cherdano Posted February 2, 2015 Report Share Posted February 2, 2015 Ok, so I have thought a lot more about this coaching decision, pondered reasons either way, and I have really come to the conclusion that I cannot find any good reason to defend Belichick's decision not to call a timeout right after the Marshawn Lynch run to the one-yard line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Maybe the story is that we usually talk about the less important aspects of coaching, i.e. the parts we can see. The main story is that the patriots were well-prepared for this specific play:https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/02/02/analysis-notebook-super-bowl-xlix-that-play/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrei Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 The play Patriots were not well prepared for? Stopping the power run: they were dead-last in the league.Seattle were second best in running it: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl But yeah, let's run a pass play to Lockette, who has a whooping 18 catches in his 4 year long career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 I rethought this, and realized that of course they can always run the ball on 4th down. So technically they are only forced to pass once, not twice. Still, passing on 2nd down keeps the rush in play on 3rd down, forcing the Pats to defend both on that play. That could make the difference between getting in and not. OK, maybe a slant into traffic wasn't the best choice of passes. Maybe a fade, or something else safer. But I don't think that passing was automatically wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 I rethought this, and realized that of course they can always run the ball on 4th down. So technically they are only forced to pass once, not twice. Still, passing on 2nd down keeps the rush in play on 3rd down, forcing the Pats to defend both on that play. That could make the difference between getting in and not. OK, maybe a slant into traffic wasn't the best choice of passes. Maybe a fade, or something else safer. But I don't think that passing was automatically wrong. SEA thought they were getting exactly the look they wanted to score on the pick play with NE putting 8 in the box to stop the run with 3 CBs on the 3 WRs. The problem as has already been said was that NE (particularly Butler) knew the exact play that was coming when they stacked the receivers. If SEA had thrown in any tiny wrinkle, Butler was selling out 100% to the pick route, so it would have been an easy pitch and catch. Some sports science guys were showing that when the WR planted his foot to cut inside on the slant, Butler was able to react in less than a 10th of a second or something ridiculous. And then on top of that, Butler made an amazingly athletic play to beat the WR to the ball and instinctively shield the ball with his body so that he could make a pretty difficult catch. When the ball leaves Russell's hands, if you watch the play, it looks like it's exactly what they wanted from the play. The break Butler makes on the ball though is unreal. To me, if this were an ATB problem, I've got like 10% on the play call and 90% on pats/butler preparation and execution. Maybe someone can dig up the actual percentages, but I'd guess the difference in win expectancy between pounding ML and throwing there is very small, except of course when NE knows beforehand what the play is going to be, which obv they didn't account for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Also it should be noted on that play that the other SEA WR is supposed to push Browner back into Butler creating the pick, but Browner holds firmly on the line to give Butler a clear path to jump the route. So any number of things could have gone wrong in the pats execution or gone right in the SEA execution and the outcome would be totally different. Can't blame Carroll imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Also it should be noted on that play that the other SEA WR is supposed to push Browner back into Butler creating the pick, but Browner holds firmly on the line to give Butler a clear path to jump the route. So any number of things could have gone wrong in the pats execution or gone right in the SEA execution and the outcome would be totally different. Can't blame Carroll imo.I agree with all your points, disagree with your conclusion. You had a bye in wild-card weekend. You have two weeks to prepare for the superbowl. Shouldn't that leave time to add a wrinkle to what is apparently the goal line play your opponent was expecting? (As you say, it wasn't just one defender who knew what was coming.) Carroll deserves blame - but for bad preparation much more than for the call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Maybe New England was spying on practices again http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Also Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomSac Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 SEA thought they were getting exactly the look they wanted to score on the pick play with NE putting 8 in the box to stop the run with 3 CBs on the 3 WRs. The problem as has already been said was that NE (particularly Butler) knew the exact play that was coming when they stacked the receivers. If SEA had thrown in any tiny wrinkle, Butler was selling out 100% to the pick route, so it would have been an easy pitch and catch. Some sports science guys were showing that when the WR planted his foot to cut inside on the slant, Butler was able to react in less than a 10th of a second or something ridiculous. And then on top of that, Butler made an amazingly athletic play to beat the WR to the ball and instinctively shield the ball with his body so that he could make a pretty difficult catch. When the ball leaves Russell's hands, if you watch the play, it looks like it's exactly what they wanted from the play. The break Butler makes on the ball though is unreal. To me, if this were an ATB problem, I've got like 10% on the play call and 90% on pats/butler preparation and execution. Maybe someone can dig up the actual percentages, but I'd guess the difference in win expectancy between pounding ML and throwing there is very small, except of course when NE knows beforehand what the play is going to be, which obv they didn't account for. So, BB GOAT in other words. If I could go back 10 years in time and draft a team I got Bellichick as a higher pick than Brady. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 OK, maybe a slant into traffic wasn't the best choice of passes.Well yeah, the play call wasn't for a slant into traffic. It was for a slant to a wide open receiver because obviously Kearse was going to pick Butler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Maybe someone can dig up the actual percentages, but I'd guess the difference in win expectancy between pounding ML and throwing there is very small, except of course when NE knows beforehand what the play is going to be, which obv they didn't account for.Over the past 5 years from the 1 yard line: Run: scores 54.1%, turnover 1.5%Pass: scores 50.1%, turnover 1.9% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 My feeling was that Seattle had the time to try 2 quick QB sneaks (plays that won't lose yards and won't turn the ball over) then call their time out and work out what to do on 4th down if they hadn't got in. I also felt Seattle got shafted by the officiating crew, the missed pass interference call on the play earlier in the 4th quarter was criminal. I also feel the center precipitated the offside right at the end with a head bob that exactly resembled the one he normally snapped the ball with, as an ex-NT I'd have been fuming if that happened to me and that might have had something to do with the brawl. Even with that, NE would probably have won had they conceded a safety at that point. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted February 7, 2015 Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 thoughts on 538's hubris of attempting to solve the GOAT argument in a single article? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted February 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 My feeling was that Seattle had the time to try 2 quick QB sneaks (plays that won't lose yards and won't turn the ball over) then call their time out and work out what to do on 4th down if they hadn't got in.I guess I just don't watch enough Seahawks games, but I have never in my life seen Russell Wilson run a QB sneak. And GOAT arguments are just so stupid. Really don't care about that kind of stuff at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted February 7, 2015 Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 I guess I just don't watch enough Seahawks games, but I have never in my life seen Russell Wilson run a QB sneak. The situation called for it purely because you can't lose much on it, it's essentially a free play with no downside. I can't imagine that they don't have one in their playbook even if they don't bring it out often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted February 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 The situation called for it purely because you can't lose much on it, it's essentially a free play with no downside.I dunno, just because Brady never loses yards on this play doesn't mean it will be the same for every QB. You are still snapping the ball back 1-2 yards, and there is nothing about the QB sneak that makes it inherently fumble-immune. It might be less likely just because it is usually such a quick play, but if a defensive tackle manages to shoot a gap and put his helmet on the ball... I think the QB sneak is likely one of the few plays in the book where Wilson's lack of height is a serious disadvantage. Brady can look over his linemen to see exactly where he needs to go. Wilson probably can't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted February 7, 2015 Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 thoughts on 538's hubris of attempting to solve the GOAT argument in a single article?Pretty silly. This kind of post would makes sense in baseball, where WAR has a good theoretical and empirical basis for estimating the value of a player. But even leaving that aside, the "leverage index" is such a random choice... The problem with 538 is that sometimes mathematical models add insights, and sometimes they don't. But once you have set up a site like 538, you have to write a post in either case. I mean, just compare this discussion of the two big end of game coaching decisions with the one by ESPN's most well-known columnist.Bill Simmons' take wins on every aspect - it is more intelligent, more enlightening, more interesting, and more entertaining to read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted February 7, 2015 Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 Yeah that retro diary is hilarious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted February 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2015 Pretty silly. This kind of post would makes sense in baseball, where WAR has a good theoretical and empirical basis for estimating the value of a player. But even leaving that aside, the "leverage index" is such a random choice...Even in baseball people love to forget/ignore that a 2010 replacement player would have been a superstar in 1910. For me, there is really no gain in comparing any modern athlete to any athlete from before I was born. They were different people, they achieved things in a different environment. I wasn't around back then so I don't care. It's highly doubtful that I'll still be watching football in 50 years so why should I care how people are going to think about Tom Brady then (i.e. his "legacy")? It's all so pointless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 I just note it has been announced that the Chicago little league cheated and has vacated the USA wins. 1) I grew up in this area and boundary on the south side2) This organization did not exist when I played.3) I played for Palmer Park I lived here at the extreme upper right side of the map. http://www.chicagoparkdistrict.com/parks/Palmer-Park/#c9uowe8eyv http://www.chicagoparkdistrict.com/parks/Palmer-Park/#ezsokykn8q Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 FWIW, my grand boss is a very passionate football fan who spends a lot of time analyzing games.(He's also very smart so I have reason to believe that he is well informed). Here's a few quick comments that he made. 1. He buys into the "game theoretic" analysis of the play in question. At that point in time Seattle was forced to pass to create uncertainty about pass versus run in future plays. 2. The real criminal offense was Seattle's time management earlier during the drive that forced them into this position 3. The interception was a thing of beauty, however, a lot of credit needs to go to another NE Defensive player who set the play up through his blocking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 Suh to Miami is so scary as a pats fan. ridley/mayo notwithstanding the patriots ran hot with dodging injuries to key players when it mattered last season, but a season with two games each against elite D buffalo and elite D miami is just the thing we don't want to see. wilfork likely out of NE seems like the right move, but man he's a great guy. gonna miss him if he doesn't take a big cut to re-sign. wish him all the best. also gl to MJD. one of the greats, but it was rough watching his corpse in oakland trying to hang on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 Suh to Miami is so scary as a pats fan. ridley/mayo notwithstanding the patriots ran hot with dodging injuries to key players when it mattered last season, but a season with two games each against elite D buffalo and elite D miami is just the thing we don't want to see. wilfork likely out of NE seems like the right move, but man he's a great guy. gonna miss him if he doesn't take a big cut to re-sign. wish him all the best. also gl to MJD. one of the greats, but it was rough watching his corpse in oakland trying to hang on. Just have to hope Suh's suspended for doing something silly when you play them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.