A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Flinty_McFlint

Yeah, but then they failed to quote the other part of his analysis that immediately followed the pass/run percentages for the 2014-15 season (and the 5 year period before that), which undercut that reasoning:


The key phrase there, of course, is “in a vacuum.” This wasn’t a vacuum. This was the Seahawks and the Patriots, and while the size of the stage shouldn’t matter, the matchups should. As I mentioned in my Super Bowl preview, this was a matchup specifically built for running the football with Lynch in short yardage. According to Football Outsiders, the Patriots were the worst team in the league in power-running situations and fifth-worst in terms of stuffing the opposition for no gain or a loss. Seattle was the second-best power running team and the sixth-best team at avoiding stuffs. If there was ever a matchup that called for a team to live and die on the back of its running game from the 1-yard line, this was it.

But if they had thrown the ball and failed to complete the pass, the clock would have stopped and they could still use their timeout!

TM

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Yeh. I got to tell you what I would have done. I would have handed it to Mar-shawn fucking Lynch and told him to walk it in. You heard me. Walk. It. In.

Man's a beast!

Here's how you play that. You say, "Marshawn, I want you to take the ball and start walking slowly toward the end zone. When you get to the line of scrimmage, I want you to stop, take out Thurgreed's $500 from your jock strap, wave that McKinley at the television camera and wink, then continue into the end zone, calmly place the $500 on the turf, and spike the motherfucking pigskin on that McKinley so hard that Thurgreed is gonna have to fly to China to get his cash."

That's how you play that.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

You should maybe read a little wider, because there are lots of people also not calling it the worst play in the history of the sport too.

I don't tend to approach reading about the game based on how many differing views I can get. I read whatever articles I read. And I don't stick to any one source. So stop being ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Adder

Bill Barnwell, for example, gets my proxy.

Are you serious? Re-read the very first two paragraphs of that piece. Then re-read the paragraph Flinty just quoted back to Ty. Jesus, re-read the entire piece. He shits all over the decision, even though he's trying to make the case for anything other than handing the ball to Lynch.

Originally Posted by Adder

Here's Brian Burke from Pro Football Analytics.

This is not an analysis. It is simply a discussion of what happens if you pass instead of run. Also, read the addendum.

Originally Posted by Adder

Here's Sam Monson from Pro Football Focus.

This is your best link to argue that it wasn't the worst decision in football history. However, it does nothing to address why running the ball was in fact the best decision Seattle had (or, rather, why this play was preferable to running the ball). If the Patriots want you to throw the ball to your worst receiver and they bait you into doing it because they are terrified of Lynch, does that make it a smart play when you do exactly what they want you to do?

Originally Posted by Adder

Here's way too many words and some number crunching from a smart guy who usually blogs about the Vikings.

I have to admit to not bothering reading this, but will concede that it says a bunch of smart stuff about why the approach wasn't terrible.

Maybe I should rephrase so we can move on. I and almost everyone I know think that the best decision Seattle had was to run the ball with a fucking monster against a team known for its secondary and not its run stopping defense. If you want to maximize your number of chances, sure. Go ahead and run some waste plays (as Carroll calls them). Or, give the ball to your best player and go home with a win.

Originally Posted by Adder

There are lots of way in which the Seahawks' decision making was defensible. The response to which is "but it's Marshawn Lynch."

You know why? Because it's Marshawn Lynch. This is what he's there for. Exactly this.

Originally Posted by Adder

I agree with that response and I would have run the football. But that doesn't make all the actual tactical thinking stupid, dumb or the worst ever.

And yet it is.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

It's easy to say give it to Lynch if you expect a 100% success rate. But that's just stoopid.

Come on. This cannot be your argument.

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

Yeah, it's of no real current relevance except for one coach in common, but take a look at this game-end sequence involving Edgerrin James in 2003, who was at the time considered just about as unstoppable. It can happen.

1st and 2 at NWE 2 Edgerrin James (IND) rushed for 1 yard.
2nd and 1 at NWE 1 Edgerrin James (IND) rushed for no gain.
3rd and 1 at NWE 1 Indy timeout; 00:18 remaining 4th quarter
3rd and 1 at NWE 1 Peyton Manning (IND) pass incomplete
4th and 1 at NWE 1 Edgerrin James (IND) rushed for no gain; turnover on downs.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/playby...30011&period=4

Right. Jesus Christ. You want me to go and find all the times when a run worked in a short-gain situation? Your argument has to be better than this.

TM

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

So I am now being asked to advise the sexual technologies industry. These conflict checks are going to be amusing.

[Flinty_McFlint]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

So I am now being asked to advise the sexual technologies industry. These conflict checks are going to be amusing.

Been there, done that (in 2002 ).

Best deal toy ever--platinum "little something"
Hardest deal toy to explain to the wife and/or display--platinum "little something"
RT Approved Deal Toy -- "little something"

Happy lawyering!

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by notcasesensitive

2.

2.

I 2 these 2s.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Come on. This cannot be your argument.

Right. Jesus Christ. You want me to go and find all the times when a run worked in a short-gain situation? Your argument has to be better than this.

TM

Your view has been "give it to Lynch . . . of course he'd score", which ignores there are other possible outcomes. Yes, of course he has a good chance of scoring. And an even better chance of scoring given two chances. But he wasn't going to get three chances, and Seattle wasn't going to get three chances with Lynch given the time and the timeouts. So what you're really arguing is that two shots with Lynch is better than three shots, two of which are with Lynch and one of which is a pass. But the numbers, as Adder's many links suggest, show that as intuitively obvious that 2 shots with Lynch are better they may not actually be.

There was the same immediate reaction to the Patriots' going for it on 4th and 2 against Indy on their own 25 a few years ago - "how could he do it?" "How crazy is BB?" "Stupidist decision ever!" And then when people looked at the odds it showed it was a pretty close call between going for it and punting and hoping your defense holds.

Data routinely show coaches are overly conservative because of the second-guessing, like this, that occurs. Conservative coaching - Mike McCarthy taking two FGs from the 1 - is why the Seahawks were even in the Superbowl. Sure, the easy answer is give it to Lynch twice, and then the coach can blame the O-line and Lynch for not getting the yard they needed if they don't.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

If anyone wants to question my judgment on any topic, they should know that I saw this in the theater.

TM

2. My Sega PGA Golf handle was Joe Hallenbeck.

Milo just died!

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Flinty_McFlint

Been there, done that (in 2002 ).

Best deal toy ever--platinum "little something"
Hardest deal toy to explain to the wife and/or display--platinum "little something"
RT Approved Deal Toy -- "little something"

Happy lawyering!

I approved!

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

If anyone wants to question my judgment on any topic, they should know that I saw this in the theater.

That movie was a hot mess. You gotta figure even the guys who write Bond sequences were like, “You shoot the guy and he falls into the helicopter blades? TOO MUCH.”

But that scene where he punches the guy’s septum into his brain fucking kicked ass. Bruce Willis was the best action star of the past 30 years, bar none.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

Your view has been "give it to Lynch . . . of course he'd score", which ignores there are other possible outcomes. Yes, of course he has a good chance of scoring. And an even better chance of scoring given two chances. But he wasn't going to get three chances, and Seattle wasn't going to get three chances with Lynch given the time and the timeouts. So what you're really arguing is that two shots with Lynch is better than three shots, two of which are with Lynch and one of which is a pass. But the numbers, as Adder's many links suggest, show that as intuitively obvious that 2 shots with Lynch are better they may not actually be.

There was the same immediate reaction to the Patriots' going for it on 4th and 2 against Indy on their own 25 a few years ago - "how could he do it?" "How crazy is BB?" "Stupidist decision ever!" And then when people looked at the odds it showed it was a pretty close call between going for it and punting and hoping your defense holds.

Data routinely show coaches are overly conservative because of the second-guessing, like this, that occurs. Conservative coaching - Mike McCarthy taking two FGs from the 1 - is why the Seahawks were even in the Superbowl. Sure, the easy answer is give it to Lynch twice, and then the coach can blame the O-line and Lynch for not getting the yard they needed if they don't.

You are really doing quite a dance. And I'm surely not arguing that you always go conservative.*

My argument isn't for running the ball with any team against any team just because it's the end of the game and you're in a short-yardage set. My argument is for giving it to your best player in a situation which plays into his absolute greatest strength. If the teams were switched, I would argue that Brady should be throwing the ball to Gronk. Go down with your best guys doing what they do best. Taking a stupid fucking risk because you want the possibility of an extra down if it doesn't work is just crazy when your best possible chance of scoring is something where you might lose that last down. If there was time for only two plays and they had no timeouts--although I think it would still be crazy to pass when you have the luxury of Marshawn Lynch on your team--I think you have a better argument for trying to force a quick pass.

Here's my exchange with a good friend of mine who is a Pats fan:

Me: Would love to hear your take on the Super Bowl.

Him: Pats dynasty. Is there some alternative view out there?

Me: Can’t take anything away from the Pats. They played a great game. But that call…

Him: I know, I know.

As much as I want to focus on that incredible Tom Brady 4th quarter where he shredded the amazing Seattle defense, and as much as I think the kid deserves a TON of credit for recognizing the formation and jumping in front of that pass, it is really tough to get past that play call. The game was over. Just give the ball to Lynch and watch the confetti fall. Carroll has always been cocky and brash. That decision at the end of the first half if a great example. The smart money kicks the field goal, but he is a swashbuckler and got rewarded for it. There was no need to be a swashbuckler, obviously, at the end of the game, but you cant make a leopard change its stripes. I think he wanted Wilson to be the hero, and at some level, wanted to rub Belichick, and more importantly, Kraft’s nose in his success. Sure, he could have jammed Lynch into the end zone, but a passing TD to win the Super Bowl has more panache.

Burned.
___________

Can't argue with this.

Look, when it comes down to it, when the game is on the line you go to your best possible option. If you truly believe that it made any sense at all to avoid the run in favor of a pass, then we just disagree. I just find it very hard to believe you actually do.

TM

*Hell, I think closers in baseball should be used at the moment in the game when you are most in danger of giving up the lead. If that's the 4th inning with the bases loaded and two outs, bring him in. Why wait to see if you may need him at the end of the game?

I also believe that these idiot coaches who go for two with tons of time left in any game are morons who almost always put themselves in danger of losing a close game. Put the guaranteed point on the board.

So I'm all over the map, admittedly.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

That movie was a hot mess. You gotta figure even the guys who write Bond sequences were like, “You shoot the guy and he falls into the helicopter blades? TOO MUCH.”

But that scene where he punches the guy’s septum into his brain fucking kicked ass. Bruce Willis was the best action star of the past 30 years, bar none.

I love that the running back who PULLED A GUN while he was rushing for a TD was Billy "Tae Bo" Blanks.

Also, Halle Berry at her apex and Damon Wayan's hat:

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

2. My Sega PGA Golf handle was Joe Hallenbeck.

Milo just died!

I know. And no one understands that this disaster:



was just a poor knock-off.

TM

[Replaced_Texan]

FWIW, I think the bigger error was in the 40 second clock burn than the decision to pass. If the intent was really to have use of all three downs, I'm not sure why cutting it so close time wise was a good idea.

I'm not sure if this is the analysis that Thurgreed is looking for or not, but since I'm one of the "why the fuck do you have a Beast Mode if you're not going to use a Beast Mode" people, I'm not persuaded.