jblaze":3iqmu988 said:
The short answer is that against goal line defense and in a 3WR set, that was the right call technically.
We all believe running the ball with Lynch in that situation is the preferable playcall simply because Lynch is Lynch. But technically from a playcall perspective based on formation/personnel grouping, that play call beats that coverage most of the time.
Also the time situation with one timeout meant that if they wanted the ability to run on 3rd and 4th, they had to throw it on second down. Now I don't disagree necessary to throw on 2nd down, but I do disagree with the route. Too close of quarters and too many people around. They could have rolled RW out and went to one of the front/back pylons where only the receiver could make a play if they wanted to "waste" a play as the coaches have said since the game.
If you look at the play, both NE CB's made great plays. Browner blew up the pick so our receiver couldn't pick the other CB and the other CB sold out and went after the ball and beat Lockette to the ball.
All in all, I think Bevell got a little too cute with the scheme and should have just tried to run it down their throats. That is our bread and butter and we got away from our "identify" there and it cost us the SB.
Passing was likely the best option, but that route was absolutely not the best option. They never should have ran a route into traffic. Too many ways it can go wrong. Run the routes into the endzone. Give Russell that option of throwing out of the back of the endzone if nothing opens up, but you don't create a play that you have to throw into traffic in that situation. Maybe in the 1st quarter you can risk it but not in the 4th quarter with seconds left with the Lombardi on the line. It was a bad idea from start to finish.
It's likely that they gave Wilson the option to audible to a run but only if the defense changed up to something other than goal line, but we all know that wasn't going to happen, so realistically there was no audible to be called.