Why didn't BB call time out?

The Seahawks were down by 4 and needed a touchdown to win,when you're down by more than 3 point and the clock is running out, you're more likely to run a risky pass play to win. Belichick exploited that and baited the Seahawks to throw. Not calling timeout forced Carroll to think quickly. Belichick sent a defense to stop the run and Carroll counter by calling a pass. I'm just glad it was Butler out there and not Harrington.

It's obvious why BB didn't call a timeout.

1) Formation
BB saw the Seattle formation and knew they prepared for that exact formation. BB couldn't have asked for a better formation to play against.

He didn't want them to run it 3 times.

2) Clock management
If BB calls a timeout with 1 minute left the. Seattle can run 3 running plays into the end zone.
Ie.
Timeout @ 1:00
1 running play
2nd running play at 0:20
Seattle Timeout
3rd running play

Calling a timeout would allow Seattle to run the ball 3 times.

3) Faith
Not calling a timeout showed faith in the defense. That faith forced the Defense to make a play and they made the play.


I also thought he should have called a timeout but after hearing from Butler that they prepared for that exact formation it changed the rationale completely.

he did it to kill off the thousands of clucking, feathers ruffled chicken little fans that have flocked to the Patriots the past 10 years, squawking and bawking their doomsday scenarios non-stop.

Here's their theme song...enjoy, you friggin' little coward backstabbing capons...

Patriots employees clean up after the CL massacre at the end of Super Bowl 49....Ed Winner exclaimed ...just look at all these dead, dumb clucks...finally, some peace and quiet...

Jamesred said:

It's obvious why BB didn't call a timeout.

1) Formation
BB saw the Seattle formation and knew th`ey prepared for that exact formation. BB couldn't have asked for a better formation to play against.

He didn't want them to run it 3 times.

2) Clock management
If BB calls a timeout with 1 minute left the. Seattle can run 3 running plays into the end zone.
Ie.
Timeout @ 1:00
1 running play
2nd running play at 0:20
Seattle Timeout
3rd running play

Calling a timeout would allow Seattle to run the ball 3 times.

3) Faith
Not calling a timeout showed faith in the defense. That faith forced the Defense to make a play and they made the play.


I also thought he should have called a timeout but after hearing from Butler that they prepared for that exact formation it changed the rationale completely.

Click to expand...

Excellent post.

With one little tweak: it was the assistant coaches that recognized the personnel and subbed in Butler, so they need to be credited. But Butler was the one who recognized the formation and knew what was coming out of the stack in front of him.

After thinking about it extensively, I am convinced of another factor, namely that Carroll does not do late game scenarios in practice, and BB would have learned this from Browner.

But BB deserves credit for this whole sequence in that he had the scout team do this particular play on the goal line because he picked it up from film study. On the morning of the SB game, he was reportedly watching the Bucs vs. Seattle from two years ago.

Now that is called leaving no stones unturned.

I wanted them to let lynch score off that first pass at the 2 minute mark, lol.

BB "Well, I looked across the sideline and saw Pete jumping around like a yahoo celebrating, wasting time and thought 'This nitwit might screw this up' and decided not to call a TO."

It seems like there really was no good option for Bill in that situation. If he calls a timeout, he gives Seattle a chance to settle themselves, and though it gives Brady more time on the potential ensuing drive, it would pretty much be conceding that Seattle will score. If he doesn't call timeout, he leaves Brady no time in the event Seattle scores, which was almost inevitable from where they were on the 1 yard line.

So he went with the ballsier choice. He pushed all his remaining chips into the middle of the table, and doubled down on his defense. Went for all or nothing, right there. Turned out to be Legendary.

I still don't know what to believe about this.... But just want to throw out there that I believe BB can pretty much see how a play will evolve based on just the pre-snap formations! I remember from a Sound FX episode from a few years back during a game against the Colts when Manning was driving to win the game and was picked off (I believe it was Sanders), and BB said before the snap something along of the lines of "This what we want". I'm sure that isn't the first time either. It's all based on if the players execute properly and in this case Butler made an amazing play.

Some kind poster reminded me why this wasn't the same situation as the 2012 SB:

Opponent down 2. push the RB into the end zone.

Opponent down 4, try to win.

I'm not going to pretend I have any answers, but couldn't he called the TO AND get the stop?

why are so many still posting that without a BB time out, SEA had to throw the ball once? That is simply not true. Lynch was tackled at the 1 yard line with exactly 1 minute left in the game. If SEA hurries to the line, a 2nd down run play could have been easily snapped with 40-45 seconds left. If stuffed, Carroll calls his last time out with 35 seconds left. They can run again on 3rd down and if stuffed again, easily get a 4th down play off.

So, mostly everyone is saying, BB not calling a time out forced SEA to have to throw the ball..not true. Carroll forced his own hand by not having his team hurry to the line after the Lynch run to the 1 yard line. He was confused and probably cost himself a SB. Not to mention wasting 2 time outs on the final drive...one because he was too busy jumping up and down like a kid screaming "he caught it" instead of getting his team ready for the next play. I also blame Wilson patly for this.

Triumph said:

Yes, BB was banking on a mistake and that's what happened. The pass call was a good one but poorly executed. Wilson threw late and too high. The ball should have been down around the waist. An incompletion there stops the clock.



The Seahawks used that play with success before. I have no problem with the pic play.

If Wilson throws the ball a second earlier Butler cant get his hands on the ball.



Seattle had 3 downs.

Click to expand...

To each of your points:

1) We'll have to agree to disagree on the difference between a "good" call and a "reasonable" call. I'm not among the crowd saying it was the "worst" call ever or even a "bad" call, just that I think he made a reasonable call but had better options. We're not going to change each other's mind on that.

2) Yes, it is a high percentage play, but lower percentage than a run when the pass brings into play the possibility of a completion short of the goal line, a sack (admittedly unlikely because of the quickness of the play, but anything can happen on a shotgun snap, including a bobble or a low/high snap and we can't overlook the fact that the actual outcome was pretty "unlikely" as well) or the ultimate, a pick. That's why BB didn't call a time out and left Carroll with the choice of using all three remaining plays by calling a pass or going run-timeout-run and only using two of his remaining three plays; he bet on his impetuous nature. Wilson executed it poorly in three ways. One he glances for a split second at Kearse and Lockette, telegraphing the play. Butler has said that he picked up on that; if you watch the replay in slow motion you can see it...he looks over. Two, he doesn't throw it back shoulder where Butler couldn't get to it, which is what I think you are saying. Three, he didn't have the instinct to pick up on the fact that the play was broken because Browner jammed Kearse before Kearse could use him to disrupt the route and that he should throw the ball over everybody's grasp. That's another split second decision that he would have to "intuit" more than "think about." I think it's the kind of thing that separates "good" from "great" QB's.

I know they had three downs, but, given where the clock was at the time of the snap, if they went with a run play and it didn't get into the end zone, they would have had to call a time out and would have for all realistic, practical purposes been left with one more play.

Jamesred said:

It's obvious why BB didn't call a timeout.

1) Formation
BB saw the Seattle formation and knew they prepared for that exact formation. BB couldn't have asked for a better formation to play against.

He didn't want them to run it 3 times.

2) Clock management
If BB calls a timeout with 1 minute left the. Seattle can run 3 running plays into the end zone.
Ie.
Timeout @ 1:00
1 running play
2nd running play at 0:20
Seattle Timeout
3rd running play

Calling a timeout would allow Seattle to run the ball 3 times.

3) Faith
Not calling a timeout showed faith in the defense. That faith forced the Defense to make a play and they made the play.


I also thought he should have called a timeout but after hearing from Butler that they prepared for that exact formation it changed the rationale completely.

Click to expand...

Excellent summary. see my post above. i think it's #46 in the thread.

I am party said:

It seems like there really was no good option for Bill in that situation. If he calls a timeout, he gives Seattle a chance to settle themselves, and though it gives Brady more time on the potential ensuing drive, it would pretty much be conceding that Seattle will score. If he doesn't call timeout, he leaves Brady no time in the event Seattle scores, which was almost inevitable from where they were on the 1 yard line.

So he went with the ballsier choice. He pushed all his remaining chips into the middle of the table, and doubled down on his defense. Went for all or nothing, right there. Turned out to be Legendary.

Click to expand...

Nailed it.

PatsFanSince74 said:

I know they had three downs, but, given where the clock was at the time of the snap, if they went with a run play and it didn't get into the end zone, they would have had to call a time out and would have for all realistic, practical purposes been left with one more play.

Click to expand...

that's the problem though, Carroll forced himself to having to run a pass play because he didn't get his team to the line quickly after the 1st down run..either he or Wilson choked. They had plenty of time to run 3 more running plays if they had their crap together. ..situational football. Lynch was tackled with 1 minute to play, next snap with 26 seconds to play...

sambam94 said:

that's the problem though, Carroll forced himself to having to run a pass play because he didn't get his team to the line quickly after the 1st down run..either he or Wilson choked. They had plenty of time to run 3 more running plays if they had their crap together. ..situational football. Lynch was tackled with 1 minute to play, next snap with 26 seconds to play...

Click to expand...

Yeah good call, time issue was self inflicted. I think Carrol couldn't help but let the clock tick, knowing Tom fn Brady was on the sideline waiting for his chance..which ultimately put him in this predicament where one play has to be a pass.

Now that I've seen some good analysis I can see why the TO wasn't called...but you're telling me BB made this analysis and decision on the spot? I mean I guess he had a minute to think it over when seattle called time out, but still. I know he's a master of situational football but this situation was pretty unique.

sambam94 said:

that's the problem though, Carroll forced himself to having to run a pass play because he didn't get his team to the line quickly after the 1st down run..either he or Wilson choked. They had plenty of time to run 3 more running plays if they had their crap together. ..situational football. Lynch was tackled with 1 minute to play, next snap with 26 seconds to play...

Click to expand...

We could go around and around on this and I think we're saying the same thing. I think Carroll expected BB to call a Timeout. BB forced the final sequence. Carroll was not thinking straight. Belichick was.

PatsFanSince74 said:

We could go around and around on this and I think we're saying the same thing. I think Carroll expected BB to call a Timeout. BB forced the final sequence. Carroll was not thinking straight. Belichick was.

Click to expand...

I agree..I think Carroll was definitely expecting BB to call a time out..and give him more time to think. If he did rush his team to the line, then BB would certainly not call a time out though. I think Carroll was also thinking to milk the clock so Brady wouldn't have any time. Lots of things to consider in those precious seconds. Bottom line, great play by Butler, but a better pass and it's a TD..IMO

sambam94 said:

why are so many still posting that without a BB time out, SEA had to throw the ball once? That is simply not true. Lynch was tackled at the 1 yard line with exactly 1 minute left in the game. If SEA hurries to the line, a 2nd down run play could have been easily snapped with 40-45 seconds left. If stuffed, Carroll calls his last time out with 35 seconds left. They can run again on 3rd down and if stuffed again, easily get a 4th down play off.

So, mostly everyone is saying, BB not calling a time out forced SEA to have to throw the ball..not true. Carroll forced his own hand by not having his team hurry to the line after the Lynch run to the 1 yard line. He was confused and probably cost himself a SB. Not to mention wasting 2 time outs on the final drive...one because he was too busy jumping up and down like a kid screaming "he caught it" instead of getting his team ready for the next play. I also blame Wilson patly for this.

Click to expand...

BB did not call timeout to force anything, and I don't think most posters are saying that. He didn't do it partly because he recognized that Seattle wasn't respecting the clock, and partly (my conjecture) because he previously knew that Carroll didn't practice end-game scenarios, and so stood a good chance of messing something up.

You make a good point about Carroll jumping up and down- that shows clearly that he wasn't thinking ahead, or thinking about the next several plays or scenarios.

sambam94 said:

I agree..I think Carroll was definitely expecting BB to call a time out..and give him more time to think. If he did rush his team to the line, then BB would certainly not call a time out though. I think Carroll was also thinking to milk the clock so Brady wouldn't have any time. Lots of things to consider in those precious seconds. Bottom line, great play by Butler, but a better pass and it's a TD..IMO

Click to expand...

Hard to argue with your analysis of the time out situation. So much was going on. My assessment is that BB had decided not to call one and to rely on Carroll's impetuousness, but that's only one observer's guess. Your's is as good as mine.

On the subject of whether a "better pass" would have yielded a TD, though, I'm not so sure. You might well be right: if Wilson puts it on the back shoulder then Lockette might have been able to hold onto it, but the force of the collision with Butler (Lockette clearly didn't see him coming and gets knocked sideways as they both go for the ball within five yards of the line of scrimmage) does leave that in the realm of an unverifiable hypothesis.