Official Super Bowl XLIX Thread

[pbmax]

[Pugger]

Antonio Freeman revisited.

[pbmax]

http://www.advancedfootballanalytics...medium=twitter

By Brian Burke
01 February 2015
It was 2nd and goal from the 1 with 26 seconds at the snap. SEA had 1 timeout. If SEA runs the ball on 2nd down and fails to score, that means they must call their final timeout to save time for 3rd and 4th down. And that means they must pass on 3rd down for there to be time for a 4th down.

Passing on 2nd down allows SEA the option of running on 3rd down if necessary, and forces the NE defense to respect both options on all potential remaining downs.

Lynch is a beast, no doubt. He was born for that moment. And he would make a great decoy on 2nd down. It was simply an excellent play by NE’s Malcolm Butler, and it was the one outcome that could backfire on SEA’s decision to pass.

The play call itself, I can't account for that. Perhaps it was a go-to play that they felt confident about.

The one flaw here is the assumption that you MUST pass on 3rd down after you call a TO. Percentage wise you want the extra down and shot, but you could catch NE playing pass all the way.

If you are Belichick on 3rd down, 18 seconds left, no Seattle TOs, do you play pass?

[woodbuck27]

I really cannot get any grasp on why members here are taking apart Russell Wilson for this loss.

Did he make the play call? Was Russell Wilson simply doing what he was asked to do on that down?

With 26 seconds on the clock and 2nd and goal from the NE one yard line. Russell Wilson gets called to pass on a slant route to WR Ricardo Lockette. He gets picked by Malcolm Butler and the Pats took over simply needing to run out the clock for a New England win.

Football is a game of inchs. Was it a case of Ricardo Lockette not getting to the ball? Or Clearly... that short pass being just a little out in front? If Russell Wilson had passed into the hands of the receiver maybe it may have been dropped?

Maybe Malcolm Butler had some good hands on an aggressive play and thus the pick?

Did you look carefully on what Russell Wilson did do to even get that ball in that position to possibly win that game late?

No. All you do is judge him on one play and dismiss all he did that was extremely positive in that excellent game.

[Carolina_Packer]

No. All you do is judge him on one play and dismiss all he did that was extremely positive in that excellent game.

2nd guessing is an easy thing to do, but it was the decisive play of the game and in this case, the decisive losing play. Of course the Packers would have some idea of how this feels having squandered a 4th quarter lead of their own.

What gets you beat? Getting cute. Going away from tendencies and not doing what got you there or playing to your strength. If you are wasting a play (Pete Carroll's term) on that second down play, then why not show slant and Russell tucks it and takes the right side of the field and gets the corner. I don't think Wilson gets beat to the corner, but if he can't get to the corner, he can run out of bounds or throw the ball away. That's how you waste a play, Pete. To run a slant to an inexperienced receiver and throwing the ball high and late...that will get you beat.

The Seahawks are more sick today than the Packers were a couple of week's ago. You had the Super Bowl won if you hand the ball to Lynch.

[woodbuck27]

2nd guessing is an easy thing to do, but it was the decisive play of the game and in this case, the decisive losing play. Of course the Packers would have some idea of how this feels having squandered a 4th quarter lead of their own.

What gets you beat? Getting cute. Going away from tendencies and not doing what got you there or playing to your strength. If you are wasting a play (Pete Carroll's term) on that second down play, then why not show slant and Russell tucks it and takes the right side of the field and gets the corner. I don't think Wilson gets beat to the corner, but if he can't get to the corner, he can run out of bounds or throw the ball away. That's how you waste a play, Pete. To run a slant to an inexperienced receiver and throwing the ball high and late...that will get you beat.

The Seahawks are more sick today than the Packers were a couple of week's ago. You had the Super Bowl won if you hand the ball to Lynch.

The powers to be chose to not run the ball. I do feel the star of that play call should have been Marshawn Lynch. That Seattle should have taken advantage of that man's demands to adversity the way the NFL had treated him all week.

That aside...I've looked at that play 20 times.

Russell Wilson threw that ball very well and with some mustard on that throw. I cannot find any fault on that play against Russell Wilson. In that game Russell Wilson was amazing in his execution.

How many here had knowledge of New England CB Malcolm Butler before this game? Before his game winning pick?

What university did he graduate from? When was he drafted? Was he drafted? Where is he on New England's Depth Chart? What position is normal for him as a DB? What was his record as a playmaker in the NFL ... ie how many picks did he have entering that Super Bowl game?

I'll venture to post that...not one member of this board could answer half of those questions before he made that 'Hero Play' yesterday

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-e...-unlikely-hero

Little-known Malcolm Butler an unlikely hero for Patriots

February, 2, 2015 ... 2:25 AM ET

By: Mike Reiss | ESPNBoston.com

My point is that Seattle liked the matchup and former Green Bay Packer Coach Darrell Bevell made the call for a slant pass. Rookie Malcolm Butler (who had zero NFL picks) is lined up in the end zone about seven yards from the goal line. So what went wrong?

This slant is a TD or an incompletion if Ricardo Lockette simply gets his hands up for the catch. I mean his hands moved in 'slow motion'. Lockette might have been more aggressive on that play.

Little known CB Malcolm Butler was aggressive. he made the pick and his team escapes a bullet and wins a close exciting game. That's the end of the story.

Sure it is ! yak yak Yak !

Deon Sanders was being Deion and blowing off after the game and expounding his view that the play call was "the WORST in Super Bowl history". A tad too much emotion? Marshall Falk had no words for that call. Michael Irvin didn't have the intended receivers name right.

I asked myself: How much does NFL.Com pay these guys?

Pete Carroll on the other hand took full responsibility for the loss. Pete Carroll fully explained the reason for that call and his thinking of what the whole series of calls was intended to be including using the one remaining Time Out. Pete Carroll has a ton of class. Pete Carroll's team was (a just maybe?) one made play away from back to back Super Bowl wins.

Every Packer fan should just wish to be where Pete Carroll's team was with :28 let in the fourth Quarter. So close to back to back Super Bowl wins.

[channtheman]

I like Russell Wilson. It's a shame he had to get drafted by the dirtiest team full of thugs. Seriously, you're going to start a fight after the game is "over?" Get some class you low life punks.

[esoxx]

Won $345 tonight. Moving on from stage two, anger.

[smuggler]

New England didn't call a timeout after the first down carry because they were not going to even contest a rushing attempt. If Lynch had been given the ball on second down, the line would have allowed Lynch to score. The timeout is worth more than the time to New England at that point.

Think about it, why was New England in a 4-3 look 2nd and goal from the 1-yard line? They were playing pass all the way because they didn't want anything other than a TD/turnover/incompletion. Had the Seahawks scored a TD, the Pats would have had the ball with 24ish seconds left and all three timeouts, needing only a FG to tie.

[woodbuck27]

New England didn't call a timeout after the first down carry because they were not going to even contest a rushing attempt. If Lynch had been given the ball on second down, the line would have allowed Lynch to score. The timeout is worth more than the time to New England at that point.

Think about it, why was New England in a 4-3 look 2nd and goal from the 1-yard line? They were playing pass all the way because they didn't want anything other than a TD/turnover/incompletion. Had the Seahawks scored a TD, the Pats would have had the ball with 24ish seconds left and all three timeouts, needing only a FG to tie.

That's good analysis.

Seattle's on the 1 yard line and the world was looking for a handoff to Marshawn Lynch.

I wonder if we'll ever know what Bill Belichick's thoughts were on that down/play?

[Bossman641]

New England didn't call a timeout after the first down carry because they were not going to even contest a rushing attempt. If Lynch had been given the ball on second down, the line would have allowed Lynch to score. The timeout is worth more than the time to New England at that point.

Think about it, why was New England in a 4-3 look 2nd and goal from the 1-yard line? They were playing pass all the way because they didn't want anything other than a TD/turnover/incompletion. Had the Seahawks scored a TD, the Pats would have had the ball with 24ish seconds left and all three timeouts, needing only a FG to tie.

How are you coming to this conclusion? The DL fired off the ball on 2nd down. There was no let up in their play. On top of that, NE stayed in a big package and didn't match Seattle's 3 WR look.

I think both Belicheck and Carroll screwed up the ending of that game. Belicheck should have been using the 2 remaining TO to ensure NE had some time remaining. Seattle should have run a safer play. I hate when we run slants from in close. There is too much traffic in there.

[woodbuck27]

How are you coming to this conclusion? The DL fired off the ball on 2nd down. There was no let up in their play. On top of that, NE stayed in a big package and didn't match Seattle's 3 WR look.

I think both Belicheck and Carroll screwed up the ending of that game. Belicheck should have been using the 2 remaining TO to ensure NE had some time remaining. Seattle should have run a safer play. I hate when we run slants from in close. There is too much traffic in there.

Good observations Bossman641.

Here's exactly how New England defended on 2nd and goal @ 0:28 in the game:

'Out of the horses mouth' what Bill Belichick said about that game clinching play ...See 3:25 of this video:

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/02/02/new...dad-super-bowl

[pbmax]

I think both Belicheck and Carroll screwed up the ending of that game. Belicheck should have been using the 2 remaining TO to ensure NE had some time remaining. Seattle should have run a safer play. I hate when we run slants from in close. There is too much traffic in there.

I think the problem was tendency and film study. Because for the briefest of moments, it was open, the DB was well off the LOS. That DB had to crash hard at the snap to be in position. No hesitation at all. When he saw the WR cross to run a slant/flat combo, he took off.

He had to see that on previous Seattle double red zone plays.

[ThunderDan]

I think the problem was tendency and film study. Because for the briefest of moments, it was open, the DB was well off the LOS. That DB had to crash hard at the snap to be in position. No hesitation at all. When he saw the WR cross to run a slant/flat combo, he took off.

He had to see that on previous Seattle double red zone plays.

On the radio this morning they said NE notices that SEA tended to run that play in short yardage formation and had actually run the play in practice this week with the O scoring a TD. They were ready for it during the Super Bowl.

[mraynrand]

On the radio this morning they said NE notices that SEA tended to run that play in short yardage formation and had actually run the play in practice this week with the O scoring a TD. They were ready for it during the Super Bowl.

It doesn't surprise me that Belicheat knew Seattle was running this play in practice. Probably a hidden camera in a deflated ball.

[Bossman641]

I think the problem was tendency and film study. Because for the briefest of moments, it was open, the DB was well off the LOS. That DB had to crash hard at the snap to be in position. No hesitation at all. When he saw the WR cross to run a slant/flat combo, he took off.

He had to see that on previous Seattle double red zone plays.

I agree it was open for a split second. If Wilson had thrown the ball a touch earlier Lockette probably catches it and, at worst, gets tackled just short of the end zone. I just can't believe the Seahawks didn't take advantage of Wilson's legs or Lynch in that situation.

[pbmax]

New England didn't call a timeout after the first down carry because they were not going to even contest a rushing attempt. If Lynch had been given the ball on second down, the line would have allowed Lynch to score. The timeout is worth more than the time to New England at that point.
.

Then why did they tackle him on first down?

And why not call a TO then let them score?

[woodbuck27]

Then why did they tackle him on first down?

And why not call a TO then let them score?

Yup.

1-5-NE 5 (1:06) 24-M.Lynch left tackle to NE 1 for 4 yards (54-D.Hightower).

That 'stop and hack' on Marshawn Lynch by New England's MLB Akeem Ayers was something else. Ayers played very well this season.

[yetisnowman]

Then why did they tackle him on first down?

And why not call a TO then let them score?

It was a super ballsy move by Belicheck to psych them out, Seattle I am sure expected them to call a timeout. When they didn't, all of a sudden 30 seconds ran off the clock. And with one timeout, Seattle really didn't have time to run 3 times without getting in the endzone. I didn't understand it at all at first. But as you said he most certainly wasn't not calling his timeouts to let them score on purpose, that makes zero sense.

[Bossman641]

It was a super ballsy move by Belicheck to psych them out, Seattle I am sure expected them to call a timeout. When they didn't, all of a sudden 30 seconds ran off the clock. And with one timeout, Seattle really didn't have time to run 3 times without getting in the endzone. I didn't understand it at all at first. But as you said he most certainly wasn't not calling his timeouts to let them score on purpose, that makes zero sense.

So Belichick didn't call a timeout in the hopes that Seattle would be psyched out and would botch the next play? Sorry but I'm not buying it. Lynch got tackled with 1:02 left. Seattle changes their personnel from a 2 TE I formation to the 3 WR formation and gets to the LOS at a normal pace. Seattle purposefully ran 30 seconds off the clock to leave as little time as possible remaining.

If Lynch plunges the ball in, Hauschka most likely kicks into the end zone and NE is left with 20 seconds and 2 TO to get in field goal range. Belichick is then left answering questions this morning about why he only left Brady with 20 seconds and 2 TO instead of 55-58 seconds and 1 TO.