Kyle Shanahan details play-calling regret in Falcons’ Super Bowl LI loss to Patriots

[Pats1971]

It's funny because I feel like the time has had almost the opposite effect on the Butler interception in 49. Gut reaction at the time was shock that they wouldn't run it, and certainly a lot of people still feel that way. But by backing away from the pure result, you can see a real justification for the decision, and just come to appreciate the preparedness of the Pats defense, the one in a million play made by Butler, the clutch recognition and jamming by Browner, and the gutsy tackle (with a bum shoulder) by Hightower on the previous play. Hindsight has been forgiving to Pete Carroll, and very cruel to Kyle Shanahan (fair or not).

Agree. I mean the thought process is, you run a rub play there, and all year that play had worked, to the point the pats actually practiced against it. It was a go to play, worst case, its incomplete, and the clock stops then they can run and still have a timeout. People way overreacted to it all being on the playcall and forgot what an amazing play had to be made for that to be intercepted. I think media likes to damping execution a lot and just go after a decision because it makes for more talking points than, oh the player played good or played bad. As I said if its a td there, Carroll is a genius, why didnt Bill call a timeout, etc etc. But since it was a pick, Carroll is an idiot, Bill is a genius for not calling timeout. Seattle lost becuase of carroll, hell with everything else that went on in the game.

 

[Pats1971]

if execution is perfect, it shouldn't matter what plays you call............since execution is rarely perfect, you have to consider other things......there's a bunch of coaches on the sideline......it must be that none of them realized that even in the first half, their defense was on the field for 43 plays....their offense was on the field for 19.....they were prime to get steamrolled......they should have seen it and with a 25 point lead, they should have done everything possible to just make the clock keep moving.......they didn't

Thats not what I mean. Its not about execution being perfect. Its about no matter the playcall if the team executes, its a genius call, if they dont, its a bonehead call. The call stayed the same. 25 point lead, had atlanta kept executing they win, just like the week earlier against GB. They kept executing and won in a blowout. Atlanta is a passing team that is what got them to the superbowl. There is no prediction of what will work. You play to win the game....Herm....You can run 50 times in the second half, but the problem is, the run actually has to work, or you are only going to run 10 times becuase you are going 3 and out. One thing you forget, the only reason they were even in fg range was a pass. If they were running before that, they might not have even been in fg range. Remember the play after the catch....they ran the ball, lost a yard, 2nd and 11, Pats probably think they are going to run again, atlanta is thinking, man what if we lose yards again, pats are playing the run. You try to do what your oppenent does not think you are going to do. At some point you have to execute or you lose. Its about players too, not just calls.

 

[VectorPrime]

If you can’t trust your kicker to hit a 40 year field goal in a dome then you messed up somewhere.

 

[denverpatsfan]

Tough times over there. Thought and Prayers for the entire Shanahan family...

 

[Pats1971]

If you can’t trust your kicker to hit a 40 year field goal in a dome then you messed up somewhere.

If you cant trust your MVp Qb to not take a sack......

 

[IllegalContact]

Thats not what I mean. Its not about execution being perfect. Its about no matter the playcall if the team executes, its a genius call, if they dont, its a bonehead call. The call stayed the same. 25 point lead, had atlanta kept executing they win, just like the week earlier against GB. They kept executing and won in a blowout. Atlanta is a passing team that is what got them to the superbowl. There is no prediction of what will work. You play to win the game....Herm....You can run 50 times in the second half, but the problem is, the run actually has to work, or you are only going to run 10 times becuase you are going 3 and out. One thing you forget, the only reason they were even in fg range was a pass. If they were running before that, they might not have even been in fg range. Remember the play after the catch....they ran the ball, lost a yard, 2nd and 11, Pats probably think they are going to run again, atlanta is thinking, man what if we lose yards again, pats are playing the run. You try to do what your oppenent does not think you are going to do. At some point you have to execute or you lose. Its about players too, not just calls.

no.......a 25 point lead with 20 minutes left to play is ALL about play selection and not execution/risk

you have an 8 point lead on the pats 22 with 4 minutes left to play.....you can run the ball 3 times and kick the FG and it is game over

you run for -1, then rather than running for another -1 you decide to throw the ball and get sacked, you're still within FG range and you try to throw again and get called for holding and get yourself out of FG range.....

the problem with 'execution' is that the other side also executes, BUT it is all based on the plays called.....if the defensive playcall is a good match for the offensive playcall, then the likelihood of execution not mattering goes up.

they blew the game with the plays they called

 

[Pats1971]

no.......a 25 point lead with 20 minutes left to play is ALL about play selection and not execution/risk

you have an 8 point lead on the pats 22 with 4 minutes left to play.....you can run the ball 3 times and kick the FG and it is game over

you run for -1, then rather than running for another -1 you decide to throw the ball and get sacked, you're still within FG range and you try to throw again and get called for holding and get yourself out of FG range.....

the problem with 'execution' is that the other side also executes, BUT it is all based on the plays called.....if the defensive playcall is a good match for the offensive playcall, then the likelihood of execution not mattering goes up.

they blew the game with the plays they called

You just showed the case for execution. Sacked...holding call, -1 yards on the run. I mean why do we assume that a run play would not draw a holding call? I have seen too many times teams go into a shell and get very conservative. I promise you, if they had sat on the ball and kicked a fg, and the pats still win, the media uproar would have been "You have the MVP QB and the best receiver in football and you go conservative???" If you do not execute, or the other team executes better, it does not matter the playcall. I mean I saw a lot of bad play calls for the pats in that game. A TE screen? Remember that play? Again, you are assuming a lot of things happen that might not have happened and the reality is, it doesnt matter, because if the outcome is the same, then they get slammed for whatever they did no matter what it is. If They execute and make a td on that drive, they are praised for being agressive, if they are conservative and it doesnt work, they are slammed for being conservative. Fact of the matter is, coaches have to go by the flow of the game, the only reason they were even down there in fg range was the pass. It was still working. By that point, they probably thought Brady made a deal with the devil and they felt they had to put the game away or they were going to lose. Pats made great plays, atlanta didnt in that drive toward the end. I credit the pats for doing that, I am not going to disregard credit to the players based on what you think should have happened 2 years later that may or may not have worked.

You get to the superbowl doing what you do best, you win games by doing that too. You are assuming after the fact because it didnt work. Had it worked, nobody questions it. You go froma genius call to a idiot call based on the execution of the players. Whats the difference is assuming everything would have worked or assuming the atlanta gets a holding call on a run, then fumbles the next play? Because thats what happened when they tried to pass (what they do best)

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

no.......a 25 point lead with 20 minutes left to play is ALL about play selection and not execution/risk

you have an 8 point lead on the pats 22 with 4 minutes left to play.....you can run the ball 3 times and kick the FG and it is game over

you run for -1, then rather than running for another -1 you decide to throw the ball and get sacked, you're still within FG range and you try to throw again and get called for holding and get yourself out of FG range.....

the problem with 'execution' is that the other side also executes, BUT it is all based on the plays called.....if the defensive playcall is a good match for the offensive playcall, then the likelihood of execution not mattering goes up.

they blew the game with the plays they called

It is no more complicated than that.

And it appeared as though he is proud of his pass play call to Sanu that resulted in a holding call. How often do you get a holding call on a running play? Just run the ball. Why did he care if the Patriots stuffed the run? Why is that important? I am lost. Run the ball, get stuffed three times, keep the clock running, kick a field goal and go pick up the Lombardi. That is not complicated.

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

You just showed the case for execution. Sacked...holding call, -1 yards on the run. I mean why do we assume that a run play would not draw a holding call? I have seen too many times teams go into a shell and get very conservative. I promise you, if they had sat on the ball and kicked a fg, and the pats still win, the media uproar would have been "You have the MVP QB and the best receiver in football and you go conservative???" If you do not execute, or the other team executes better, it does not matter the playcall. I mean I saw a lot of bad play calls for the pats in that game. A TE screen? Remember that play? Again, you are assuming a lot of things happen that might not have happened and the reality is, it doesnt matter, because if the outcome is the same, then they get slammed for whatever they did no matter what it is. If They execute and make a td on that drive, they are praised for being agressive, if they are conservative and it doesnt work, they are slammed for being conservative. Fact of the matter is, coaches have to go by the flow of the game, the only reason they were even down there in fg range was the pass. It was still working. By that point, they probably thought Brady made a deal with the devil and they felt they had to put the game away or they were going to lose. Pats made great plays, atlanta didnt in that drive toward the end. I credit the pats for doing that, I am not going to disregard credit to the players based on what you think should have happened 2 years later that may or may not have worked.

C'mon man. Really? Run the ball three times, run the clock, and kick the field goal. The Pats only hope would have been a missed field goal. Play the odds - the field goal attempt was the highest odds of winning - you do not have to be Ernie Adams to know that.

 

[Pats1971]

It is no more complicated than that.

And it appeared as though he is proud of his pass play call to Sanu that resulted in a holding call. How often do you get a holding call on a running play? Just run the ball. Why did he care if the Patriots stuffed the run? Why is that important? I am lost. Run the ball, get stuffed three times, keep the clock running, kick a field goal and go pick up the Lombardi. That is not complicated.

Well the clock would not have stayed running, the pats had 3 timeouts. Second, holding calls get called on runs all the time, and fumbles happen as often as The mvp of the league getting stripped sacked. Execution. If you dont execute, it does not matter. You can easily have committed a holding call and a fumble

 

[Pats1971]

C'mon man. Really? Run the ball three times, run the clock, and kick the field goal. The Pats only hope would have been a missed field goal. Play the odds - the field goal attempt was the highest odds of winning - you do not have to be Ernie Adams to know that.

Actually the hightest odds of winning would have been to score a td there. You are not taking into account a lot of factors, and going what the results were. The pats had 3 timeouts. If they had none, it changes everything. They got down there by passing, they are a passing team and now you are asking them to forget everything they did all season and do something else and hope it works with no mistakes. I will say again, if they sat on the ball, and it failed, all you would hear is, you have the MVP and the best receiver in football, etc etc. You will always be second guessed when it doesnt work.

 

[IllegalContact]

You just showed the case for execution. Sacked...holding call, -1 yards on the run. I mean why do we assume that a run play would not draw a holding call? I have seen too many times teams go into a shell and get very conservative. I promise you, if they had sat on the ball and kicked a fg, and the pats still win, the media uproar would have been "You have the MVP QB and the best receiver in football and you go conservative???" If you do not execute, or the other team executes better, it does not matter the playcall. I mean I saw a lot of bad play calls for the pats in that game. A TE screen? Remember that play? Again, you are assuming a lot of things happen that might not have happened and the reality is, it doesnt matter, because if the outcome is the same, then they get slammed for whatever they did no matter what it is. If They execute and make a td on that drive, they are praised for being agressive, if they are conservative and it doesnt work, they are slammed for being conservative. Fact of the matter is, coaches have to go by the flow of the game, the only reason they were even down there in fg range was the pass. It was still working. By that point, they probably thought Brady made a deal with the devil and they felt they had to put the game away or they were going to lose. Pats made great plays, atlanta didnt in that drive toward the end. I credit the pats for doing that, I am not going to disregard credit to the players based on what you think should have happened 2 years later that may or may not have worked.

You get to the superbowl doing what you do best, you win games by doing that too. You are assuming after the fact because it didnt work. Had it worked, nobody questions it. You go froma genius call to a idiot call based on the execution of the players. Whats the difference is assuming everything would have worked or assuming the atlanta gets a holding call on a run, then fumbles the next play? Because thats what happened when they tried to pass (what they do best)

No….it’s two sides executing

Hightower strip sack…..was it execution or was the play to have the back release rather than block?

same with blocking schemes…..if the offense dials up a play that has the tackle assigned to something other than picking up the outside

You make it sound like execution is 100% on one side…..they’re all pro football players.

And none of this happens if they simply run the ball 3 times from the 22 and kick the field goal. Play selection killed it before the plays even happened. They should have been running the ball to place it in the best spot for the kicker …. Case closed … the falcons gave it away and the pats took the best possible advantage.

 

[IllegalContact]

C'mon man. Really? Run the ball three times, run the clock, and kick the field goal. The Pats only hope would have been a missed field goal. Play the odds - the field goal attempt was the highest odds of winning - you do not have to be Ernie Adams to know that.

That’s what BB would have done

 

[IllegalContact]

Actually the hightest odds of winning would have been to score a td there. You are not taking into account a lot of factors, and going what the results were. The pats had 3 timeouts. If they had none, it changes everything. They got down there by passing, they are a passing team and now you are asking them to forget everything they did all season and do something else and hope it works with no mistakes. I will say again, if they sat on the ball, and it failed, all you would hear is, you have the MVP and the best receiver in football, etc etc. You will always be second guessed when it doesnt work.

2 scores is 2 scores

 

[FCB02062]

why is there always media revisiting other teams' decisions vs the Pats? how none of these **** losers ever ask "what if McDaniels called "this" 2 pt conversion @Denver in 2015 or whenever it was....or "what if Coach Bill played Butler?"...the butler thing was beaten to death locally, but not nationally....Al these shannahan things seem to intimate Atlanta should've, would've won...well, know what, they didn't so **** Off

 

[FCB02062]

so apparently c u c k doesn't pass the censor.....WOW

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Yep. Because Bill has made more often than not great decisions. His teams are also programmed to do the same. I mean I try, and its hard sometimes, to see if a playcall was right regardless of the result. Like I was one of the rare few that thought what seattle did was fine with the pass they threw and the situation of the clock running, only having one timeout and the play they used. Guy just made a great play on the ball, a near perfect play that everything had to go perfect or its a td. If they run there and get stuffed, they have to call a timeout and then they pretty much cant run for fear of the clock running out, so then you get into a must pass and the pats get seattles timeout to think about it. Again had that been a td pass, Everyone is a genius. He outcoached the goat on the play, the cries of why didnt Bill call a timeout, etc etc. Shanny did run in the second half, but they were getting stuffed and the way the pats were scoring on every drive, he got spooked and said hey we are a passing team, we won all year like that and we got the lead in this game like that. Players on the pats just made great plays.

You just allude to it, but IMO the most important thing that happened on the sidelines in that sequence was BB not calling a Time Out..."mmm, I looked over there and something just didn't look right". The most important thing that happened from the sidelines that week was Ernie Adams and BB making Butler and all the corners practice covering that play a couple of times.. In the game situation, Browner stuffs Kearse and Butler "runs to where the ball is going to be."

Like all of you, I've probably watched that play a couple hundred times and two other things stand out to me. One is that Butler knew what the play was from how the Seahawks lined up, but Wilson also tips it by looking over to Lockette during the snap count. The second is the look of disbelief on Lockette after the play...he reaches his hands down like he's wondering where the ball is.

I also agree with the call by Carroll. It should have been a walk-in touchdown, whereas if they lined up for a run, there would have been one guy free to just cover Lynch. And, Hightower had already stopped him the play before. They only had one time out. If the Pats stopped them they would have to call it. That play had been run 60 or so times in the League that year without an INT so at worse they'd have stopped the clock without having to use a TO.

 

[TheRainMaker]

Shanahan and the 9ers will implode this year.

Refuse to address their major weakness in the secondary.

Signed the wrong guy in Armstead who got exposed when he was the main guy. He had an awful season. Buckner makes the All Pro team. Lol.

Drafted a dud so far with the Buckner pick.

Historically bad training staffs.

Jimmy G.

Boom bust pick at QB.

 

[JarOfMayo51]

wow, kudos to those 2 guys for just being relaxed and just honestly discussing their thought process, etc while making insanely critical coaching decisions in huge games

Its just like playing poker, or anything else... You just have to work with the data that you have infront of you and make the best decisions that you can at any given time. The RNG of life, etc is going to get you at some point... I remember being an insane favorite in a major poker tournament I attended, and was almost at final table with huge money, been playing great all night long.. Got some sucker to chase his draws, had a dominant hand at like 94% favorite with river card to go.... and he got it.. I still remember him standing up in the middle of the ****ing poker room, and shouting "I'M THE RIVER KING!!!!"

I was so disgusted and upset lol... Obviously this has nothing to do with football, but i guess im making a pathetic attempt to put yourself in the mindset of these coaches when they try to make these decisions in big games... They're working off of good data, good understanding of their players, their abilities, their scheme, etc... but at the end of the day, its basically a percentage game and sometimes the percentages dont work out for you

Again, obviously the physcality of football is not the same as the complete RNG of poker... so im not trying to equate the 2 in that regard, more just about the decision making process involved and just having to accept the outcomes

I guess this was a really long winded and irrelevant way to say, I enjoyed that video and hearing their sincere responses

Come fight me about it...

(please dont!)

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Shanahan and the 9ers will implode this year.

Refuse to address their major weakness in the secondary.

Signed the wrong guy in Armstead who got exposed when he was the main guy. He had an awful season. Buckner makes the All Pro team. Lol.

Drafted a dud so far with the Buckner pick.

Historically bad training staffs.

Jimmy G.

Boom bust pick at QB.

Add in a really tough division.