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

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

First, I think Carroll is covering for a call made by his offensive coordinator, which is classy of him.

Carroll doesn't have a classy bone in his body. This was like having Alec Baldwin fight Dick Cheney.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

Y'all talking about some sportin' event?

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!

[Flinty_McFlint]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

That's fine, but what I quoted was a block quote from Barnwell in Grantland, as quoted in that Slate thing.

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.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

More awesomeness. Despite an overwhelming number of people calling it a tremendously stupid play call (including quite a few who have been in football their whole lives calling it the worst play in the history of the sport), we keep hearing, "Well, I wouldn't have made that call, but..."

Whatever.

TM

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.

Bill Barnwell, for example, gets my proxy. Here's Brian Burke from Pro Football Analytics. Here's Sam Monson from Pro Football Focus. Here's way too many words and some number crunching from a smart guy who usually blogs about the Vikings.

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

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.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3084

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3085

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3086

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3087

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

Carroll doesn't have a classy bone in his body. This was like having Alec Baldwin fight Dick Cheney.

I'm a Pats fan. You don't have to dump on Carroll for me. We did our time with him.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I just don't understand this. I don't think a pass play is their best chance to score. I cannot see Lynch being denied on a run to win the Superbowl and I'm not even a Seattle fan.

And let's say he is denied. It's true that you've lost your timeout, but now the Patriots have no idea what you're doing on the next down because they'll have to think pass, but will need to hedge on the run because Seattle has Marshawn Lynch and how often is he denied 1 yard on consecutive plays?

TM

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

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

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

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.

Fuck the statistics!

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

Carroll doesn't have a classy bone in his body. This was like having Alec Baldwin fight Dick Cheney.

What's your deal?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

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.

Yes, I read the original too.

If you're going to defend the call, which I'd rather not do -- I'm arguing more about just how bad it is on the spectrum between "bad" and "most epic fail in the history of sports" -- then I would say, there isn't enough time on the clock to run three times. And you have three downs. So you throw on second down. If Lockette catches the ball, game over. And it's incomplete, you can still run twice, and the Pats know you're willing to throw. You don't worry about an interception in the same way that you don't worry about Lynch fumbling -- it can happen, but the odds are very, very low.

Doesn't make it a good call.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

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

What's your deal?

What?

Both are great coaches, but proven dickheads AND cheaters.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

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.

It was resolved several years ago that the single worst play call ever was Belichick's decision to go for it rather than punt on 4th and 2 from his own 25 against Indy.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

What?

Both are great coaches, but proven dickheads AND cheaters.

I thought you knew your Pete Carroll memes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeS3...7QgS-ZPGYfFOUi

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

First, I think Carroll is covering for a call made by his offensive coordinator, which is classy of him.

Uh...I'm not sure how you think sports works, but if you think Carroll didn't know exactly what was being called and chose not to jump in and overrule Bevell, then I don't know what to say. Carroll is responsible. For him to not take full responsiblity would be truly pathetic.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Second, you could find people all over the internet yesterday arguing that it wasn't such a bad decision. I dunno, maybe they were all Pats fans, but I doubt it.

I didn't see one person on any of the coverage I watched or read (whose opinion I respect) say that they weren't shocked by the play call, at best, and astounded over its stupidity, at worst. But maybe I didn't read any of the Boston coverage.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Third -- and this is not a reaction so much to you as to people like Tom Jackson after the game -- the way people are talking about that play call takes away from the players and the game. Wilson and Lockette didn't execute on that play, and Butler did. He made a hell of a play -- that wasn't foreordained. Brady played some great football to get the Pats the lead. Seattle made an awesome play call at the 2:02 mark to isolate Lynch on the lineback and get to midfield. Kearse's catch was stunning. Harping on the play call takes away from all of that, particularly in the way some people other than you put it.

I know you think it takes away from the players and the game, but I don't understand why you think that. It was the pivotal play of that game. When Jordan hit the game winner against Utah to seal the championship, we didn't say that talking about what an awesome play that was took away from the accomplishments of his teammates. When Romo fumbled the snap on the potentially game-winning field goal in the playoffs against Seattle in '06, the fact that we talk about it doesn't take away from Seattle's victory.

In every single highlight I saw, every single big play in the Superbowl was covered. If you don't think that the most pivotal play of the game should be discussed on its merits because we might not give a player enough attention for his contributions, I think you're delusional.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Fourth, what people are saying is obviously hindsight bias.

This is the absolute worst thing you've written so far. I was completely shocked when they chose to throw the ball. I could not believe it. I thought it was a stupid decision from the snap. If they scored, sure people wouldn't be focusing on it as much, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't have been a terrible decision. Just because something happened in the past doesn't mean you suffer from a lack of perspective because you know how it turned out.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

Hey, as Joe Hallenbeck said in The Last Boy Scout:

"500 bucks is 500 bucks"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WliLm__D25Q

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

TM