Seattle play-calling - New England Patriots Forums

OldEnglandPatriot · 02-05-2006, 10:49 PM

[Apologies if this was already discussed in the monster Superbowl thread]

The one thing I thought Seattle did wrong was attempting a number of bombs. (Before the game was getting away from them in the 4th quarter, obviously).

They barely completed a real long pass, but were moving the ball well otherwise. Yet several times they more or less wasted a down going for broke, when they should have just kept moving the chains as they were doing effectively.

Worst example was on a 2nd and 15 around midfield. The long pass was never even close to being completed, putting themselves in 3rd and 15 miracle-required territory, rather than trying to get some yards to leave a manageable 3rd down.

hwc · 02-06-2006, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NEM

And yes, you are right abaout the deep passes, not so much because they were called, moreso for the routes that were run...deep sideline patterns that require absolute perfection...because double coverage is not necessary when the sidleine itself acts as a defender....

I guess you and Bill Belichick will just have to agree to disagree. Belichick said on the pregame show that the key to beating the Steelers is to attack the corners on the outside with deep passes.

If Belichick says that's the weakness of a particular defense, I figure it's probably true.

p8ryts · 02-06-2006, 08:13 AM

While he did a lot of good things, he looked like he was just throwing the ball up for grabs on the deep throws. At the same time, his receivers were not getting any separation. They were getting some against Ike Taylor but not against the corner on the Steelers right side, I think that was Deshea Townsend.

I agree that you need to throw deep against the Steelers but Seattle just didn't seem to have the continuity. I thought they ran decently and should have run right more frequently.

They called the long pass at inopportune times.

Seattle just wasn't ready for prime time. Come to think of it, the NFC is probably not ready for prime time. I think any of the AFC playoff teams including Jacksonville would have beaten them.

***BelichickFan*** · 02-06-2006, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hwc

I guess you and Bill Belichick will just have to agree to disagree. Belichick said on the pregame show that the key to beating the Steelers is to attack the corners on the outside with deep passes.

If Belichick says that's the weakness of a particular defense, I figure it's probably true.

The Patriots have always (in the past two years) attacked the Steelers downfield. Depite what GOM (Grumpy Old Man) says, there is nothing wrong with sideline routes - the problem with Seattle's is Hasselbeck through too many of them out of bounds.

***BelichickFan*** · 02-06-2006, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by p8ryts

Come to think of it, the NFC is probably not ready for prime time. I think any of the AFC playoff teams including Jacksonville would have beaten them.

That's the reason that I was rooting for Pittsburgh, as much as I hated myself for it. Seattle were pretenders and I'm glad they didn't legitimize themselves as much as I hate Pittsburgh winning.

denverpatsfan · 02-06-2006, 08:46 AM

Didn't they absolutely kill the Stealers with short to medium slants in the 1st quarter. Jackson had 5 catches. What happened to those plays later in the game. Very hard to defend those.

I know it has been talked about already, but how do they not get closer to an easier FG at the end of the half with 2 TO's left and the Stealers helping them by calling a couple themselves. Terrible clock management.

This is where you can make the argument that Holgram is overated. If you buy into the fact that Parcells purposely called a terrible game for the Pats in 97 then Holgram isn't really that great of a coach that he is made out to be.

Also helps if the receivers catch the balls instead of dropping them. Maybe we should see if Stevens has an offshore gambling account?

***edzo44*** · 02-06-2006, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NEM

And, if they were inbounds, theywould have been defended or intercepted. That has always been my point,the deep sideline fly is an extremely low percentage play as the receiver has very little room to operate at full speed, the sideline itself is a defender, allowing the secondary to stay in single coverage, and the pass has to be absolutely pin point perfect, whereas an inside post, slant, or crossing,allows the receiver to run at fullspeed, having the advantage over the defender and even if the pass is not perfect, the receiver can stretch, run, or come back for it...not on deep sideline fly patterns....

The play calls were horrible, plain and simple.

Here's Charlie as NEM rips into Holgrem's playcalling:

At least it ain't me this time!

primetime · 02-06-2006, 09:15 AM

The problem was a lack of play action plays. If they had play faked before going deep they could've froze the Pittsburgh safeties who were playing closer to the line to check Alexander, and had favorable one on one matchups against weaker Pittsburgh corners. Everytime they went deep (until the end), they tried to hit smaller receivers who were blanketed because of safety help. At the end, Hasselbeck realized he has a 6'5", 240 lb. option with hands in Joe Jurevicius, who I would love to see be a Patriot next year (though the same could be said for Randle El).

Unfortunately, the Seahawks playcalling on both sides of the ball was horrendous. They didn't bring any extra men on defense, meaning showing blitz then dropping back was completely out of the playbook because there was no blitz, and it meant the Steelers didn't need to keep any guys in tight to pass block, allowing them to spread the field. I called the Randle El reverse simply because there was no way the Steelers call for a big formation like that with one wideout at that point in the game unless they're going for some designed trick play. I'm not sure how Seattle's coaches/players didn't notice the break in the pattern from the 3 wide the Steelers had run all game.

ilduce06410 · 02-06-2006, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NEM

And, if they were inbounds, theywould have been defended or intercepted. That has always been my point,the deep sideline fly is an extremely low percentage play as the receiver has very little room to operate at full speed, the sideline itself is a defender, allowing the secondary to stay in single coverage, and the pass has to be absolutely pin point perfect, whereas an inside post, slant, or crossing,allows the receiver to run at fullspeed, having the advantage over the defender and even if the pass is not perfect, the receiver can stretch, run, or come back for it...not on deep sideline fly patterns....
The play calls were horrible, plain and simple.

IMO in this nfl, coaches sometime call a deep pass just to create a jump ball. they use the old woody hayes reasonong: about 7 things can happen, & 4 of them are good. god i miss the jerry rice slants ane the kellen winslow 20-yard outs. i miss raymond berry and the paul warfield slants. namath-to-sauer. ol'peyton and harrison have a 25-yd out pattern that maybe 2 other QBs in the league have the cannon to throw it: drew bledsoe, and someone else.

that was not the holmgren i remember from green bay. IMO only half the nfl HCs know how to manage their teams and the clock in the last 4 minutes, parcells does, belichick does. jimmuh johnson did, romeo, mike tice, lou saban do. at the other end of the spectrum are herm edwards, jack delrio & Bill Cowher. holmgren made a stupid decicion with about 3 minutes in 1st half. cowher responded with a even stupider one, thus making holmgren look smart. holmgren is what, 10 years older?

captain stone · 02-06-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NEM

And, if they were inbounds, theywould have been defended or intercepted. That has always been my point,the deep sideline fly is an extremely low percentage play as the receiver has very little room to operate at full speed, the sideline itself is a defender, allowing the secondary to stay in single coverage, and the pass has to be absolutely pin point perfect, whereas an inside post, slant, or crossing,allows the receiver to run at fullspeed, having the advantage over the defender and even if the pass is not perfect, the receiver can stretch, run, or come back for it...not on deep sideline fly patterns....

The play calls were horrible, plain and simple.

...who are not fans of the deep sideline fly, for the exact reasons NEM mentioned. That pattern is best executed off play-action, pump-faking, or preferably both. A team also has to be experienced and proficient at it. Holmgren apparantly thought so. However, based on his play-calling, 2-minute drill, and guts, I don't give a rat's ***** what Mike Holmgren thinks anymore.