"They Took A Dream"

[AROS]

Michael-Shawn Dugar has got to be one of the better Seahawks journalists out there at the moment. Reminds me of Clare Farnsworth back in the day. This was a sobering but hell of a read this morning. It's bad form to cut and paste an article in its entirety so I will add below a lead-in. This is likely firewalled but The Athletic is definitely worth their subscription price, hell, even for just MSD's articles alone. Something to consider. I will definitely be getting the book.

A Seahawks Super Bowl disaster and the unraveling of a would-be dynasty: ‘They took a dream’​

By Michael-Shawn Dugar
Aug. 12, 2025

---

The following excerpt from The Franchise: Seattle Seahawks: A Curated History of the Legion of Boom Era by Michael-Shawn Dugar is reprinted with the permission of Triumph Books. It has been lightly edited in spots for context and clarity. You can find more information and order a copy here.



Marshawn Lynch imagined this moment countless times as a kid growing up in North Oakland:

“It’s the end of the game … one more play … the quarterback hand the ball off to Marshawn … he jump in the end zone — touchdown! The Oakland Raiders win the Super Bowl!”

The final seconds of Super Bowl XLIX between the Seattle Seahawks and New England Patriots nearly played out that way.

With Seattle on the New England 5-yard line, trailing 28-24 with 1:06 remaining, NBC’s Cris Collinsworth said, “Now you have to stop Marshawn Lynch.” Then Russell Wilson put the ball in Lynch’s hands.

“Here he goes,” play-by-play man Al Michaels said as the running back plowed forward. “Beast Mode! To the half-yard line!”

Offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell recalled that the Seahawks had failed on a pair of short-yardage runs earlier in the game: Vince Wilfork blew up a third-and-2 shotgun run for no gain in the first quarter, and linebacker Rob Ninkovich did the same on a third-and-1 carry in the third quarter. With those plays in mind, Bevell didn’t think Lynch would just walk into the end zone if he called another run play on second down. Even though Lynch was also successful on a three-yard touchdown run on third-and-2 in the second quarter and produced a first down on a second-and-1 run in the third, Bevell believed he made the right decision based on the situation.

Obviously, Lynch could have scored the game-winning touchdown, but when Bevell hears that he made the worst call of all time, “I would not agree with that” is his retort. As for the specifics of the play he chose, Bevell felt good about giving Wilson options: he could go to Doug Baldwin if the Patriots were in zone coverage, Ricardo Lockette if they were in man-to-man.

“The process was solid,” Bevell said. “And I think the play call gave us a great opportunity to be very successful.”

Choosing to throw on second down may have made sense to the coaching staff, but not to the dreamer from North Oakland.

“Not only did they take a ring, a moment — they took a dream,” Lynch said. “That’s a once-in-a-lifetime situation.”

A Seahawks Super Bowl disaster and the unraveling of a would-be dynasty: ‘They took a dream’

We revisit Super Bowl XLIX and its fallout in an excerpt from The Franchise: Seattle Seahawks: A Curated History of the Legion of Boom Era.

www.nytimes.com

 

[chris98251]

They took a communities soul also.

 

[NoGain]

Frazzles my nerves and makes my blood boil almost every time I'm reminded of that moment. Real physical reaction.

 

[MORGULON]

I was in shock. Still might be in shock.

Fat little russy fussy. What a dilrod

 

[NoGain]

Man, if you don't run Lynch and call pass there, you just don't let that ball go there on 2nd down unless your guy is the only one who's got a shot at it.

 

[Hawkamaniac]

Should have thrown it to Bobo ...

 

[AROS]

If you are able to read the entire article it gets worse. Both Carroll and Wilson said they would run the same play again if given the chance.

As you can imagine that didn't go over well.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Sorry, I've always been satisfied with Pete's reason for the decision (not wanting to have a timeout dictated in case the run fails).

It was a gut punch for sure, but thinking a play is a sure thing is cousin to thinking a draft pick is a sure thing and shaping your strategy around it. Not a good foundation.

If the Legion would like to beef, they can ask themselves why they gave up 28 points to the Pats. Not an ideal score to beat. Kinda how I feel about the other Super Bowl we lost - the officiating may have been terrible, but I'm a "let's look at the chances we blew" sort of guy.

Feel free to flame me, but that's just how I feel.

 

[oldhawkfan]

“They took a dream”? More like they gave us a nightmare!

 

[AROS]

If the Legion would like to beef, they can ask themselves why they gave up 28 points to the Pats. Not an ideal score to beat.

To me, it was always pretty easy to tell that it was due to injuries on defense which directly relates to those 28 points. A fully healthy LOB would have bitch smacked that team and like Denver, it likely wouldn't even have been much of a contest.

 

[oldhawkfan]

To me, it was always pretty easy to tell that it was due to injuries on defense which directly relates to those 28 points. A fully healthy LOB would have bitch smacked that team and like Denver, it likely wouldn't even have been much of a contest.

And that would have set the table for a three peat dynasty status. Stupid play call!

 

[AgentDib]

This continues to be the textbook example of Outcome Bias.

It's fine not to like a play call, and for Seahawk fans this is easily the worst outcome one of our plays has ever had. However, if that play had succeeded then no one would be criticizing it years later. In fact, it might have faded into the background compared to other memorable plays from that game, and if remembered at all, it would be celebrated rather than condemned. This is a case where the widespread opinion hinges not solely on the decision itself but is inextricably linked with the outcome it produced.

To me, it was always pretty easy to tell that it was due to injuries on defense which directly relates to those 28 points. A fully healthy LOB would have bitch smacked that team and like Denver, it likely wouldn't even have been much of a contest.

Sure, but that viewpoint should also lessen the resentment that is alluded to in this thread. There are lots of reasons why we lost that game aside from one single play call. On our first drive of the game we couldn't convert a 3rd and 2 with a Lynch run up the middle and had to punt.

 

[NoGain]

Yup. Our D was beat up. And you could expect that Belichick and the GOAT would be exploiting its weaknesses at the time.

I'll never understand why that pass play was even on their play sheet for an end of the game situation like that when they had two weeks to prepare for all such situations. But as most of us know around here, in-game situational decision making/strategizing was PC's weak suit as a HC. It showed up then, and Belichick was waiting in the weeds to pounce on it.

I'll say it till the day I die: Even if you decide to run a pass play there given our timeout situation, you don't call a play where the shortest QB in the league is throwing to his worst part of the field, over/through lineman that towered over him, to a second string receiver, in a crowded area, against a BB defense, with the SB on the line. The risk/reward of doing so was so not worth the risk in that situation it's mind-boggling to me how they could defiantly think and say so otherwise in retrospect.

 

[AROS]

This continues to be the textbook example of Outcome Bias.

It's fine not to like a play call, and for Seahawk fans this is easily the worst outcome one of our plays has ever had. However, if that play had succeeded then no one would be criticizing it years later. In fact, it might have faded into the background compared to other memorable plays from that game, and if remembered at all, it would be celebrated rather than condemned. This is a case where the widespread opinion hinges not solely on the decision itself but is inextricably linked with the outcome it produced.


Sure, but that viewpoint should also lessen the resentment that is alluded to in this thread. There are lots of reasons why we lost that game aside from one single play call. On our first drive of the game we couldn't convert a 3rd and 2 with a Lynch run up the middle and had to punt.

I don't disagree but I was specifically addressing what seems to me a pretty obvious reason why our defense gave up 28 points in that game. Losing players throughout the game - and others already playing really banged up - was a narrative throughout. That seems to be lost on some fans when they bring up that the defense should not have given up 10 points in the 4th quarter which would have made that final play moot.

I agree, they shouldn't have given up 10 points in the 4th quarter, but given the state of injuries to key players, to me at least, it was understandable. To your point, there absolutely were several plays (or lack therof) in the game that contributed to the loss, not just that final, fated play.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

I don't disagree but I was specifically addressing what seems to me a pretty obvious reason why our defense gave up 28 points in that game. Losing players throughout the game - and others already playing really banged up - was a narrative throughout. That seems to be lost on some fans when they bring up that the defense should not have given up 10 points in the 4th quarter which would have made that final play moot.

Then they were doomed from the start. If you're cleared to play, it's assumed that you can do your job. Losing Jeremy Lane mid-game was more of a blow than the big three being beat up. As Doug Baldwin has often said, everyone is beat up by January.

 

[Appyhawk]

Glass half full or half empty?
I think the fact that ML was stopped twice earlier in the game just makes it more likely he would NOT be stopped in this particular game on the line situation.

 

[Streamhawk]

I was in shock. Still might be in shock.

Fat little russy fussy. What a dilrod

So Russ audibled out of Bevell’s play or just went with it? It was an iffy play call at best given the circumstances. Such a bad matchup and NE was stacking the box. So why throw there? Marshawn was wide open - that could’ve solved a lot of problems!
Damn, I’m tired of this discussion 10 years later

 

[Streamhawk]

Then they were doomed from the start. If you're cleared to play, it's assumed that you can do your job. Losing Jeremy Lane mid-game was more of a blow than the big three being beat up. As Doug Baldwin has often said, everyone is beat up by January.

Also losing Avril was massive.

 

[MORGULON]

So Russ audibled out of Bevell’s play or just went with it? It was an iffy play call at best given the circumstances. Such a bad matchup and NE was stacking the box. So why throw there? Marshawn was wide open - that could’ve solved a lot of problems!
Damn, I’m tired of this discussion 10 years later

I am as well. Bad ideas all the way around.

Run the ball . If not , option roll out and the WR is Doug freaking Baldwin.

 

[Hawkstorian]

I always think we gloss over the most important issue. If they'd called a pass and it was incomplete, no one would have an issue. You called a a pass and it was F***** INTERCEPTED. Whether you blame the QB or the WR or the OC doesn't matter. They called a play for their worst offensive player and Russ should have thown it away and Lockette should have just laid down. That's my feeling on the whole thing and I was there.