Luke Willson talking about THAT play

[Sgt. Largent]

Who said it had to be a handoff to Lynch?

The team had more than one strength

you're playing into numerous falsehoods.. and not sure why? Is it to extoll the Pats? Is it to provide an out to the Seahawks? Is it to suggest that was the team's best play?

Because the issue is/was elsewhere

What other strengths are you talking about then.

You're the one telling me I'm wrong, so why am I wrong? What "strengths" should we have gone with if you weren't talking about Marshawn?

I mean i did have it one of my first posts. Wilson with the ball in his hands and on the move. Read option. Roll out. Something to Baldwin. Pass in the flat to Lynch. You cant convince me THAT play was even in our top 5 of good options, considering personnel.

Im not telling you you are wrong.. I just think your perspective is focused on the wrong thing. Pats do what they do.. wait for mistakes. Seahawks got uncharacteristically casual and cute with their play call.

I never said I LOVED the playcall...............and have said many many times that if we were going to pass, to roll Russell out.

I'm merely giving the Patriot's credit, and saying that even though it might not have been the strongest playcall. If we execute then we probably win.

But what the hell, this is all speculation that continues to make me sick to my stomach. So not sure why we continue to dwell on the play like it's going to change the outcome.

 

[Hawks46]

The biggest problem with that play was that we didn't audible out of it.

The Pats obviously knew what play we were running.

Trying to run a pick against the toughest CB in the league at the LOS (Browner) wasn't ever going to happen. Kearse was our biggest WR at the time, plus the best blocker. There wasn't another choice but he was always going to get owned against Browner. So at that point, expect no pick/interference from Kearse.

The throw by Wilson wasn't great but it wasn't horrible. If he lead Locket a bit more it would've been harder for the CB to make the play but Butler still broke on it.

Can't really blame Locket too much as he was expecting the defender to get picked or at least fight through traffic. You can see when he gets hit, he's totally surprised.

Butler just made a hell of a play. Sometimes they get you.

I'm also not griping about the play call. It was a good call against a goal line defense. I just think we should've either called timeout or audibled out of it, yet even then that's hindsight being picky. There is a VERY low interception rate on that pass play. Typically if you don't get it, it's either an incompletion or your guy is stopped short.

 

[Uncle Si]

Who said it had to be a handoff to Lynch?

The team had more than one strength

you're playing into numerous falsehoods.. and not sure why? Is it to extoll the Pats? Is it to provide an out to the Seahawks? Is it to suggest that was the team's best play?

Because the issue is/was elsewhere

What other strengths are you talking about then.

You're the one telling me I'm wrong, so why am I wrong? What "strengths" should we have gone with if you weren't talking about Marshawn?

I mean i did have it one of my first posts. Wilson with the ball in his hands and on the move. Read option. Roll out. Something to Baldwin. Pass in the flat to Lynch. You cant convince me THAT play was even in our top 5 of good options, considering personnel.

Im not telling you you are wrong.. I just think your perspective is focused on the wrong thing. Pats do what they do.. wait for mistakes. Seahawks got uncharacteristically casual and cute with their play call.

I never said I LOVED the playcall...............and have said many many times that if we were going to pass, to roll Russell out.

I'm merely giving the Patriot's credit, and saying that even though it might not have been the strongest playcall. If we execute then we probably win.

But what the hell, this is all speculation that continues to make me sick to my stomach. So not sure why we continue to dwell on the play like it's going to change the outcome.

Agree totally.

I don’t mind the conversation to be honest. I’m over it (mostly.. back to back would’ve been cool) emotionally.

 

[Sports Hernia]

I figure a room full of Seahawk fans is a safe place for me to unload on something else that really gets me angry about that play....other than the obvious.
I give the Patriots and coaches all the credit for being prepared for that play and their preparation in general. But the over-the-top praise drives me nuts. Remember how the Pats didn't call timeout after Lynch's run leading up that play. I've actually heard people calling that a brilliant move by Billicheck that manipulated Pete into throwing the ball. Give me a freaking break. If the Hawks score on that play, everyone is questioning why the Pats didn't use a timeout to give Brady more time to come back and tie the game.
There is no reason to call that a brilliant move. Rant off!

A time out is what was supposed to happen and almost any coach in the world would have called one. Belichick didnt though and our coach panicked. I truly dont think Pete knew what to do. It was a great move by Belichick.

Actually it was a dumb move by Billycheat and our coaches didn’t take advantage of it. Our coaching staff panicked and had to get the play in, and they called the dumbest play in NFL history. If Seattle scores there (which was most likely to happen) NE has very little time to score. Billycheat handed Seattle the game and our coaching staff refused to take it.

 

[Sports Hernia]

The biggest problem with that play was that we didn't audible out of it.

The Pats obviously knew what play we were running.

Trying to run a pick against the toughest CB in the league at the LOS (Browner) wasn't ever going to happen. Kearse was our biggest WR at the time, plus the best blocker. There wasn't another choice but he was always going to get owned against Browner. So at that point, expect no pick/interference from Kearse.

The throw by Wilson wasn't great but it wasn't horrible. If he lead Locket a bit more it would've been harder for the CB to make the play but Butler still broke on it.

Can't really blame Locket too much as he was expecting the defender to get picked or at least fight through traffic. You can see when he gets hit, he's totally surprised.

Butler just made a hell of a play. Sometimes they get you.

I'm also not griping about the play call. It was a good call against a goal line defense. I just think we should've either called timeout or audibled out of it, yet even then that's hindsight being picky. There is a VERY low interception rate on that pass play. Typically if you don't get it, it's either an incompletion or your guy is stopped short.

Disagree. It was a horrible play call and the results prove it. They threw a hurried pass into a stacked and crowded box. Unnecessary risk.

 

[XxXdragonXxX]

Terrible play call.

1. You dont throw a precision route to your 73rd best out of 5 WRs with the game on the line in the Superbowl.

2. You sont make the pass hinge on Kearse being able to outmuscle BRANDON BROWNER.

3. You dont ply away from your QBs strength!

 

[thegreeninyoureye]

The Whole time I was Yelling I dont like the formation I dont like the formation. If Wilson would of rolled out to his right he would of walked in, This is something he has to change in his game a little bit. He is a seasoned vet he needs to know when to hold them know when to fold them know when to walk away know when to run. I blame him just as much if not more than lockette on the play it was a crap pass.

 

[Sports Hernia]

The Whole time I was Yelling I dont like the formation I dont like the formation. If Wilson would of rolled out to his right he would of walked in, This is something he has to change in his game a little bit. He is a seasoned vet he needs to know when to hold them know when to fold them know when to walk away know when to run. I blame him just as much if not more than lockette on the play it was a crap pass.

I agree with the first part of your post. I was yelling at the TV with my folks as Lynch emptied out of the backfield “saying what are they doing? They are going to <censored> pass!!! Then the worst thing happened. It was like watching a car accident in slow motion.

 

[northseahawk]

so who is the dude that broke/hurt his arm punching something?

 

[Steve2222]

I still have no problem with the concept of passing on that play. But play action, Russ rolls with one of 3 options 1) run it in, 2) throw to someone wide open in the back of the endzone cause his man bit on the play-fake 3) throw it out the back of the endzone if neither 1 nor 2 is available.

Pats heavy package means bigger guys and more people towards the middle. So why call a play throwing there to a guy known more for his special teams play than receiving skills?

The play design itself wasn’t wrong. What was wrong was using Lockette and as the primary and Russell. I think I’m the biggest Russell supporter on this board, if not certainly amongst them. However, he screwed up on that play. The placement of that ball should have been at Riccardos sheens. Either Ricardo catches it. Or it’s incomplete.

 

[12HawkFan]

Lets not forget the low snap from Unger to start the play as well, something that I think was a leading factor for his being traded for Graham because it was happening way to often during the regular season and continued in the playoffs.

So little could have been different in that play that could have resulted in any number of other things happening other than an INT but that's hindsight and it's always 20/20.

Once we win another SB, I think all this will fade into history, I just hope it doesn't take a decade or more to do it.

GO HAWKS!!!

 

[Bobblehead]

Bevel was right, Lockette did not fight for the ball.. just kind of chicken winged it and Butler fought through it and made Lockette his.. B thing.

 

[MD5eahawks]

I found that interview to be very informative. I know some here are saying time to let it go, but with the players actually talking about it brings it full circle. Just part of the process of letting it go.

After THREE YEARS?????...NOT letting go, is for losers, you weigh anchor and move on.

Yes. After THREE YEARS.
Point is, the core of players involved are still here and it seems it took THREE YEARS for the team to make a change that they deemed necessary during that particular off-season. Getting rid of Cable and Bevell THREE YEARS later is part of the process of letting go. Should've been sooner but, could've, would've, should've. It has happened now, not THREE YEARS ago.

note: I left the THREE YEARS in caps as a tip of the cap to our frustration over the lack of change that was needed. I feel ya.

 

[12HawkFan]

I found that interview to be very informative. I know some here are saying time to let it go, but with the players actually talking about it brings it full circle. Just part of the process of letting it go.

After THREE YEARS?????...NOT letting go, is for losers, you weigh anchor and move on.

Yes. After THREE YEARS.
Point is, the core of players involved are still here and it seems it took THREE YEARS for the team to make a change that they deemed necessary during that particular off-season. Getting rid of Cable and Bevell THREE YEARS later is part of the process of letting go. Should've been sooner but, could've, would've, should've. It has happened now, not THREE YEARS ago.

note: I left the THREE YEARS in caps as a tip of the cap to our frustration over the lack of change that was needed. I feel ya.

.
I know it's a different sport but how long did it take for the Boston Red Sox to get over what had happened during a World Series a very long time ago?

A very LONG time.

Pro sports is a weird thing in as much as you can inherit baggage left over by past regimes that you had ZERO to do with but the reality is that it is still in the franchises head and sometimes takes who knows what to finally get over it.

GO HAWKS!!!

 

[scutterhawk]

I found that interview to be very informative. I know some here are saying time to let it go, but with the players actually talking about it brings it full circle. Just part of the process of letting it go.

After THREE YEARS?????...NOT letting go, is for losers, you weigh anchor and move on.

Yes. After THREE YEARS.
Point is, the core of players involved are still here and it seems it took THREE YEARS for the team to make a change that they deemed necessary during that particular off-season. Getting rid of Cable and Bevell THREE YEARS later is part of the process of letting go. Should've been sooner but, could've, would've, should've. It has happened now, not THREE YEARS ago.

note: I left the THREE YEARS in caps as a tip of the cap to our frustration over the lack of change that was needed. I feel ya.

No angst or Frustration here, I've learned a long time ago, that if ya stop picking at the scab, ya heal a lot faster.
I figure that there are some folks that just can't let go, and that it's a waste of time & Rolaids. :lol:

 

[Uncle Si]

I found that interview to be very informative. I know some here are saying time to let it go, but with the players actually talking about it brings it full circle. Just part of the process of letting it go.

After THREE YEARS?????...NOT letting go, is for losers, you weigh anchor and move on.

Yes. After THREE YEARS.
Point is, the core of players involved are still here and it seems it took THREE YEARS for the team to make a change that they deemed necessary during that particular off-season. Getting rid of Cable and Bevell THREE YEARS later is part of the process of letting go. Should've been sooner but, could've, would've, should've. It has happened now, not THREE YEARS ago.

note: I left the THREE YEARS in caps as a tip of the cap to our frustration over the lack of change that was needed. I feel ya.

.
I know it's a different sport but how long did it take for the Boston Red Sox to get over what had happened during a World Series a very long time ago?

A very LONG time.

Pro sports is a weird thing in as much as you can inherit baggage left over by past regimes that you had ZERO to do with but the reality is that is still in the franchises head and sometimes takes who knows what to finally get over it.

GO HAWKS!!!

The Seahawks got over a super bowl loss in ten years. Patriots got over 2 losses in 4 years.

 

[chris98251]

After THREE YEARS?????...NOT letting go, is for losers, you weigh anchor and move on.

Yes. After THREE YEARS.
Point is, the core of players involved are still here and it seems it took THREE YEARS for the team to make a change that they deemed necessary during that particular off-season. Getting rid of Cable and Bevell THREE YEARS later is part of the process of letting go. Should've been sooner but, could've, would've, should've. It has happened now, not THREE YEARS ago.

note: I left the THREE YEARS in caps as a tip of the cap to our frustration over the lack of change that was needed. I feel ya.

.
I know it's a different sport but how long did it take for the Boston Red Sox to get over what had happened during a World Series a very long time ago?

A very LONG time.

Pro sports is a weird thing in as much as you can inherit baggage left over by past regimes that you had ZERO to do with but the reality is that is still in the franchises head and sometimes takes who knows what to finally get over it.

GO HAWKS!!!

The Seahawks got over a super bowl loss in ten years. Patriots got over 2 losses in 4 years.

Nobody has forgot the Bettis Bowl, it just was one upped by the Bevell Bowl.

 

[DomeHawk]

After THREE YEARS?????...NOT letting go, is for losers, you weigh anchor and move on.

Yes. After THREE YEARS.
Point is, the core of players involved are still here and it seems it took THREE YEARS for the team to make a change that they deemed necessary during that particular off-season. Getting rid of Cable and Bevell THREE YEARS later is part of the process of letting go. Should've been sooner but, could've, would've, should've. It has happened now, not THREE YEARS ago.

note: I left the THREE YEARS in caps as a tip of the cap to our frustration over the lack of change that was needed. I feel ya.

.
I know it's a different sport but how long did it take for the Boston Red Sox to get over what had happened during a World Series a very long time ago?

A very LONG time.

Pro sports is a weird thing in as much as you can inherit baggage left over by past regimes that you had ZERO to do with but the reality is that is still in the franchises head and sometimes takes who knows what to finally get over it.

GO HAWKS!!!

The Seahawks got over a super bowl loss in ten years. Patriots got over 2 losses in 4 years.

Comparing apples to oranges, the Seahawks loss was SO controversial. Seriously, when the lead official comes out four years later and apologizes for calls that altered the outcome of the game?

 

[Uncle Si]

If that was apples and oranges then what was comparing it to the 1910s Red Sox?

 

[Uncle Si]

Yes. After THREE YEARS.
Point is, the core of players involved are still here and it seems it took THREE YEARS for the team to make a change that they deemed necessary during that particular off-season. Getting rid of Cable and Bevell THREE YEARS later is part of the process of letting go. Should've been sooner but, could've, would've, should've. It has happened now, not THREE YEARS ago.

note: I left the THREE YEARS in caps as a tip of the cap to our frustration over the lack of change that was needed. I feel ya.

.
I know it's a different sport but how long did it take for the Boston Red Sox to get over what had happened during a World Series a very long time ago?

A very LONG time.

Pro sports is a weird thing in as much as you can inherit baggage left over by past regimes that you had ZERO to do with but the reality is that is still in the franchises head and sometimes takes who knows what to finally get over it.

GO HAWKS!!!

The Seahawks got over a super bowl loss in ten years. Patriots got over 2 losses in 4 years.

Nobody has forgot the Bettis Bowl, it just was one upped by the Bevell Bowl.

We are still talking about the players right?

Who cares if fans get over it. The idea professional athletes paid millions to compete can’t get over losses of any magnitude is contrary to what I’d want from them.

It’s not like these guys are walking up and down radio row asking for a hot mic to spill their guts. They are being asked. If Manning was there someone would bring up 43-8. I’m sure Ryan has fielded a question or two about 28-3.