Why didn't BB call time out?

You trust that your team is more prepared than the other and you don't call a time out which would give the other team more time to get their **** in order.

I think the biggest reason is that because you are ahead by 4, time spent is more of a commodity than time saved. Loosing 40 seconds, means that Seattle has 20 seconds to call 3 plays instead of over 60, more chance for mistakes, more chance to confuse the opponents, more chances that Seattle burns a timeout because they are not ready etc, etc. By calling a timeout, it indirectly sends the message that you are conceding the touchdown, and want to give as much time to Offense to get a field goal. It also lets Seattle look at the defense and plan accordingly, and probably gives them the edge.

The risk obviously is they score on second down, you only have 20 seconds, but 2 timeouts. If they score at 60 seconds, you only have 1 timeout.

At the end he had more faith that the defense would get a stop or two, than his team driving down the field and scoring a field goal.

At the end, the Pats needed a break to go their way (after the Kearse catch), and we have seen last second plays go either way (remember the Sterling Moore past breakup followed by missed field goal?). Odds of fumbling, dropping passes, etc probably are much higher when the game (the ultimate game) is on the line. It worked out, and we call it genius, but I think if he called a time out, then extremely likely Seattle scores.

If he calls time out, Seattle subs their goal line package in and runs in for the score. They can also run on all 3 remaining downs.

No time out, Seattle is forced to pass if they want 3 plays or settle for 2 runs.

Brady had ~1 minute in the last two games vs. the Giants and we already saw how that worked.

Sure, if it doesn't work out then he looks like Carroll looks for calling the play he did. As it turns out, BB out coached him.

Because Billy Bill was on some thug life ****.

Probably to force Carrol to scramble and make a mistake like he did

I, too, still can't fathom why he didn't call time out other than for substitutions. After all, I'm a huge Pats fan and I don't like their chances of stopping Seattle 3 times from within the half yard line.

If you take a time out there then one of two things happens.......

Seattle scores on second down (which gives the Pats maximum amount of time to get a tying score)

Seattle DOESN"T score, Pats THEN let the clock bleed BUT now at least you are counting on making TWO stops (3 and 4th down) instead of putting all your marbles in 3 stops.

While it was happening I absolutely hated watching all those seconds tick off and not using a TO.

But in hindsight I'm glad we didn't, definitely the right move.

Anyone else watch inside the nfl on Showtime tonight?

After Butlers interception Wilson went over to Carroll and asked what happened..Carrol responded he jumped the route.

I have to believe BB knew 100 percent what was coming and trusted his defense to make the play.

I used to agree with this letting them score and saving time to score on our own theory but lately I've come around and don't think it's often a great idea.

How many times has it actually worked?

How many times would teams have been better off just playing it out?

There's something to be said for actually making your opponent make a play under stress and crunched for time.

Good analysis, I agree making a play under that kind of pressure can be very difficult, even the simplest play can go wrong.

That said I think it's worth noting that 31 out of the 32 nfl head coaches probably call time out and, as a result, lose the game there.

TeamFirst said:

Anyone else watch inside the nfl on Showtime tonight?

After Butlers interception Wilson went over to Carroll and asked what happened..Carrol responded he jumped the route.

I have to believe BB knew 100 percent what was coming and trusted his defense to make the play.

Click to expand...

Yes.

Hindsight is 20/20. Looks like a genius move because it worked but I still can't say I agree with the call. If it happened all over again Id like a timeout to be called. It all worked out in the end tho so I'm not complaining.

I was screaming at the TV to call a TO. I thought it displayed an IMMENSE amount fo trust in this defence to A) not call a TO and B) to not just let them score like we did against the Giants to give us enough time to try and get the lead back.

I thought it might be another one of those moments after the catch where we just let them in and it gives as about a minute to simply get within a FG...and we had been moving the ball on them in that quarter.

A couple of years ago and I think we make that call. However I think Belichick has a vast amount of trust in this defence...more trust than he has had in years...and he was confident they could get it done.

pwes said:

This is ******** made up by someone just trying to make excuses.

Click to expand...

Nope.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...equence-headset-communications-issue.1116626/

Welka_fan said:

Can anyone explain the rational behind Bill NOT calling a timeout on seattles final drive?

With 1:06 to go lynch runs to the 1 on first down. Pats have 2 time outs left. If we call one there, we can call one after second down, so as long as seattle scores by/on 3rd down..we leave brady with slightly under a minute to get in fg range to send it to OT. Rough but manageable.

As played, by letting clock tick..if seattle scores brady needs a freakin miracle on final score. So, I can only assume BB really didn't think they were going to score? Did he really like his chances of stopping seattle 3 times from inside the 1??

Big pats fan, obv not hating, trying to figure out because I highly doubt that was just a blunder on belichicks part..it has to have been a conscious decision. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

He had faith in his defenses ability to stop the Seahawks on the goal line and wanted to put the pressure on Seattle to do everything right. Remember, when you are on the goal line, a simple false start puts you back pretty far.

TeamFirst said:

Anyone else watch inside the nfl on Showtime tonight?

After Butlers interception Wilson went over to Carroll and asked what happened..Carrol responded he jumped the route.

I have to believe BB knew 100 percent what was coming and trusted his defense to make the play.

Click to expand...

Butler talked about going over the play in practice. I'm sorry but I don't remember when exactly. It was either during his interview with Edelman from Disney or after he ran around mumbling incoherently after the game. I thought he said that "Bill" showed him how to plant his foot and jump the route.

I was screaming for the Pats to call a time out as the seconds gave way. In retrospect, I was conceding the Hawks score and the Pats wouldn't have enough time to counter. In reality, Belichick was showing his faith in his defense to make the plays to win the game. He aggressively went for the win.

Pat the Pats Fan said:

I was screaming for the Pats to call a time out as the seconds gave way. In retrospect, I was conceding the Hawks score and the Pats wouldn't have enough time to counter. In reality, Belichick was showing his faith in his defense to make the plays to win the game. He aggressively went for the win.

Click to expand...

I think every Patriots fan was screaming for BB to take a timeout.

The entire ethos of Bill Belichick's coaching is to Not waste your time going against a planned Defense. It is why he gameplans and changes the Team's personality every week. BB's approach is anti-thetical to Lombardi, who said, "Here we come, you stop us, if you can. Lombardi wanted to out execute the opponent.

If he were Carrol, BB would not have run into a stacked goal line Defense either, especially as the Pats have some very big DTs and LBs.

BB tries to run when he has the advantage there; and pass when he has the advantage there.

I fully believe that Belichick would have done the same.