Dumbest playcall ever....

[Fatbot]

Hometown paper take is pretty good: http://seattletimes.com/html/seahawks/2025601887_brewer02xml.html

"We throw the ball, really to kind of waste that play.

It’s an incomprehensible and inexcusable explanation."

 

[Mojo Ram]

“We had it,” linebacker Bruce Irvin said. “I don’t understand how you don’t give it to the best back in the league on not even the 1-yard line. We were on the half-yard line, and we throw a slant. I don’t know what the offense had going on, what they saw. I just don’t understand.”

“It’s not the right matchup for us to run the football,” Carroll said. “So on second down, we throw the ball, really to kind of waste that play. If we score, we do. If we don’t, then we’ll run it on third and fourth down. Really, with no second thoughts or hesitation in that at all.”

http://seattletimes.com/html/seahawks/2025601887_brewer02xml.html

 

[So Ram]

It was only stupid because it was intercepted. Earlier in the game they went away from Lynch and threw a 3 yard TD to Baldwin.
You asked me if I was serious about what I said, and I still am. I'd take him as OC in a heartbeat.

--Dumb NFL fans
-A play is a play call is a play call.
Seattle has to score a TD 28-24 vs 27-24 in SD game.Big difference.

Maybe hindsight comes into & you feed the beast,but in the end you need a TD & have only so much time.
--That play call does not rush the offense & you are in control of the clock.
---Hindsight being NE are on there heals & Lynch should be able to walk in.You still give NE "20 " seconds to score a field goal.

----What's the NFL rule ,last 10 seconds of a game with a false start & play clock running ? Run off.Game over.

It takes over 10 seconds to tun a play & it is 4 down territory. You have to give yourself the chance of using all 4 of your downs.--Trust the QB(Wilson).
I questioned 6 seconds & no Timeouts to end the half ,more than a pass on 2nd down w/ a timeout and 2 more plays with 20 plus seconds.

 

[RamsesIII]

Interesting stats on Lynch & Seahawks when on 1 yard line during the season.

http://espn.go.com/blog/seattle-sea...wilson-into-a-nightmare?ex_cid=espnapi_public

"This was the 10th time this season the Seahawks had a play at their opponents’ 1-yard line. They had rushed the ball on seven of the previous nine such chances. They scored a touchdown on three of the seven runs and one of the two dropbacks. Lynch had five rushes from the 1-yard line this season for minus-1 yard and one touchdown."

Nonetheless, I would have run the clock down to 35 seconds, then run the ball 3 times if necessary.

 

[PhillyRam]

Key thing was when they burned that 2nd TO. If they would of had two TO's left I think they run it three times. But with one they felt the throw 1st, then they can run it twice if needed with the TO used in between the last two plays.

 

[Marq]

Seahawks take a page out of schotty's playbook. That last Seattle play is the same situation the rams were in in the San Diego game. Why not just run it with lynch? Lol what a play call.

I was thinking exactly that when it happened. Lol

 

[RamsSince1969]

Mike Jones' "The Tackle" will forever be the greatest single defensive moment in Super Bowl history.
But, that INT by an undrafted rookie from a small school, at that moment, that's a close second. And I really really really don't like the Patriots, but, their coach had them mentally prepared. The rookie knew the formation and route, recognized it, gambled and won. If you are a Patriot, Belichick will quiz you if you run into him in the hallway at the practice facility, chow line or walking out to your car. One player describes seeing Belichick coming towards you as "Bone Chilling". Know your enemy front, back and sideways because he is going to drill you about the guys on the other team that are going to be your responsibility on game day that week. It paid off.

 

[Zaphod]

At first I was baffled, but I think they really did have only one time out and 3 more attempts at a touch down. What they did was absolutely logical now that I think about it.

The Patriots were stacking the box and they had three wide-outs. If they run now, they pretty much burn a time-out and a down. If they call a time out and switch out personnel, then their next attempt after that is almost certainly a pass.

This was basically their last attempt at exploiting any element of surprise with time and downs running out. If that ball was thrown better, it was a touchdown, game over, Seahawks win. If if was thrown away, the next to plays are hand offs to Lynch, and at least one of them likely makes it in.

I want to place the blame on Wilson, but this wasn't the first interception of the game, and this is a team game. If you eliminate the interceptions entirely, then this game probably isn't even close.

But in the end, the Patriots really played well and overcame their mistakes and the better team won. I know everyone hates the teams involved, as do I, but it really was a fun game to watch, and it was as close to the 1999 super bowl as anything we've seen in a while, right up to pass call at the end that people will probably question for a long time.

 

[Faceplant]

That was an amazing play bybthe defender. If he doesn't make that read, the WR scores untouched. That said, I would not throw it down there if it were my call. Certainly not to middle of field where it is more likely to be tipped/deflected or intercepted.

 

[dieterbrock]

Darrell Bevell should be fired immediately for that terrible call.
And then, as a sign of revenge, he signs with another team in the division. Anyone still looking for an OC?

 

[jjab360]

27 seconds left with one TO left (I think?). Of course you throw the ball for either the TD or a chance to kill the clock. The slant route is supposed to be a safe pass in that situation, Wilson just read the coverage wrong and the DB made a great play.

It's not a bad playcall, not sure why people think it was.

 

[Win1-4Ned]

In hindsight, I think the play call can be criticized due to playing to Wilson's weaknesses rather than his strengths. He's short, so he's going to likely be more susceptible to having his vision obscured, especially over the middle of the field on short distance. Also, it was a quick throw, so it didn't even give the defense a chance to break down in coverage fearing he might take off. Wilson is much more dangerous as a passer outside the pocket, because the DB's have to respect that he can run. It was just two weeks ago, that they scored on that two point conversion. While there was a high degree of luck and ineptitude by the Packers on that play, it wouldn't have happened if Wilson had thrown it initially from the pocket. Oh, well, one cheater wins and one cheater loses. Just seems to be the way things are in the NFL these days.

 

[FrantikRam]

Some things I really don't understand here.

1. How would the OC get ANY BLAME for this? In that situation, Pete Carrol (and any and every HC) is essentially calling the plays. It's what any halfway decent leader would do. Bevel may have "called" the play, but Carrol had to have signed off on it. This playcall was entirely on Carrol.

2. WHY do people question passing the ball? For as good as Lynch is, they haven't been terribly successful running in that situation. And if he gets stopped for a loss, of which there was a 70% chance IMO, the defense knows you have to pass - and you also would have had to have burned your last time out. Passing the ball on 2nd down was the right call. Calling a slant pass when you get zero coverage and man to man??? that's a good call. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING wrong with the play call here.

3. HOW on earth are people avoiding placing the blame where it should actually be placed???? Wilson blew it. It verified what I already thought: he predetermines what he is going to do on a play, and when it's not there, he either holds the ball or throws a pick. He is not a $20mi/year QB, and it cracks me up that he will be paid as such. I love it.

The real reason they lost, plain and simple: their players didn't execute, and they didn't win, on the most important play of the season.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Nice call there, Pete. You're a genius.

Therein lies the problem... he (Carroll) really does think he's a genius.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Ramhusker said: ↑
Yeah, but I'm thinking he would of scored the first time. Then this thread wouldn't exist. We'd all be choking on that hideous combo of greens and blues they got going on in Seattle until draft day.

And I'm all for the unpredictable. I may have called a fake to Lynch and let Wilson bootleg it to the corner or loft it to a TE in the corner. It still would of been a run call first though. The 100 out of 100 comment is just my confidence of Lynch caving somebody's sternum in to cross the goal line in that situation.

I would have too.

The more I watch that play though, it was really well designed. Stacked receivers with an all-out blitz and only one defender to beat.
If that ball was thrown just a couple of inches more inside, and a little lower, game over.

I didn't have a problem with passing, per se.

But it was a risky type of pass, IMO.

Right over the middle, where bodies are most concentrated and bated balls occur, etc.

Throw it? OK, but maybe have Lynch fake it right up the gut and then pass... or, better yet, roll out and pass.

Pass = bad? No
Pass in traffic over the middle = bad? Yes, IMO

 

[-X-]

Throw it? OK, but maybe have Lynch fake it right up the gut and then pass... or, better yet, roll out and pass.

Pass = bad? No
Pass in traffic over the middle = bad? Yes, IMO

That's fair. It was man coverage and there was only one guy for Lockette to beat, so I don't think it was a matter of the throwing area being congested. It was just one of those plays where if the ball was down and left by about 2 inches, it's a TD. Or, like Bevell said, if Lockette makes more of an effort to out-muscle his defender, it's also a TD. That said, like you, I would have run the naked boot or even hit Lynch in the flat. There was some pretty good blocking going on over there too.

 

[Rmfnlt]

That's fair. It was man coverage and there was only one guy for Lockette to beat, so I don't think it was a matter of the throwing area being congested. It was just one of those plays where if the ball was down and left by about 2 inches, it's a TD. Or, like Bevell said, if Lockette makes more of an effort to out-muscle his defender, it's also a TD. That said, like you, I would have run the naked boot or even hit Lynch in the flat. There was some pretty good blocking going on over there too.

Yeah... it was very close to being successful.

The kid (defender) made a play.

As far as suggesting Lockette didn't out-muscle... that goes hand in hand with the "just a little off" throw.
Seemed to me that, because the throw was a little off, the defender had a better shot at it than Lockette... in fact, Lockette got blown up on the play.

I don't think there was much Lockette could do with that throw.

And Bevell even suggesting that is weak, IMO.

 

[Dieter the Brock]

I hate to say it
but I think that Butler just made one helluva play - he destroyed Locket with pure will and brute force
I thought it was a good call actually in that situation really if you consider the down, the clock, and the coverage
If Locket had just been able to match Butler's desire, I think you'd have a whole different outcome this morning

 

[-X-]

Yeah... it was very close to being successful.

The kid (defender) made a play.

As far as suggesting Lockette didn't out-muscle... that goes hand in hand with the "just a little off" throw.
Seemed to me that, because the throw was a little off, the defender had a better shot at it than Lockette... in fact, Lockette got blown up on the play.

I don't think there was much Lockette could do with that throw.

And Bevell even suggesting that is weak, IMO.

Could be. Or, Lockette could have matched (or exceeded) Butler's intensity on the play.

 

[-X-]

Now I have to wonder if the seahawks ran that play during their walkthroughs before the game....