NFL Week 21 (Super Bowl XLIX game time thread)

The Game Room
261

Could one not as easily turn it around and say that Seattle’s D did not perform as well because Brady accurately picked them apart and marched down the field for four long TD drives?

I agree that this was not Brady’s greatest game - just watching it you got the feeling that he was playing well but not spectacular, particularly because of those INTs. But the idea that any quarterback could have executed that gameplan is ridiculous. I mean, let’s face it: your beloved Rodgers (who I also love, btw, and is an incredible QB) had two bites at Seattle and came up empty, and that’s not just because the secondary “performed better” against Rodgers. Tom Brady also “performed better.”

262

You could. If you want to ignore the injuries, the interceptions, and the way the secondary played. Brady was accurate, for the most part, but what really “picked them apart” was the YAC by the pass catchers.

I sure am glad that I didn’t say that then. Whew.

263

I wouldn’t have a problem with a pass play there. I have a problem with that pass play there. Something safer than into the middle. Maybe play-action, Wilson out on the edge where he can toss it away if there’s nothing available. A fade to the corner where only his guy can get it*. Plenty of options other than into traffic.

*: just don’t do that fade idea on every play

264

Correct, he saved the game twice in that series. And the effort he made to break up the first pass was really spectacular, even though a lucky bounce negated it.

He’s no Tony Sinclair, though (I doubt I’ll get much argument about that). I would have fallen down in the end zone after making the interception, rather than running it out to the half-yard line.

265

I thought Edelman deserved the MVP.

266

I am not really sure you want to take the least time off the clock, given that more time would leave the other guys with more chances to try to come back.

267

I’m with Quercus on this. The call not only is defensible but it’s a good call. As Quercus and Barnwell mention, Seattle is probably going to get just two attempts to run the ball. Quercus already gave the background on that so I’ll just add this:

On that particular play NE had just three DBs to defend three receivers. One of those DBs was a rookie undrafted free agent. If one assumes that Seattle is going to use one of its three downs to pass the ball isn’t this the perfect setup to try it?

And don’t make the argument that a Lynch run is a definite TD. The previous three (?) drives by the 'Hawks were three-and-out (or close to it). In the 3rd quarter the Pats tackled Lynch for a loss on third down that led to the field goal. I agree that two runs by Lynch is likely a TD but it makes perfect sense for Seattle to maximize their opportunity by attempting a pass.

268

That’s a new one on me.

Throwing it out the end zone might be an ok call if a back corner fade was not available. A pick route into traffic was not.

I guess good/bad is a matter of opinion, but the majority of the opinions (including the educated ones) say that this particular call was not a good one.

And as noted above, even Barnwell said this was a bad call for reasons given above. Quote him all you want, but this part was in the beginning of the article:

[QUOTE=Bill Barnwell]
You will probably never understand why the Seahawks just didn’t hand the ball to Marshawn Lynch in that situation and worry about trying anything else later. Truthfully, neither will I.

I don’t think passing the ball was the right decision, but let me try to put together a case in which it might be a justifiable choice.
[/quote]

So, again, it was a defensible call but not a good one.

Who’s making that argument?

You want to maximize your chances of getting the TD. Unless Lynch broke a leg, the maximizing play is feeding him the ball or maybe a back corner throw. Throwing that pass into traffic was not a maximizing choice at all. Especially in this context, when Pete Carroll said they were playing for 3rd or 4th down and a better alignment anyway and not looking to maximize their time (which also doesn’t make sense, but he just lost a big game, so I’ll give him a break).

And as I myself noted earlier in the thread and you quoted, if he still fails to get the TD, so be it. There are worse ways to lose the Super Bowl than relying on the best RB in the league.

Granted, if the play ended up with a completed pass, nobody would care, but it would have been a bizarre play call in any case.

269

True, but you don’t get YAC without accurate throws. A little behind, a little low, a little high, etc. and those runs after catch don’t happen.

[QUOTE=Hamlet]
I sure am glad that I didn’t say that then. Whew.
[/QUOTE]

You’re right, sorry about that. Here’s what you did say:

[QUOTE=Hamlet]
There wasn’t a single throw that Brady made that couldn’t have been made by a dozen other QB’s.
[/QUOTE]

And you’re right about that, too. Same thing for Wilson. But the point is that Brady didn’t just make a bunch of random good throws. He put them together into two 4th quarter TD drives (13/15 for 123 yds and 2 TDs). The individual throws were nothing magic, I agree. But how many of your dozen could drive down twice against Seattle and get it into the end zone both times to win? Maybe Rodgers. Luck on a great day? Obviously not Manning. Romo would have wet his pants under that pressure. Who else?

Then again, Rodgers couldn’t get it into the end zone twice in the whole conference championship game (or the regular season, for that matter). And I recall Richard Sherman playing with one arm at the end of that game.

270

I was quoting Barnwell’s initial point that Seattle had only two shots at running the ball. I disagree with Barnwell on the final judgement.

I agree that the best chance for a TD is a Lynch run. However, if one agrees with these two statements:

  1. Seattle can only run the ball twice before time runs out.
  2. Two runs and a pass have a better chance of scoring than two runs.

Then the decision to pass is a reasonable one. Now couple that with the play: Seattle got one-on-one coverage by a rookie UFA on a pick-and-slant route. 95% of the time this is either a TD or incompletion. This one time, though, Butler makes a great, one-in-a-thousand break on the ball and intercepts it.

Let’s say Seattle had run the ball twice and the Pats D makes a one-in-a-thousand stand. Then time expires as Seattle hurriedly tries to line up for one last forth-down play. The touts would be hammering Seattle for not running their plays in a way that gave them three shots.

271

As Darryll Royal use ta say, you dance with the one that brung ya. That would a should a been Lynch. That said, as Lynch said, we play football. It’s a team sport.

Here’s to the Seahawks keeping it together and being back next season.

Meantime, the Mariners are supposedto have chance this year.

272

Which is why I’ve repeatedly complimented his accuracy.

You’re taking two drives and ignoring the rest of the game.

The very reason most teams have a Cover 2 plan somewhere in their defensive scheme is for that very reason: it’s difficult to sustain long drives without making a mistake. Brady did very well on those two drives, but he also made mistakes during the game. He was lucky enough that those mistakes didn’t kill his team, and that they were still in the game at the end, so he could make those two drives. Yes, he was a great QB for those two drives, but you’re also ignoring the rest of the game where he wasn’t that great.

273

I didn’t find the call to be particularly horrific. Sometimes you’ve got to zag when the other side thinks that you’re going to zig, and it just so happens that this zag didn’t get the job done. If I had been in charge of calling the plays, though, I think I would have faked a handoff to Lynch and let Wilson run the naked bootleg. I think Wilson would have been able to skip his way into the end zone, what with everyone in the known universe looking for Lynch to have the ball.

274

Nah. The real kick in the gut for Seahawks fans is that we got knocked out without getting the chance to see the BEST we had tried at least once. If the’d run Lynch once and he’d been stuffed, then the ill-fated pass, it would still be devastating, but not as much. All season the Seahawks have been straight ahead. Live by it or die by it. That last play, it was sideways.

275

Relevant article on Slate.

276

Certainly from an emotional standpoint it was more devastating but if Butler was just a step slow it becomes a TD catch. Then everybody is talking about how the Seahawks took advantage of the Patriots defensive alignment and Carroll is a genius for doing the unexpected.

277

I think we’re talking past each other at this point, and in many ways we agree, but since I’m still in the afterglow and enjoying talking about the win, I’ll keep going…

I don’t believe I am ignoring the rest of the game. I’ve already stated in previous posts that prior to the 4th quarter Brady’s game was not spectacular - he was good but inconsistent, looking great on one drive and not great on the next. But I think you might be downplaying his play earlier in the game a little. Prior to the 4th quarter, he led 3 good, long drives that ended in 2 TDs and 1 INT and outside of parts of the 3rd quarter moved the ball well.

But I think you are certainly downplaying the historic nature of the comeback. Fun facts: NFL teams in the SB had previously been 0-29 when heading into the 4th down by 10+ points; also, over the last 3 seasons, the Seahawks were 18-0 when leading by 10+ in the 4th. Even ignoring that the Seahawks have an excellent defense, no other team in history - and no other QB - has ever come back from that in the SB before.

So, yeah, maybe a dozen other QBs could have done as well as Brady through 3 quarters. I won’t argue with that. But perhaps you’d like to take a stab at my question about which of the dozen other QBs could lead those two game-winning TD drives in that situation?

278

Again, you’re cherry picking to make a point. Brady was great during those two drives, and I’m not sure if you’ve caught it yet, but I’ve given him credit for that.

But you don’t get to only look at the good a QB did, and ignore the bad. Brady was fortunate enough that the mistakes he made didn’t cost his team too badly, and that they were still in a position to win in the 4th quarter. But as I’ve said, but for some horrible play calling by Seattle, Brady’s performance wouldn’t have been recognized as anything special. It was the win, a TEAM win, that made Brady’s performance MVP worthy.

279

Brady sure looked like a better quality QB in that game than Manning did in the last one. Of course, one could credit some of that to a shaky secondary for Seattle.

280

There’s another stat out there that its rare for an NFL QB or Russell Wilson (I forget what exactly I heard) to throw an interception from a the one yard line someone would need to check.

ALSO, if Marshawn Lynch had failed on second down, it would have cost Seattle a timeout and they would most likely have had to throw two passes anyway.

Then theres the theory out there that New England had stacked the box on the 2nd down.

I dont know, the thing is, as a coach you have to remember fans only judge you on your failures. If you put Lynch in there on the second down and he fails, and you have to call a time out, then the heat is on Lynch, and as a coach you can easily explain I didn’t want to run him on the 3rd and 4th because if he didn’t make it, I couldn’t stop the clock (which you can if you throw a close to out of bounds pass play that either success or fails).

But maybe Pete Carroll deserves credit for doing what he thought would win the game, not what the fans think.