SB 49 Belichick non timeout call -- different perspective

[mosslost]

I know everyone hates ESPN but there was an interesting thing on there that made thing differently about Belichick's no timeout call at the end of SB 49.

I often have argued, and get killed on here, that Belichick made a huge mistake there, and just got lucky. "Whatever"

But.. the articile on ESPN gave a reason for why he did not call the time out that I think makes a lot more sense than the usual "Belichick was genius because he forsaw what was going to happen bs" I always here from the homers.

Accord to the writer he believes that Belichick wanted them to RUN, and expected them to, and he expected to stop them, forcing them to call their final timeout. (If of course the Pats stopped them)

IF that had happened, and the Pats held them again, the clock would be running and things would have got kind of nuts. Basically the writer was saying that he was really trying to put the Seahawks in a situation where they might have to pass on THIRD and maybe even FOURTH down by NOT calling the timeout there. (Expecting and hoping of course they stopped them running it in on SECOND down)

What do you think?

 

[TB_Helmet]

Well I was screaming at my TV for him to take a timeout, probably similar to most of us.

In the Do Your Job documentary Belichick said that he thought about taking the timeout but specifically didn't because he looked across the field and saw they were all disorganized.

One of the assistants (Patricia? Forget who exactly) said that he told Belichick that everyone was asking for a timeout and Belichick said "Yeah I know. I'm good". And the assistant said that it was the loneliest moment of his life.

So because that's a great story, it might be revisionist history on the part of Belichick, maybe your theory is right. However, I choose to believe him, since it's one of the greatest coaching moments of his career and I love it.

On the other hand, if the Seahawks had scored and we were left with less time for a desperation drive because he didn't call timeout, Belichick would have gotten crushed for it. So I'm glad it worked

 

[qbno12]

BB said he saw Seattle's sideline and they seemed a bit confused and that he wanted them to waste time. It makes sense for Seattle to throw to save time, since they only had one left. Obviously, they wanted to pass first and then run if pass didn't work. Fortunately for us, butler intercepted it.

BB basically forced Seattle's hand into rushing by not calling a timeout is what I think happened.

What happened in those final seconds can be discussed/debated/argued many different ways. Ultimately, it's a split second decision and it worked for us. If it hasn't worked, BB would be crucified similar to the decision to go for 4th and 2 in Indy few yrs ago.

All that said, you actually read or watch ESPN ?

 

[signbabybrady]

Isn't that what Bill basically said he was doing. I thought he explained that he didn't want to slow it down for Pete and wanted to put the pressure on him to manage things.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Bill won the game of chicken.

Pom Pom was without a head.

He and Bevell had no idea what to do.

Case closed.

 

[TB_Helmet]

Slightly related, we were in Napa the other day for a work thing and our host at one of the vineyards was a Raider fan, and was talking about how Marshawn Lynch had been there recently. I said "Oh you mean Marshawn Lynch who lost to the Patriots in Super Bowl 49?"

The guy said "Sure, but let's make something clear. Marshawn Lynch didn't lose that game. Pete Carroll lost that game."

So I calmly replied "Actually Carroll gets way too much grief for that call. Let's be really clear. Russell Wilson lost that game because he threw an interception on the one yard line. And the Patriots won that game because Malcolm Butler made the best play ever."

And the guy agreed with me! But I think my coworkers started regarding me a little different after that, as they would a stray dog where they're not sure if it's going to attack someone without warning. (Although it turned out some of them were also Pats fans which I hadn't known before; corporate offsites do indeed encourage team building!)

 

[dannydyn]

I know everyone hates ESPN but there was an interesting thing on there that made thing differently about Belichick's no timeout call at the end of SB 49.

I often have argued, and get killed on here, that Belichick made a huge mistake there, and just got lucky. "Whatever"

But.. the articile on ESPN gave a reason for why he did not call the time out that I think makes a lot more sense than the usual "Belichick was genius because he forsaw what was going to happen bs" I always here from the homers.

Accord to the writer he believes that Belichick wanted them to RUN, and expected them to, and he expected to stop them, forcing them to call their final timeout. (If of course the Pats stopped them)

IF that had happened, and the Pats held them again, the clock would be running and things would have got kind of nuts. Basically the writer was saying that he was really trying to put the Seahawks in a situation where they might have to pass on THIRD and maybe even FOURTH down by NOT calling the timeout there. (Expecting and hoping of course they stopped them running it in on SECOND down)

What do you think?

I think it was 4 years ago, and I think we won. That's all I care about. Got Chiefs to worry about!

GO PATS!

 

[Brandon Manning]

Belichick noticed Seattle was disorganized. If he calls time out, there's a chance Seattle changes up the play call. He went with his gut. And he was right. Yes he would've been criticized forever if Seattle scores a TD. But that's why BB is paid the big bucks.

I also remember him calling time out after the Butler pick. He wanted Brady to get them offsides. Worked like a charm too. Had Bennett not jumped offside, Brady may have been forced to take a QB sneak or try a 2 or 3 yard pass.

 

[Hyped]

IMO, it was a "Point Of No Return" decision made.

Julius Caesar once brought some boats filled with soldiers to conquer some Celts....and once his troops hit the beach they saw that they were vastly out numbered...and started to prepare the boats to withdraw. Caesar had the boats burned so there was no going back. I am roughly paraphrasing...and not sure if this is historically accurate (there are similar stories in "Art Of War" and other generals did it in the past too).

I think BB was thinking, "F this...Tom did his job coming back from down 10 with 2 TD drives in the 4th quarter. Our D needs to make a stop here so I am not calling a time out".

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

99 times out of 100, Butler and Lockette collide like that and the ball pops loose for an incompletion. Then it's 3rd down with the clock stopped and a timeout in Pete's pocket to use between 3rd and 4th down if need be, giving him tons of flexibility in those 2 play calls, assuming they were ready to call plays without burning a TO as they did just a few plays earlier.

There is no way BB saw a turnover coming. He went for broke, knowing Seattle had to score a TD and decided the game ends on that half of the field, one way or the other. He simply had no intention of helping Pete out by calling a TO. Major game of chicken going on. Major faith in his D to hold, either by a turnover or on downs.

Regards,
Chris

 

[The Brandon Five]

I think there were a few other factors.

1. The Pats were in goal-line defense. The first time that they had used the particular formation all year, so it would not have been ideal for Seattle to run the ball.
2. Bill knew they had to throw the ball at least once to stop the clock.
3. The team had practiced how to defend Seattle's goal-line plays, so they were prepared for whatever was called.
4. Beastmode was 1 for 5 on the 1 yard line that year.
5. The Pats had already stuffed the run on a 3rd and 1 earlier in the game.

 

[mosslost]

Well I was screaming at my TV for him to take a timeout, probably similar to most of us.

In the Do Your Job documentary Belichick said that he thought about taking the timeout but specifically didn't because he looked across the field and saw they were all disorganized.

One of the assistants (Patricia? Forget who exactly) said that he told Belichick that everyone was asking for a timeout and Belichick said "Yeah I know. I'm good". And the assistant said that it was the loneliest moment of his life.

So because that's a great story, it might be revisionist history on the part of Belichick, maybe your theory is right. However, I choose to believe him, since it's one of the greatest coaching moments of his career and I love it.

On the other hand, if the Seahawks had scored and we were left with less time for a desperation drive because he didn't call timeout, Belichick would have gotten crushed for it. So I'm glad it worked

>>> So because that's a great story, it might be revisionist history on the part of Belichick

This is exactly what that was on the Do Your Job Documentary

 

[BTTA]

I don't understand why Belichick's answer to the question isn't just accepted at face value.

 

[mosslost]

Bill won the game of chicken.

Pom Pom was without a head.

He and Bevell had no idea what to do.

Case closed.

Actually Belichick himself defends Pete's decision to throw on that down all the time. In fact the premise of the article I just read is that what Belichick was hoping would happen did NOT happen. And he did basically luck out. Because if it dropped incomplete, they still had their time out and could run twice. Belichick wanted Pete to run on that down, and Pete threw.

 

[jah]

>>> So because that's a great story, it might be revisionist history on the part of Belichick

This is exactly what that was on the Do Your Job Documentary

The point is Belichick could have embellished for the sake of telling a good story. I don't necessarily agree.

 

[mosslost]

And he was right.

"And he was right"

The premise was that Belichick wanted Seattle to run and expected them to run. he did not call the time out, because if he stopped that run, Seattle would be out of time outs.

People always say Belichick was "daring him to throw" with that obvious RUN D package he had out their for that play.

No. BB wanted them to run and expected them to run, and Pete threw.

 

[mosslost]

The point is Belichick could have embellished for the sake of telling a good story. I don't necessarily agree.

I think BB was full of it on that point. He was expecting a run.

 

[mosslost]

IMO, it was a "Point Of No Return" decision made.

This is totaly not true. He could have called timeout with 1:00 on the clock. If they had run it in with 16 seconds left on the clock it would have gone down in history as one of his worst blunders ever.

 

[TB_Helmet]

>>> So because that's a great story, it might be revisionist history on the part of Belichick

This is exactly what that was on the Do Your Job Documentary

Right, as I said in my post, that's where I saw it. I was giving your OP (which proposes a different theory) the benefit of the doubt.

 

[mosslost]

99 times out of 100, Butler and Lockette collide like that and the ball pops loose for an incompletion. Then it's 3rd down with the clock stopped and a timeout in Pete's pocket to use between 3rd and 4th down if need be, giving him tons of flexibility in those 2 play calls, assuming they were ready to call plays without burning a TO as they did just a few plays earlier.

There is no way BB saw a turnover coming. He went for broke, knowing Seattle had to score a TD and decided the game ends on that half of the field, one way or the other. He simply had no intention of helping Pete out by calling a TO. Major game of chicken going on. Major faith in his D to hold, either by a turnover or on downs.

Regards,
Chris

fair enough, but the point of my OP is that he actually specifically was expecting a run and wanted the run. He was NOT trying to get Pete to pass, because of the HUGE irony, that a PASS was the RIGHT move at that moment, as long as Belichick did not call the time out.

If he had called the time out at 1:00 to save Brady time on the clock, the Hawks would have been able to do anything they wanted for two downs. So Belichick did make the call and it was gutsy as hell, the only difference I am saying is he WANTED them to run the ball and he wanted us to stop it obviously.

That flies in the face of all the "Belichick was daring him to pass". Belichick wanted a stop on a run play, so Seattle called the time out.