Yeah what we thought

[pittpnthrs]

Because the very, very, very high likelihood is that Seattle scores a TD. By calling a timeout you are giving yourself more time when you get the ball back. Burning 35 seconds off and leaving yourself with something like 20 seconds is just plain dumb. He got very very, very lucky!

The likelihood is that they wouldn't have had time to score anyways. It was the right move.

 

[chris98251]

Some good takes in here.

Nobody would spike the ball there. Nobody.

You have 4 downs, 1 time out, a player lined up and set up to destroy the guy that is supposed to shield your receiver and give him route depth in Browner that knew the play, was so big and physical he could take out TE's and body slam or by just chucking take most guys off their feet.

A primary receiver who rarely played, was not a guy that ran routes well let alone crossing routes in traffic, slight of build, watch Butler when he hits him picking the ball off, Lockette is pushed forward with just body contact.

QB that has everything about this play not being any of his strengths.

Spiking the ball and burning 1 or 2 seconds upon recognition of Browner taking a position that allowed Butler to be shielded to attack Lockette before the snap would have given them a chance to reset with the least amount of resource damage.

Years ago Dan Marino did just that in a game.

 

[GemCity]

It was a terrible play call. Someone mentioned it earlier, know your strengths.

Now go find a heatmap that’s shows RWs pass attempts. Middle of the field…wasn’t his strong suit.

There was plenty of time. Pete froze. He was accountable and rightfully expressed it.

No hindsight…I’m giving the ball to Lynch. Perhaps that’s via RPO. But I’m damn sure not passing up the middle.

You always hear that NE knew the play. But NE ‘knew’ we were running too. Which is it?

Pete took accountability. Kudos to him on that. He damn sure should’ve. In the biggest moment in sports, you don’t just let your OC roll with whatever he wants. If that is truly what happened, the blame stills falls squarely in Pete’s lap.

 

[Maelstrom787]

ML gained 4 yards against an 8 man box on the 1st and goal at the 5. So why wouldn't you try it again at the 1?

Beast was killing them all night. You don't pass the ball there, you hammer that $hit in.

Woody Hayes said (yes I just threw up a little in my mouth) three things can happen when you pass the ball and two of them are bad.

The Pats prior to the 5 yard run


The Patriots goal line runstop formation after subbing in more heavies


The Patriots have an 8 on 6 advantage in the box. Every gap is covered on both the inside and outside with a linebacker waiting to fill whichever middle gap Seattle's line attempts to vacate.



Vince Wilfork, Sealver Siliga (who, by the way, would've known Seattle's run plays as a former Seattle DT if you think passing was unforgivable due to Browner), and Alan Branch are on the line.

Siliga and Branch are at the 2i on each of Seattle's guards. They're threatening to absolutely destroy the A gap and they're both 350 pounds.

Vince Wilfork is at the 4i on Okung's inside shoulder. Vince Wilfork has that B gap. He's Vince Wilfork. Vince's 4i alignment puts pressure on Carpenter's outside as well, and he already has a 350 pound man threatening to wreck his inside.

Chris Jones, a 300 pound defensive tackle, is lined up at the 4t directly over Britt.

From there, you have star LB/EDGEs Jamie Collins and Chandler Jones absolutely smothering the C gap on the left with a helpless Luke Willson splitting them.

Rob Ninkovich, a strong off-ball linebacker, is covering the C gap on the right.

If that wasn't enough, yet another great linebacker (a prime Dont'a Hightower at 24 in his third season) is sitting at the second level, ready to further obliterate whichever gap Seattle might foolhardily attempt to go for on the ground.

There's just no good defense for running the ball here from a schematic perspective. Only with the benefit of hindsight can we say "I wish I did the illogical and nearly objectively wrong thing and lost 2 or 3 yards on an ill-advised run play."

 

[Maelstrom787]

It was a terrible play call. Someone mentioned it earlier, know your strengths.

Now go find a heatmap that’s shows RWs pass attempts. Middle of the field…wasn’t his strong suit.

There was plenty of time. Pete froze. He was accountable and rightfully expressed it.

No hindsight…I’m giving the ball to Lynch. Perhaps that’s via RPO. But I’m damn sure not passing up the middle.

You always hear that NE knew the play. But NE ‘knew’ we were running too. Which is it?

Pete took accountability. Kudos to him on that. He damn sure should’ve. In the biggest moment in sports, you don’t just let your OC roll with whatever he wants. If that is truly what happened, the blame stills falls squarely in Pete’s lap.

They didn't know we were running. They just took away any sane option to run.

 

[Maelstrom787]

You have 4 downs, 1 time out, a player lined up and set up to destroy the guy that is supposed to shield your receiver and give him route depth in Browner that knew the play, was so big and physical he could take out TE's and body slam or by just chucking take most guys off their feet.

A primary receiver who rarely played, was not a guy that ran routes well let alone crossing routes in traffic, slight of build, watch Butler when he hits him picking the ball off, Lockette is pushed forward with just body contact.

QB that has everything about this play not being any of his strengths.

Spiking the ball and burning 1 or 2 seconds upon recognition of Browner taking a position that allowed Butler to be shielded to attack Lockette before the snap would have given them a chance to reset with the least amount of resource damage.

Years ago Dan Marino did just that in a game.

Assuming we actually consider the lack of clairvoyance and psychic ability that these players and coaches had at the time, it must be made positively clear that no one who professionally coaches or plays football in any capacity would advise spiking the ball with nothing left on the gameclock when you have 3 attempts left at getting into the endzone.

No one. Literally no one. Not a single person.

It is objectively a terrible course of action.

 

[chris98251]

Assuming we actually consider the lack of clairvoyance and psychic ability that these players and coaches had at the time, it must be made positively clear that no one who professionally coaches or plays football in any capacity would advise spiking the ball with nothing left on the gameclock when you have 3 attempts left at getting into the endzone.

No one. Literally no one. Not a single person.

It is objectively a terrible course of action.

So when teams run the 2 minute drill down the field and spike the ball to stop the clock those professional teams are wrong, making bad decisions, there were like 26 seconds left, a time out, and 4 downs. You had time, spiking kills the clock like hey guess what a 2 minute drill, you reset, like I said, you can go back with same formation but have Kearse step forward and roll right as Browner comes heavy and Lockette clears, Kearse is standing there having coffee as he waits all alone for the ball to get there. You know that is a option out of that play.

 

[SeaWolv]

The Pats prior to the 5 yard run.

The Patriots goal line runstop formation after subbing in more heavies

The Patriots have an 8 on 6 advantage in the box. Every gap is covered on both the inside and outside with a linebacker waiting to fill whichever middle gap Seattle's line attempts to vacate.

Vince Wilfork, Sealver Siliga (who, by the way, would've known Seattle's run plays as a former Seattle DT if you think passing was unforgivable due to Browner), and Alan Branch are on the line.

Siliga and Branch are at the 2i on each of Seattle's guards. They're threatening to absolutely destroy the A gap and they're both 350 pounds.

Vince Wilfork is at the 4i on Okung's inside shoulder. Vince Wilfork has that B gap. He's Vince Wilfork. Vince's 4i alignment puts pressure on Carpenter's outside as well, and he already has a 350 pound man threatening to wreck his inside.

Chris Jones, a 300 pound defensive tackle, is lined up at the 4t directly over Britt.

From there, you have star LB/EDGEs Jamie Collins and Chandler Jones absolutely smothering the C gap on the left with a helpless Luke Willson splitting them.

Rob Ninkovich, a strong off-ball linebacker, is covering the C gap on the right.

If that wasn't enough, yet another great linebacker (a prime Dont'a Hightower at 24 in his third season) is sitting at the second level, ready to further obliterate whichever gap Seattle might foolhardily attempt to go for on the ground.

There's just no good defense for running the ball here from a schematic perspective. Only with the benefit of hindsight can we say "I wish I did the illogical and nearly objectively wrong thing and lost 2 or 3 yards on an ill-advised run play."

I count 6 in the box on 1st and goal and 7 in the box on 2nd and goal. If you're worried about the heavies leave the FB in or better yet run tempo and prevent the heavy package.

Schlereth says you can easily run against an 8 man box:

 

[pittpnthrs]

You have 4 downs, 1 time out, a player lined up and set up to destroy the guy that is supposed to shield your receiver and give him route depth in Browner that knew the play, was so big and physical he could take out TE's and body slam or by just chucking take most guys off their feet.

A primary receiver who rarely played, was not a guy that ran routes well let alone crossing routes in traffic, slight of build, watch Butler when he hits him picking the ball off, Lockette is pushed forward with just body contact.

QB that has everything about this play not being any of his strengths.

Spiking the ball and burning 1 or 2 seconds upon recognition of Browner taking a position that allowed Butler to be shielded to attack Lockette before the snap would have given them a chance to reset with the least amount of resource damage.

Years ago Dan Marino did just that in a game.

So now Wilson should have spiked the ball?

If Wilson spikes the ball, what kind of friction does that set off between he, Bevell, and Carroll? As for recognizing the horrid matchup against Browner, don't you think the coaching staff should have been aware of that matchup to begin with? Best case scenario is Wilson throwing the ball into the stands. Spiking it wasn't even a consideration.

As for Marino, not sure what game your talking about or the context. I'm also sure Marino had more leeway than most QB's.

 

[pittpnthrs]

There's just no good defense for running the ball here from a schematic perspective. Only with the benefit of hindsight can we say "I wish I did the illogical and nearly objectively wrong thing and lost 2 or 3 yards on an ill-advised run play."

You have a RB that has made a career of yards after contact and carrying people on runs and your pointing this out as he had no shot. Games are played every weekend where RB's score against loaded boxes on the goal line so i'm not sure why you think this is any different. If he gets stuffed for 2 or 3 yards, who cares? At least they tried and the ball was in the hands of one of their strength personnel. It also gives the offense more room for when they have to pass. I see no negatives with running the ball against a particulary gassed defense except for a fumble and even that is more acceptable than the worst play call ever. You also have to take heart and determination into effect. I bet those lineman and Lynch would have fought harder for that goal line than they ever have before.

 

[pittpnthrs]

I count 6 in the box on 1st and goal and 7 in the box on 2nd and goal. If you're worried about the heavies leave the FB in or better yet run tempo and prevent the heavy package.

Schlereth says you can easily run against an 8 man box:

Yep, happens all the time.

 

[Ozzy]

The Pats prior to the 5 yard run
View attachment 67248

The Patriots goal line runstop formation after subbing in more heavies
View attachment 67249

The Patriots have an 8 on 6 advantage in the box. Every gap is covered on both the inside and outside with a linebacker waiting to fill whichever middle gap Seattle's line attempts to vacate.

View attachment 67250

Vince Wilfork, Sealver Siliga (who, by the way, would've known Seattle's run plays as a former Seattle DT if you think passing was unforgivable due to Browner), and Alan Branch are on the line.

Siliga and Branch are at the 2i on each of Seattle's guards. They're threatening to absolutely destroy the A gap and they're both 350 pounds.

Vince Wilfork is at the 4i on Okung's inside shoulder. Vince Wilfork has that B gap. He's Vince Wilfork. Vince's 4i alignment puts pressure on Carpenter's outside as well, and he already has a 350 pound man threatening to wreck his inside.

Chris Jones, a 300 pound defensive tackle, is lined up at the 4t directly over Britt.

From there, you have star LB/EDGEs Jamie Collins and Chandler Jones absolutely smothering the C gap on the left with a helpless Luke Willson splitting them.

Rob Ninkovich, a strong off-ball linebacker, is covering the C gap on the right.

If that wasn't enough, yet another great linebacker (a prime Dont'a Hightower at 24 in his third season) is sitting at the second level, ready to further obliterate whichever gap Seattle might foolhardily attempt to go for on the ground.

There's just no good defense for running the ball here from a schematic perspective. Only with the benefit of hindsight can we say "I wish I did the illogical and nearly objectively wrong thing and lost 2 or 3 yards on an ill-advised run play."

The right play for me was Russ on a read to the left because I believe the LB they had playing was terribly slow but that's also hindsight. I have zero problems with a pass play there and always thought a Lynch run wasn't a great idea. He wasn't as dominant in that scenario as people remember either.

 

[chris98251]

So now Wilson should have spiked the ball?

If Wilson spikes the ball, what kind of friction does that set off between he, Bevell, and Carroll? As for recognizing the horrid matchup against Browner, don't you think the coaching staff should have been aware of that matchup to begin with? Best case scenario is Wilson throwing the ball into the stands. Spiking it wasn't even a consideration.

As for Marino, not sure what game your talking about or the context. I'm also sure Marino had more leeway than most QB's.

Oh no friction after the play as it stands ok....

Big deal, Coaches and QB's have heated moments all the time. If they won by using a different play Wilson would have been a Hero even if Marshawn scores.

Obviously, the staff should have known, but the track record of WTF moments is long and storied.

Throwing the ball into the stands requires a lot more time off the clock, but yes, an option.

Marino, Favre, Brady, Montana, Young, Moon, Tarkenton, Manning, Fouts, Stabler, Krieg, Hasselbeck, if they seen a failure in a play about to happen would have called a time out, spiked the ball, thru the ball away, Wilson was not given the authority to stop a play whatever way is needed?

This actually goes back to his weaknesses about lack of recognition then, reading a defense. Having practiced against Browner he is fully aware of his capabilities to blow shit up.

 

[Ozzy]

So now Wilson should have spiked the ball?

If Wilson spikes the ball, what kind of friction does that set off between he, Bevell, and Carroll? As for recognizing the horrid matchup against Browner, don't you think the coaching staff should have been aware of that matchup to begin with? Best case scenario is Wilson throwing the ball into the stands. Spiking it wasn't even a consideration.

As for Marino, not sure what game your talking about or the context. I'm also sure Marino had more leeway than most QB's.

Spiking it when the play looks good and you can't watch everyone and know if Lockette rounded his route or if Kearse did his part seems weird to me too. Just seems like were trying to force a narrative of Wilson sucks because we don't like him while ignoring multiple other issues that went wrong on that play.

 

[chris98251]

Spiking it when the play looks good and you can't watch everyone and know if Lockette rounded his route or if Kearse did his part seems weird to me too. Just seems like were trying to force a narrative of Wilson sucks because we don't like him while ignoring multiple other issues that went wrong on that play.

I don't put him on a HOF pedestal like yourself, are you sure you are not John63.

 

[BeaHUman]

I'll always be in the camp that a pass play was a good call, execution was the issue. I think Russ lead Lockette too much (basically threw right at Butler) and Lockette didn't box out or defend the ball. I can only think how different the outcome if Baldwin was the receiver, he would have at least boxed Malcom out and protected the ball. 2 more downs to give Marshawn the ball, seemed almost a slam dunk (that's what hurts the most).

 

[Maelstrom787]

I count 6 in the box on 1st and goal and 7 in the box on 2nd and goal. If you're worried about the heavies leave the FB in or better yet run tempo and prevent the heavy package.

Schlereth says you can easily run against an 8 man box:

That begs the question: What is even easier to do on an 8 man box?

Passing on them.

Running on an 8 man box is possible, but it isn't smart football to try to out-jumbo a package that sells out to stop the run. Success rates are vastly higher when teams stay in 11 personnel in goal to go situations because there's a multi-dimensional threat from that formation. In jumbo, you're very limited. You can run it, you can do the roll out that tries to create a high low conflict, or you can run basically Spider 2 Y Banana.

It's 8 in the box for the final play. Regardless, if you classify it as 7, you still have 8 men attacking every gap. That was not the case at all on Lynch's 5 yard run. Different personnel and very different alignment, much more aggressively attacking the LOS.

Advocating for rushing into one of the sickest run D packages I've ever seen in my life with a disadvantage in numbers is just... why? Outside of hindsight playcalling, there's very little justification for doing anything other than simply attacking the space vacated by the heavy 8 attacking the LOS. Vince Wilfork, Alan Branch, Chandler Jones and 3 great LBs with a few other fatties... I'm not trying to take them on straight at a numbers deficit.

Sure, again, in hindsight a tempo attack avoids this. At the time though, you would likely want to take your time as to not potentially leave THOMAS EDWARD PATRICK BRADY JR. ALMOST MINUTE ON THE CLOCK WHEN YOU SCORE (and you go up by only 3 points). So like.. hindsight probably not advisable in the position Seattle was in. Next best thing is to attack the matchup their look gives you, not run into it's jaws.

 

[Maelstrom787]

You have a RB that has made a career of yards after contact and carrying people on runs and your pointing this out as he had no shot. Games are played every weekend where RB's score against loaded boxes on the goal line so i'm not sure why you think this is any different. If he gets stuffed for 2 or 3 yards, who cares? At least they tried and the ball was in the hands of one of their strength personnel. It also gives the offense more room for when they have to pass. I see no negatives with running the ball against a particulary gassed defense except for a fumble and even that is more acceptable than the worst play call ever. You also have to take heart and determination into effect. I bet those lineman and Lynch would have fought harder for that goal line than they ever have before.

Pitt,

I get where you're coming from here, but you know just as well as I do that you would've absolutely shat your pants at Pete Carroll if they'd stubbornly run into an 8 man box filled with some of the best run defenders in recent football history, got stuffed, and then lost after dramatically reducing their chances at scoring with that decision, and you would be right to be mad in that scenario.

Also, turnover rate is only slightly less for run plays. There's a heightened chance of a fumble in that type of scenario.

 

[pittpnthrs]

Oh no friction after the play as it stands ok....

Big deal, Coaches and QB's have heated moments all the time. If they won by using a different play Wilson would have been a Hero even if Marshawn scores.

Obviously, the staff should have known, but the track record of WTF moments is long and storied.

Throwing the ball into the stands requires a lot more time off the clock, but yes, an option.

Marino, Favre, Brady, Montana, Young, Moon, Tarkenton, Manning, Fouts, Stabler, Krieg, Hasselbeck, if they seen a failure in a play about to happen would have called a time out, spiked the ball, thru the ball away, Wilson was not given the authority to stop a play whatever way is needed?

This actually goes back to his weaknesses about lack of recognition then, reading a defense. Having practiced against Browner he is fully aware of his capabilities to blow shit up.

I think your laying the blame at the wrong feet.

 

[IndyHawk]

The right play for me was Russ on a read to the left because I believe the LB they had playing was terribly slow but that's also hindsight. I have zero problems with a pass play there and always thought a Lynch run wasn't a great idea. He wasn't as dominant in that scenario as people remember either.

Kind of where I'm at .. If there was a time for him improv or wing it this, was it.
You had Beast open to the left also.. Had he done this we wouldn't be having any
convos on HOF and honestly, I probably am not as hard on him.
Good chance at 3 too if everyone is all in for it but that was a nice failed dream.