other plays int he game that could have made things different. Is anyone calling out our defensive coordinator for letting up 2 touchdown near end of game. I am not.

Good points. The biggest mistake there was in not rolling Russell out. That gave him plenty of options to throw, run, or get rid of the ball.

It was a bad play call but there's plenty of blame to go around.

1. Russell should not have led Lockette so far. Or he should have recognized the bad matchups and gotten rid of the ball.

2. Lockette should have been more aware of the DBs position.

3. Kearse should have thrown more weight in to getting past Browner.

But let's not gloss over a great play by Browner and the NE DB.

However, in the end, imho, this comes down to Pete Carroll and Darrell Bevell over thinking the play, and not recognizing the poor match ups.

1. Brandon Browner is not going to be pushed out of the way. He was a Seahawk, they have seen that, and they should have known better. According to them they recognized the run stopping defense. How did they miss Browner?

2. Ricardo Lockette is not the name you call in that play. He's a below average receiver whose sole claim to fame is speed. Put someone in there who has a history of catching the ball in tough situations. Doug Baldwin. This is the Superbowl, you don't risk an INT or deflected pass to Ricardo Lockette. He's more likely to have the ball go through his hands than to be the hero.

3. That play calls for Russell to catch the ball and let it go. Why take it out of the hands of your best player? Russell (and Marshawn) got you there, finish it with them.

4. Who in the hell worries about using all of the downs up when you have the best run offense in the NFL? You have Marshawn Lynch and 1 time out, use them. If the Patriots stop that twice, then they earned the win.

5. Never, ever, ever put the fate of a Superbowl in the hands of Darrell Bevell, Jermaine Kearse, and Ricardo Lockette all three working in unison. Don't make matters more complicated than they need to be when the game's on the line. Instead, put it on your strength.

 

[Sports Hernia]

I dont think this team was making the "safe" calls all game. Look at the touchdown at the end of the 1st half. Nobody is criticizing that because it worked. If not well...... I can understand why people are critical of Bevel in general but this play was not "the dumbest play". Like Pete said it was the WORST OUTCOMES of a play. IMHO people are directing more of the blame to Bevell (and yes he definitely deserves some after several 3 and outs) since it culminated in the last play. Lots of blame to go around in this game. There should also be some praise as well. Just a close one that we lost. Dam it.

And no you will never be done. We will drag you in until you break and learn to praise Bevell as the greatest OC in the History of the game

We will have to agree to disagree on the subject then....

And FWIW, I heaped praise upon Bevell for his playcalling in XLVIII and other games, he just seems to have a lot more brain farts than well called games. Hopefully that changes.

 

[brimsalabim]

Vancan I appreciate your post and understand your point but imo the difference was Browner. You mention there was no Butler flying to the ball. This time they knew what was coming. I have softened my opinion somewhat though after reading your post and comments from several NFL receivers who all seem to think they would have beat the defender to the ball and scored on that throw. Maybe just receiver bravado but at least some players think Bevel was right.

 

[chris98251]

I would like to add one other aspect, before the Super Bowl Quinn and Bevell were talk as the two hottest young coaches to be moving forward from the Hawks, after the Super Bowl I think Bevell had one interview with the Raiders and Quinn several wanting to talk to him and ended up with the Falcons, you don't think that call had an impact on his opportunities?

 

[Basis4day]

Calling the play to throw D offguard. Zero problem.

Throwing the ball. All the problem. Throw the ball away, live to have another play.

 

[olyfan63]

Would it have been a bad play call if we would have scored? Would everyone be calling for Bevels head then? I think not. The only reason it was a failed play is because the DB mad a great play. Simple. They beat us on that play. It could also have been executed better as well but like I said the biggest factor on that play was the DB making a great read and jump on the ball. Plenty of other plays int he game that could have made things different. Is anyone calling out our defensive coordinator for letting up 2 touchdown near end of game. I am not.

Good points. The biggest mistake there was in not rolling Russell out. That gave him plenty of options to throw, run, or get rid of the ball.

It was a bad play call but there's plenty of blame to go around.

1. Russell should not have led Lockette so far. Or he should have recognized the bad matchups and gotten rid of the ball.

2. Lockette should have been more aware of the DBs position.

3. Kearse should have thrown more weight in to getting past Browner.

But let's not gloss over a great play by Browner and the NE DB.

However, in the end, imho, this comes down to Pete Carroll and Darrell Bevell over thinking the play, and not recognizing the poor match ups.

1. Brandon Browner is not going to be pushed out of the way. He was a Seahawk, they have seen that, and they should have known better. According to them they recognized the run stopping defense. How did they miss Browner?

2. Ricardo Lockette is not the name you call in that play. He's a below average receiver whose sole claim to fame is speed. Put someone in there who has a history of catching the ball in tough situations. Doug Baldwin. This is the Superbowl, you don't risk an INT or deflected pass to Ricardo Lockette. He's more likely to have the ball go through his hands than to be the hero.

3. That play calls for Russell to catch the ball and let it go. Why take it out of the hands of your best player? Russell (and Marshawn) got you there, finish it with them.

4. Who in the hell worries about using all of the downs up when you have the best run offense in the NFL? You have Marshawn Lynch and 1 time out, use them. If the Patriots stop that twice, then they earned the win.

5. Never, ever, ever put the fate of a Superbowl in the hands of Darrell Bevell, Jermaine Kearse, and Ricardo Lockette all three working in unison. Don't make matters more complicated than they need to be when the game's on the line. Instead, put it on your strength.

For all the reasons stated above and elsewhere, it was a brain-dead call by Bevell. Also as Chris9-whatever pointed out, it was disgusting to see Bevell then proceed to throw Lockette under the bus. Absolutely disgusting. Scapegoating Lockette for Bevell's failure.

The one point I haven't seen others making is that this play is one where Russell's height, or lack thereof, hurt him. He couldn't see Butler hiding behind the LB/OL and Browner/Kearse. Again, to me, that's on Bevell, for creating the situation in the first place.

ONE SCENARIO FOR TELL-THE-TRUTH MONDAY FOR "THE PICK" (and plays/situations leading up to it)

1) Bevell's truthful confession:
My situational awareness sucked on that play:
- I was asking Jerome Kearse, giving up 30 lbs to Browner, to push ultra-physical Browner off the line. Simply dumb.
- Apparently I have become so predictable in my play-calling that NE knew exactly what was coming based on the formation.
- I set up a problematic situation for Russell, because his height IS a disadvantage in that situation, and the replays show that the onrushing Butler was "hidden" behind other players where Russell couldn't see him, where a 6'4" QB would have.
- I failed to use a primary weapon, Russell's mobility and decision-making, by not giving Russell the opportunity to make a decision, not allowing him to use his feet. By calling a non-decision quick-slant, I failed to use our team's best offensive weapon in a situation that screamed out for it.
- I ran plays that resulted in two consecutive 3-and-outs leading up to the Patriots winning TD. Instead of sustaining drives, running clock, maybe scoring more, I called a game that allowed NE back into the game.

2) Russell's truthful confession:
- I was in such a hurry to get the TD and get to celebrating another win, I was so sure it would be a TD, that I blocked out everything else
- I never even saw Butler, even though I threw it straight to him
- I need to have better awareness of where DBs are hiding behind players I can't see over
- I needed to put the ball lower, and more on Lockette's body, instead of out in front, and with more zip
- I was so concerned about not screwing up what looked so wide open that I threw a cautious lolli-pop ball that allowed the pick to occur

3) Kearse's truthful confession:
- YOU try pushing Browner off the line creating a pick on Butler. Go ahead, YOU freakin' try it. I gave it everything I had and I was not able to get it done in that situation against that man.
- I should've caught the 3rd down ball when we were up 10. I had it in my hands and didn't finish the play.

4) Lockette's truthful confession
- I knew the ball was coming to me and was more concerned about not messing it up than going and getting the ball.
- I was worried about getting blown up by the LB (Hightower) and not getting in, so I was trying to hand-catch it out front and then duck inside and under for the score.
- I never even saw Butler til he hit me, and I need to improve my awareness of where DB's are likely to be on different routes, instead of focusing only on avoiding the onrushing LB.

5) Carroll's truthful confession
- Darell, I have taken the arrows for you and done my best not to throw you under the bus, because that's not how we roll here.
- This puts me in an awful position because I'd rather just outline the parameters and then trust my guys to operate within them and get it done. This was way too cute; it really was the dumbest play-call in Super Bowl history, and didn't take advantage of our strengths.
- I can't be focusing on every play call, and there's no way I want to have to overrule or micromanage my OC on every critical call. I need the OC to be better prepared, less predictable--NE knew exactly what was coming--we have to give opponents more to look at on tape, in terms of situations and formations, to prevent this.
- This has to improve. I want you to use this next week to figure out a plan on how you'll improve our Red Zone and especially our "Goal-to-go" performance next year, to be less predictable, and better utilize team strengths. And don't assume better weapons; assume the same weapons we had for SB49.

I left out the whole part about burning timeouts unnecessarily, but it's fertile ground for Tell-the-Truth, if anyone is up to laying out how that conversation would go down in tell-the-truth mode.

It was a ridiculous play-call by Bevell, in that situation, with that personnel, against those opposing personnel. At first, the similar play from the Saints game was interesting to see, but as others pointed out, it was our 6'5" TE out there. He possibly draws a LB cover assignment instead of a CB assignment. Apples and oranges. No amount of defending Bevell can change the lunacy of that call. All that's going on here is the OP playing deaf and ignoring all the great points explaining why the call sucked so badly.

 

[netskier]

Nice post.

 

[Threedee]

It's still the singularly most moronic decision I've ever seen, and I've seen people make decisions that got them expelled from middle/high school and college, arrested, deep into debt, beaten up, very ill, etc.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Would it have been a bad play call if we would have scored? Would everyone be calling for Bevels head then? I think not. The only reason it was a failed play is because the DB mad a great play. Simple. They beat us on that play. It could also have been executed better as well but like I said the biggest factor on that play was the DB making a great read and jump on the ball. Plenty of other plays int he game that could have made things different. Is anyone calling out our defensive coordinator for letting up 2 touchdown near end of game. I am not.

Good points. The biggest mistake there was in not rolling Russell out. That gave him plenty of options to throw, run, or get rid of the ball.

It was a bad play call but there's plenty of blame to go around.

1. Russell should not have led Lockette so far. Or he should have recognized the bad matchups and gotten rid of the ball.

2. Lockette should have been more aware of the DBs position.

3. Kearse should have thrown more weight in to getting past Browner.

But let's not gloss over a great play by Browner and the NE DB.

However, in the end, imho, this comes down to Pete Carroll and Darrell Bevell over thinking the play, and not recognizing the poor match ups.

1. Brandon Browner is not going to be pushed out of the way. He was a Seahawk, they have seen that, and they should have known better. According to them they recognized the run stopping defense. How did they miss Browner?

2. Ricardo Lockette is not the name you call in that play. He's a below average receiver whose sole claim to fame is speed. Put someone in there who has a history of catching the ball in tough situations. Doug Baldwin. This is the Superbowl, you don't risk an INT or deflected pass to Ricardo Lockette. He's more likely to have the ball go through his hands than to be the hero.

3. That play calls for Russell to catch the ball and let it go. Why take it out of the hands of your best player? Russell (and Marshawn) got you there, finish it with them.

4. Who in the hell worries about using all of the downs up when you have the best run offense in the NFL? You have Marshawn Lynch and 1 time out, use them. If the Patriots stop that twice, then they earned the win.

5. Never, ever, ever put the fate of a Superbowl in the hands of Darrell Bevell, Jermaine Kearse, and Ricardo Lockette all three working in unison. Don't make matters more complicated than they need to be when the game's on the line. Instead, put it on your strength.

For all the reasons stated above and elsewhere, it was a brain-dead call by Bevell. Also as Chris9-whatever pointed out, it was disgusting to see Bevell then proceed to throw Lockette under the bus. Absolutely disgusting. Scapegoating Lockette for Bevell's failure.

The one point I haven't seen others making is that this play is one where Russell's height, or lack thereof, hurt him. He couldn't see Butler hiding behind the LB/OL and Browner/Kearse. Again, to me, that's on Bevell, for creating the situation in the first place.

ONE SCENARIO FOR TELL-THE-TRUTH MONDAY FOR "THE PICK" (and plays/situations leading up to it)

1) Bevell's truthful confession:
My situational awareness sucked on that play:
- I was asking Jerome Kearse, giving up 30 lbs to Browner, to push ultra-physical Browner off the line. Simply dumb.
- Apparently I have become so predictable in my play-calling that NE knew exactly what was coming based on the formation.
- I set up a problematic situation for Russell, because his height IS a disadvantage in that situation, and the replays show that the onrushing Butler was "hidden" behind other players where Russell couldn't see him, where a 6'4" QB would have.
- I failed to use a primary weapon, Russell's mobility and decision-making, by not giving Russell the opportunity to make a decision, not allowing him to use his feet. By calling a non-decision quick-slant, I failed to use our team's best offensive weapon in a situation that screamed out for it.
- I ran plays that resulted in two consecutive 3-and-outs leading up to the Patriots winning TD. Instead of sustaining drives, running clock, maybe scoring more, I called a game that allowed NE back into the game.

2) Russell's truthful confession:
- I was in such a hurry to get the TD and get to celebrating another win, I was so sure it would be a TD, that I blocked out everything else
- I never even saw Butler, even though I threw it straight to him
- I need to have better awareness of where DBs are hiding behind players I can't see over
- I needed to put the ball lower, and more on Lockette's body, instead of out in front, and with more zip
- I was so concerned about not screwing up what looked so wide open that I threw a cautious lolli-pop ball that allowed the pick to occur

3) Kearse's truthful confession:
- YOU try pushing Browner off the line creating a pick on Butler. Go ahead, YOU freakin' try it. I gave it everything I had and I was not able to get it done in that situation against that man.
- I should've caught the 3rd down ball when we were up 10. I had it in my hands and didn't finish the play.

4) Lockette's truthful confession
- I knew the ball was coming to me and was more concerned about not messing it up than going and getting the ball.
- I was worried about getting blown up by the LB (Hightower) and not getting in, so I was trying to hand-catch it out front and then duck inside and under for the score.
- I never even saw Butler til he hit me, and I need to improve my awareness of where DB's are likely to be on different routes, instead of focusing only on avoiding the onrushing LB.

5) Carroll's truthful confession
- Darell, I have taken the arrows for you and done my best not to throw you under the bus, because that's not how we roll here.
- This puts me in an awful position because I'd rather just outline the parameters and then trust my guys to operate within them and get it done. This was way too cute; it really was the dumbest play-call in Super Bowl history, and didn't take advantage of our strengths.
- I can't be focusing on every play call, and there's no way I want to have to overrule or micromanage my OC on every critical call. I need the OC to be better prepared, less predictable--NE knew exactly what was coming--we have to give opponents more to look at on tape, in terms of situations and formations, to prevent this.
- This has to improve. I want you to use this next week to figure out a plan on how you'll improve our Red Zone and especially our "Goal-to-go" performance next year, to be less predictable, and better utilize team strengths. And don't assume better weapons; assume the same weapons we had for SB49.

I left out the whole part about burning timeouts unnecessarily, but it's fertile ground for Tell-the-Truth, if anyone is up to laying out how that conversation would go down in tell-the-truth mode.

It was a ridiculous play-call by Bevell, in that situation, with that personnel, against those opposing personnel. At first, the similar play from the Saints game was interesting to see, but as others pointed out, it was our 6'5" TE out there. He possibly draws a LB cover assignment instead of a CB assignment. Apples and oranges. No amount of defending Bevell can change the lunacy of that call. All that's going on here is the OP playing deaf and ignoring all the great points explaining why the call sucked so badly.

I just read the link (thanks Chris982..) and Bev didn't exactly throw Lockette "under the bus." He said he could have been a bit stronger to the ball. That's not exactly tearing him a new one. And he should have been a little more hungrier and aggressive on his route because the play was a millisecond from being a touchdown. He makes that catch and he's a hero for life and the Hawks are back-to-back champs.

 

[Sealake80]

Oh excuse me. Did I breech a policy? Let me cool down for a bit.

 

[Spin Doctor]

The play call at the end of Super Bowl XLIX was unacceptable given the circumstances. We've all seen similar plays work in the end-zone with different teams on some highlight reel on NFL Network, however that does not mean it was justifiable call for the Seahawks in the situation that they were in. I did not mind the fact that they called a pass, I just felt that the Seahawks should have used a call that took advantage of Wilsons athleticism, and minimized the potential for a turnover.

The first variable that made this play a bad decision was the Seahawks execution of said play during the season. Seattle is not a team that was very good at running slants. It's only a concept that they started extensively using towards the end of the season. Our success with slant plays, and pick plays was mediocre at best. Wilson, nor most of our receivers looked very comfortable with those plays, and just two weeks prior, Wilson and the offense struggled mightily with slant routes. Despite these factors the Seahawks decided to run one of the plays that they struggled with during the most pivotal point of the game.

The second thing that needs to be mentioned is the formation that the Seahawks used. The Patriot players said when the Seahawks used the particular formation they almost always run that same play that the Seahawks used on the final play. When we lined up in that formation, the Patriots knew what was coming. This is what allowed Browner to get a jump on Kearse, and this is why Butler made a beeline towards Lockette. If you only run a few plays from one formation, why risk using it against one of the best prepared teams in the league, during the biggest game of the year in a win - lose situation, in a risky situation?

The last thing I'm going to mention is the personnel grouping. Kearse's job on that play was to pick off Browner. If he could have accomplished such a feat the play would have ended in either an in completion or touchdown. The issue here is that Browner is taller, and holds a weight advantage over Kearse. Not only that, but Kearse could not get a clean release from Browner all game. He was dominating him whenever he was placed on Kearse. We also used our number 4/5 receiver (depending on the game) to run the route. Lockette is a player that has never been good at running short routes. Lockette is asked to run deep post, and go routes on the Seahawks, he was nothing more than an ST gunner and an occasional deep ball option on the Seahawks. He has never been known for his route running ability, and he was used sparingly on short routes. We used one of our worst players for that particular play call as the primary receiver.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

.................5. Never, ever, ever put the fate of a Superbowl in the hands of Darrell Bevell, Jermaine Kearse, and Ricardo Lockette all three working in unison. Don't make matters more complicated than they need to be when the game's on the line. Instead, put it on your strength.

:th2thumbs:

 

[Largent80]

[

Obsessed? Dude...I don't have 27,000 posts (I'm not attacking you, just stating my observations)

I have almost 27,000 posts because I joined this forum in 2002, I had 12,000 more on the earlier versions of this board. None of that has anything to do with the crappy call, the crappy personnel, and the crappy outcome. Nobody cares about post counts or what ifs, or that play and that has been made clear by the majority of members here over a month ago.

 

[Swedishhawkfan]

[

Obsessed? Dude...I don't have 27,000 posts (I'm not attacking you, just stating my observations)

I have almost 27,000 posts because I joined this forum in 2002, I had 12,000 more on the earlier versions of this board. None of that has anything to do with the crappy call, the crappy personnel, and the crappy outcome. Nobody cares about post counts or what ifs, or that play and that has been made clear by the majority of members here over a month ago.

OT but do you post alot in like the lounge, PWR forums etc? Cause it feels like you celebrated your 10 000th post almost yesterday.. :mrgreen:

 

[MontanaHawk05]

WHY MUST I REVISIT THIS GOD-AWFUL MOMENT

 

[Thunderhawk]

So we're "haters" for disagreeing with a decision that was objectively higher risk than simply running the ball? A decision that cost hard-working players and loyal fans a repeat championship? That makes us "haters"? Ugh... newspeak claims another victim.

 

[jammerhawk]

I liked Olyfan63's post which was awesome, otherwise I'm not going to play anymore but still think it was a terrible call, too risky, and one that NE was ready to stop and did.

Bevell still hasn't owned it. I'm trying to to get out and leave this behind, but every time I get pulled back in.

BTW statistically NE had not been able to stop the run inside their 5 all freaking season and the team should have known it and they should have managed the clock better which was on Pete or RW. Play action fade, or Lynch up the gut for the W, or even a read option play would all have been better options. It was a stupid obvious and defensible play that cast the team a second SB.

Don't want to revisit it again thanks.

 

[KiwiHawk]

It may have been a stupid and defensible play, but it didn't cost us the Super Bowl.

We should never have been in the situation to win or lose the game on one play. We failed to move the ball in the first half and had to play catch-up in the second. We played poorly enough to lose, and only the luck of a bizarre catch by Kearse put us in position to even try for the win.

Our first half lost us the game. One play at the end killed the comeback attempt.