Super Bowl XLIX Carroll/Belichick prolepsis

[mosslost]

Only if they'd deliberately let the Seahawks score.


Even if they were gassed, that's still a much better D than Atlanta's. It would've been somewhere around 45-50 seconds with one timeout left to go and, assuming the ball gets put at the 25, at least 40 yards to go for a reasonable shot at a FG. And in that case it would not have been possible to employ the dink-and-dunk strategy that beat the Seahawks D that day with time being of the essence.

Brady was carving them and all they needed was a Field Goal. I never said they would have won, but the odds were much higher if he had called the timeout. As he executed it, if they had run Lynch (and he scored of course) We would have had like 24 seconds instead of 58 or so, huge. And clearly a coaching blunder. A lot of homerism on this obvious issue. I feel like I am debating "Creationists" or something. lol

 

[mosslost]

This is your problem.

In your mind, you are allowing conventional thinking to define right and wrong when the actual situation called for unconventional thinking.

He saw how confused SEA was and saw no need to take a time out and let them off the hook.

You can say all you want BB made the wrong decision but the outcome was exactly what he planned for which was SEA not scoring.

>>He saw how confused SEA was and saw no need to take a time out and let them off the hook.

this is simply ********. And it is just hind site. Belichick describes his own genius well in the documentary. Only problem is it is all folly.

 

[bormio]

Brady was carving them and all they needed was a Field Goal. I never said they would have won, but the odds were much higher if he had called the timeout. As he executed it, if they had run Lynch (and he scored of course) We would have had like 24 seconds instead of 58 or so, huge. And clearly a coaching blunder. A lot of homerism on this obvious issue. I feel like I am debating "Creationists" or something. lol

So you would have let them score - to preserve the 58 seconds?

 

[mosslost]

Luck is part of the game. But in this instance it was an experienced, thoughtful choice (that the odds were better to stay with the defense) by the greatest HC in the History of the NFL based upon his feel, what he saw across the sidelines and what they had practiced for....

the rest of this is just your needle stuck in a warped dip in the vinyl.

>> (that the odds were better to stay with the defense)

Problem is the odds were worse to go the no time out route.

 

[mosslost]

Mistake

1. an action or judgment that is misguided or wrong.
   "coming here was a mistake"
   synonyms: error, fault, inaccuracy, omission, slip, blunder, miscalculation, misunderstanding, oversight, misinterpretation, gaffe, faux pas, solecism;

verb

1. 1.
   be wrong about.
   "because I was inexperienced, I mistook the nature of our relationship"
   synonyms: misunderstand, misinterpret, get wrong, misconstrue, misread More

You keepa using that word, I do no think it means, what you think it means.

>>an action or judgment that is misguided or wrong

Exactly right word. Thank you

 

[mosslost]

So you would have let them score - to preserve the 58 seconds?

Possibly that would be the right move yes. But it is simply more likely, a hand off to Lynch equals touch down.

 

[mosslost]

One of the post game videos covered that moment with the coaches. They were all talking about how cool Belichick was and his "I got this" comment to all of the madness going on.

Not relevant. The coaches were stunned he was not calling a timeout. That is clear listening to Patricia with his eye brows on the matter, many months after the fact. They knew it was nuts.

 

[bormio]

>> (that the odds were better to stay with the defense)

Problem is the odds were worse to go the no time out route.

There is no way to know the percentages - too many variables. Any model makes assumptions that might or might not be correct. Sometimes you coach by feel and experience. We had no great options. BB did not try to have it both ways - he went all in with a single approach.

 

[bormio]

Possibly that would be the right move yes. But it is simply more likely, a hand off to Lynch equals touch down.

If you think that was the right approach (and you can't say maybe - you have to decide) - then I am glad you were not head coach of the Patriots that day.

 

[PF_SU]

Possibly that would be the right move yes. But it is simply more likely, a hand off to Lynch equals touch down.

They had stopped Lynch on 3rd and 2 and 3rd and 1 for no gain earlier in the game. In -and 1/2 situations where the Seahawks ran Lynch that day they were 2/4 in picking up the 1st.

The reality is, there is no "possibly". If you call timeout you must let them score, otherwise it's completely senseless. Stop them on 2nd Down and you are in the same situation time-wise as if you had not called the timeout, only with the difference that the Seahawks now would have not needed to call a pass play on 2nd or 3rd down for time reasons.

Brady was carving them and all they needed was a Field Goal.

The Patriots O beat the Seahawks D by exploiting the underneath stuff. 8 yards here, 4 yards there etc. etc. That would not have worked in an end-game scenario. Patriots would have needed to create chunk plays.

 

[bormio]

They had stopped Lynch on 3rd and 2 and 3rd and 1 for no gain earlier in the game. In -and 1/2 situations where the Seahawks ran Lynch that day they were 2/4 in picking up the 1st.

The reality is, there is no "possibly". If you call timeout you must let them score, otherwise it's completely senseless. Stop them on 2nd Down and you are in the same situation time-wise as if you had not called the timeout, only with the difference that the Seahawks now would have not needed to call a pass play on 2nd or 3rd down for time reasons.


The Patriots O beat the Seahawks D by exploiting the underneath stuff. 8 yards here, 4 yards there etc. etc. That would not have worked in an end-game scenario. Patriots would have needed to create chunk plays.

I think our stuffing Lynch twice affected Seattle's thinking.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Everyone is soo naive and homerish on this issue.

>>He saw how confused SEA was and saw no need to take a time out and let them off the hook.

this is simply ********. And it is just hind site. Belichick describes his own genius well in the documentary. Only problem is it is all folly.

Let me understand your position here.

You are arguing BB completely gaffed the ending of the game by not following standard coaching protocol for timeout usage/situations even though SEA didn't score and NEP won the game.

Overall, I agree with the logic which says that just because the result was achieved, it doesn't mean the process getting there was without flaws.

The problem with that take is we have documented evidence of BB having conversations with his coaching staff and his approach which support his explanation for how he handled the last play of the game.

Again, you can sit back and call us homers and gullible all you want, at the end of the day, BB strategy - while risky, worked.

 

[mosslost]

They had stopped Lynch on 3rd and 2 and 3rd and 1 for no gain earlier in the game. In -and 1/2 situations where the Seahawks ran Lynch that day they were 2/4 in picking up the 1st.

The reality is, there is no "possibly". If you call timeout you must let them score, otherwise it's completely senseless. Stop them on 2nd Down and you are in the same situation time-wise as if you had not called the timeout, only with the difference that the Seahawks now would have not needed to call a pass play on 2nd or 3rd down for time reasons.


The Patriots O beat the Seahawks D by exploiting the underneath stuff. 8 yards here, 4 yards there etc. etc. That would not have worked in an end-game scenario. Patriots would have needed to create chunk plays.

>>The reality is, there is no "possibly". If you call timeout you must let them score, otherwise it's completely senseless.

Not on the first Lynch run on second down. If the Pats had stopped them on that run BB calls his second timeout. Leaving like 54 seconds roughly on the clock. Then you probably

Again, you can sit back and call us homers and gullible all you want, at the end of the day, BB strategy - while risky, worked.

OK. I know we won. lol

 

[Clonamery]

OK. I know we won. lol

Are you sure? I think if you took a poll of people here the results might differ.

 

[Pats2000]

>>an action or judgment that is misguided or wrong

Exactly right word. Thank you

It was wrong how? They won. You didn't answer my question regarding your football pedigree to make such incredible statements of when the potentially best coach ever to participate in the game makes good or bad decisions.

 

[bbobbo]

if the "right" course of action is just to do whatever has the highest odds of success/winning, then teams might as well not have human coaches and just let computer programs decide all of the play calls, timeouts, challenges, etc.
.

 

[PF_SU]

Not on the first Lynch run on second down. If the Pats had stopped them on that run BB calls his second timeout. Leaving like 54 seconds roughly on the clock. Then you probably

Then you are out of timeouts. If Seattle scores on 3rd down you are down to 40-45 seconds, needing at least 40 yards in chunk plays while having to avoid the middle of the field as much as possible. Just about the worst situation to be in against that D.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Did you watch the documentary where he goes through his thinking at the time? How he went through the pro's and con's in real time, and saw the other sideline in disarray and decided to press the issue? How they had Seattle's goal line offense extremely well diagrammed?

The idea that any of us neophytes could even begin to make a judgment about that, from this distance, is just absurd.

It was also the first time they had used a goal line defense with three corners, like, ever. Watch the "Do Your Job" documentary and then try to tell me that the outcome was just dumb luck. They were prepared for that situation.

 

[bormio]

Then you are out of timeouts. If Seattle scores on 3rd down you are down to 40-45 seconds, needing at least 40 yards in chunk plays while having to avoid the middle of the field as much as possible. Just about the worst situation to be in against that D.

If you are going to let them score - do it and get it over. Trying to have it both ways almost certainly guarantees failure.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Possibly that would be the right move yes. But it is simply more likely, a hand off to Lynch equals touch down.

Lynch was 1-for-5 from the 1-yard line in 2014. The Pats had already stuffed him on a 3rd and 1. Not sure what you are basing your level of certainty on, but it's not objective evidence.