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

[notcasesensitive]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I do not understand New England fans. You and Burger are making very little fucking sense.

The chances of Marshawn Lynch, the most physical back in the League (and maybe one of the most physical ever) not gaining 1 yard to win the Superbowl are negligible. You guys won. You are the better team by virture of not being fatally fucking stupid when it counts. What does all this bullshit about past goal line performance and chances of fumbling get you? Enjoy the win.

TM

Agree. It was a colossally bad call, which doesn't make the NE win any less of a win.

Look at the number of NFL wide receivers who tweeted about how bad a call it was if you want proof. If the Giants (who lack Marshawn Lynch) were to pass on 2nd down at the 1 to win the Super Bowl (and I wouldn't put it past them, knowing their play calling), at least they would call a fade route with extremely low chances of interception--Giants receiver gets it or it's out of bounds. That was a bad bet slant when they had 3 plays to get it in from the 1.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Gattigap

Best thing about this open letter to Pete Carroll is that it's almost plausible to imagine Jim Harbaugh actually writing it.

That is sofa king awesome.

TM

[taxwonk]

Y'all talking about some sportin' event?

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I didn't particularly want either team to win. OTOH, I really did want the Seahawks to lose (division rivals and all), so I'm okay with this.

It was a bad play call, badly executed, and a clutch play by Butler. The game came down to that moment, but it wasn't all about that moment -- it was also about the Patriots dealing with Seattle's oh-so-fucking-tough defense and multi-faceted offense, being up in the 4th, and capitalizing on the bad play when it happened.

Seattle could have called a dozen dumb plays against the Broncos last year and still kicked their asses. Saying it was just about a dumb call is like saying that, back in the NFC Championship a couple of years ago, the Niners "deserved" to beat the Giants and "only" lost because of a muffed kick return.

?

I don't think I ever said that the Patriots didn't play a good game. They absolutely did. They put themselves in a position to win and made the play(s) they needed to to secure the victory. I don't think the Seahawks' dumbass call detracts from that victory.

But let's not be ridiculous, either. It was a very stupid call. Knowing what you know about Marshawn Lynch, watching him run over people on the regular, having the understanding that the first person to get to him is almost never capable of bringing him down, and having just watched him get you to the one yard line while running through 3 defenders the play directly before, would you elect to throw a slant? This whole, "We need to make sure we are able to use all four downs if we need to, so let's burn this one" is mind-numbingly ridiculous. Give the ball to your best player, right now, and win the game. If he doesn't get in, do it again, or fake it and have your next best player bootleg it in.

TM

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Yeah. $500 down the drain because Pete Carroll is a dumb ass. But it ain't like I'm a Seahawks fan.

TM

To answer the question:

1 for 2 in SB48:

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...ss_location=DR

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

?

I don't think I ever said that the Patriots didn't play a good game. They absolutely did. They put themselves in a position to win and made the play(s) they needed to to secure the victory. I don't think the Seahawks' dumbass call detracts from that victory.

But let's not be ridiculous, either. It was a very stupid call. Knowing what you know about Marshawn Lynch, watching him run over people on the regular, having the understanding that the first person to get to him is almost never capable of bringing him down, and having just watched him get you to the one yard line while running through 3 defenders the play directly before, would you elect to throw a slant? This whole, "We need to make sure we are able to use all four downs if we need to, so let's burn this one" is mind-numbingly ridiculous. Give the ball to your best player, right now, and win the game. If he doesn't get in, do it again, or fake it and have your next best player bootleg it in.

TM

The only pass play I would have called in that situation would have been play action. If the receiver is wide open - throw it. If not, let Wilson run it.

Please note I would not have called a pass play.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

?

I don't think I ever said that the Patriots didn't play a good game. They absolutely did. They put themselves in a position to win and made the play(s) they needed to to secure the victory. I don't think the Seahawks' dumbass call detracts from that victory.

But let's not be ridiculous, either. It was a very stupid call. Knowing what you know about Marshawn Lynch, watching him run over people on the regular, having the understanding that the first person to get to him is almost never capable of bringing him down, and having just watched him get you to the one yard line while running through 3 defenders the play directly before, would you elect to throw a slant? This whole, "We need to make sure we are able to use all four downs if we need to, so let's burn this one" is mind-numbingly ridiculous. Give the ball to your best player, right now, and win the game. If he doesn't get in, do it again, or fake it and have your next best player bootleg it in.

TM

I didn't think you did, was just responding generally. And I agree it was a very stupid call.

But I do understand why they called a pass play (to stop the clock if it was incomplete, then be able to try a run on the next play and, if that didn't work, use their last time out and try a run on 4th down). It was just a dumb pass play.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

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

To answer the question:

1 for 2 in SB48:

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...ss_location=DR

I love this. So, you're saying they would have had to run it a maximum of 2 times? Okay.

I think each of the posts with all these numbers are ridiculous. If you can't tell me how Marshawn runs for short yardage against the Patriots, against the Patriots at the goal line, against the Patriots at the goal line in the 4th quarter, against the Patriots at the goal line in the 4th quarter at the very end of the game, against the Patriots at the goal line in the 4th quarter at the very end of the game to win the Super Bowl, I think your numbers are useless. Hell, give me the breakdown of the Patriots goal line, short-yardage defense in all these scenarios too.

If you want to say that you think a slant is the right call based on your statistical analysis, please do so. But until you do, you haven't really said anything.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I didn't think you did, was just responding generally. And I agree it was a very stupid call.

But I do understand why they called a pass play (to stop the clock if it was incomplete, then be able to try a run on the next play and, if that didn't work, use their last time out and try a run on 4th down). It was just a dumb pass play.

I find this to be insane. Go with the absolute best play you have to get one yard immediately. Don't plan based on failure, especially when you have a timeout. If you don't get in, call a timeout and then reassess what your best play is based on where you are now and the fact that you no longer have a timeout. Don't try to be cute. This is the Superbowl. Get in the end zone. If you can't get there with Marshawn fucking Lynch, you lose.

TM

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I love this. So, you're saying they would have had to run it a maximum of 2 times? Okay.

I think each of the posts with all these numbers are ridiculous. If you can't tell me how Marshawn runs for short yardage against the Patriots, against the Patriots at the goal line, against the Patriots at the goal line in the 4th quarter, against the Patriots at the goal line in the 4th quarter at the very end of the game, against the Patriots at the goal line in the 4th quarter at the very end of the game to win the Super Bowl, I think your numbers are useless. Hell, give me the breakdown of the Patriots goal line, short-yardage defense in all these scenarios too.

If you want to say that you think a slant is the right call based on your statistical analysis, please do so. But until you do, you haven't really said anything.

TM

I see . . . so we should throw out all the numbers, because we don't have them for the precise situation faced, just supposedly irrelevant analogies, and just go on our (or your) gut. And your gut says that a run in that situation was indisputably the best call, and that any other play call (considering clock, timeouts, Pats defensive alignment, etc.) was totally and utterly unreasonable? Well, not much point in discussing that.

But, really, I don't care. You know I'm a Pats fan, and I'm happy they won. Determining they won "only" because Pete Carroll made the stupidest decision ever, or, in an alternate universe, that the Seahawks won only because Jermaine Kearse made the second most ridiculous super bowl catch ever kind of misses the point of what happened for the first 59 minutes.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

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

I see . . . so we should throw out all the numbers, because we don't have them for the precise situation faced, just supposedly irrelevant analogies, and just go on our (or your) gut. And your gut says that a run in that situation was indisputably the best call, and that any other play call (considering clock, timeouts, Pats defensive alignment, etc.) was totally and utterly unreasonable? Well, not much point in discussing that.

As far as I'm concerned, you and I aren't discussing anything. You keep posting links. Do you think Carroll made the right call or not? If you're saying he did based on your breakdown of Lynch's success in short-yardage scenarios, then actually say it.

If it takes two running plays for Lynch to get in. Like, I said, okay. If you want to be crazy (like Ty) and start arguing about the likelihood of Lynch fumbling on the last play of the Superbowl (like the numbers of short yardage fumbles mean anything in that situation when we all know he'll be holding it tighter than ever before), have at it.

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

But, really, I don't care. You know I'm a Pats fan, and I'm happy they won. Determining they won "only" because Pete Carroll made the stupidest decision ever, or, in an alternate universe, that the Seahawks won only because Jermaine Kearse made the second most ridiculous super bowl catch ever kind of misses the point of what happened for the first 59 minutes.

I don't think I said they "only" won because of the dumbest decision ever. That's how you choose to read it because you think my criticism of Carroll's decision somehow takes away from your win. If that's how you feel, I don't really care. It was an incredibly stupid decision and absolutely everyone with any sense at all has said so. Hell, even the Patriots were wondering why the fuck he would throw the ball there with a man whose nickname is fucking "Beast Mode" ready to go.

If the Seahawks had won and you argued that they were pretty lucky because the ball Butler tipped on a very good defensive play happened to land in Kearse's hands, I sure as hell wouldn't be arguing with you.*

TM

*Although your point about it being the second most ridiculous catch is hilarious if you're referring to the catch made by Tyree as the most ridiculous catch. That catch was amazing and not lucky in the slightest. He went up and got it and brought it down with Harrison doing his best to break it up. Amazing play. Not lucky or ridiculous.

[Atticus Grinch]

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

I see . . . so we should throw out all the numbers, because we don't have them for the precise situation faced, just supposedly irrelevant analogies, and just go on our (or your) gut. And your gut says that a run in that situation was indisputably the best call, and that any other play call (considering clock, timeouts, Pats defensive alignment, etc.) was totally and utterly unreasonable? Well, not much point in discussing that.

But, really, I don't care. You know I'm a Pats fan, and I'm happy they won. Determining they won "only" because Pete Carroll made the stupidest decision ever, or, in an alternate universe, that the Seahawks won only because Jermaine Kearse made the second most ridiculous super bowl catch ever kind of misses the point of what happened for the first 59 minutes.

FWIW, I have a mountain of statistics to show that an argument in which Thurgreed says something was stupid and another person says “no, here are the reasons a person might do that” has a success rate of 0%.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally Posted by did you just call me coltrane?

the only pass play i would have called in that situation would have been play action. If the receiver is wide open - throw it. If not, let wilson run it.

2.

please note i would not have called a pass play.

2.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

FWIW, I have a mountain of statistics to show that an argument in which Thurgreed says something was stupid and another person says “no, here are the reasons a person might do that” has a success rate of 0%.

Your chest all puffed out after your Adder burn? Sit back down, son.

TM

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

As far as I'm concerned, you and I aren't discussing anything. You keep posting links. Do you think Carroll made the right call or not? If you're saying he did based on your breakdown of Lynch's success in short-yardage scenarios, then actually say it.

I think passing in that situation was totally defensible, if not the right specific play call, given one timeout and ~25 seconds. Any running play that doesn't get you in (and there is a chance of that greater than zero, even with Lynch) means they have to use their last timeout, and it means they have to throw on third down (or risk not getting a 4th down play).

Was the slant the best pass play call in that situation? Probably not, because in addition to the risk of interception there was some risk that he could have been tackled before breaking the plane, which makes it the same as a run. Play action with a keeper option has the same problem as a run (hi Coltrane). A fade has neither of those risks, although I'm not sure the receiver matchups for Seattle make that much better than just a spike.

As for the Kearse and the helmet catch, both were ridiculous. And of course they both took skill and athleticism to make.