Passing on second down was the correct call.

TTJ

TTJ

New Fish
This article on Nate Silver's* site explains why.

It's math. On second and goal from the one, with :26 left and one TO, you can have three tries at the end zone -- but *only* if one of them is a pass. Passes from the one yard line are extraordinarily low risk, statistically speaking: Your odds of an INT-ing away a pass from the one are lower than your chances of fumbling away a rush. SEA still had 3-wide O personnel on the field, versus NE's goalline D personnel. If one of your three tries at the endzone has to be a pass, second down was definitely the time to do it. Unless Belichick called a TO, which Carroll had very good reason to expect.

So you can debate whether *this* particular pass play was the correct pass play to call. And you can debate the execution. But you really can't debate the pass-vs-run decision on second down. PASS-RUN-RUN was *absolutely* the correct sequence for those final three tries at the endzone.

* Nate Silver is less fucktarded than basically anyone involved in this discussion. Except for possibly Pete Carroll.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't have a problem with calling the pass given the specific circumstances. What I do have a problem with is the pass that was called as a miss in that situation drives an increased likelihood of a turnover. Other pass calls could have been made (think run/pass options) that would have allowed for safer throws and the ability to just get rid of the ball if needed.

Given that the Pats were relying on a very short passing game all night, the amount of time left on the clock after the TD was not a primary concern for me even with the 3 timeouts. As such, I would have worked to snap the ball with somewhere between 30-35 seconds on the clock. IF stuffed, you should have plenty of time to get everybody up to the LOS again and then run a play on 3rd down with around 10 seconds on the game clock. IF that play wasn't successful, then there's still the single timeout available to be used to set up 4th down.

If the ball is snapped at 35 seconds and Lynch scores, you're looking at having 31-32 seconds on the clock remaining. I'd expect that the Seahawks would then kick a grounder down the field forcing the Pats to return the ball somewhere around the 25 yard line while using up 3-5 seconds. Given the routes that the Pats would need to run to get the necessary chunk plays, each play that they would run would be taking at minimum in the 5-7 second range. The key would be to not let the Pats getting a chunk play while utilizing getting the ball out of bounds.

Gostkowski's career long is 54 yards. Even if you give the benefit of the doubt of him trying an attempt in the 57-60 yard range, that requires the Pats to get the ball to the 40-43 yard line for that attempt. For the reasonable attempt, you're looking at needing to get to around the 35 yard line. That's 35-40 yards from their most likely starting place on the field.

Now let's back up again and realize that for the Pats to get those 40 yards, given the fact that they weren't taking any significant shots down the field (which also plays into the strength of Seattle's pass defense), the Pats would need to pick up 3 different 12-15 yard plays. While doable, without getting to the outside, the Hawks secure the game if they are able to get a single sack on Brady OR tackling a check down route in the 5-8 yard range as the game situation would not allow the Pats to have a ready opportunity to spike the ball after ANY completion.

Getting the ball back with between 25-30 seconds left, the Pats have time for AT MOST 4 plays to get the required distance. 3 of those plays will be stopped afterwards with a timeout. Barring a throw out of bounds or sufficiently deep down the field, the Pats would have run out of time or yards to get the winning score.

This was my biggest problem with the explanation given for wanting to run the clock down. The Pats lack the explosive players to make massive plays down the field. Brady isn't a risk to run the ball under any condition. This isn't Matty Ice throwing 25 yard darts down the seam or Rodgers hitting dangerous WRs on plays that can get an extra 5-10 YAC. This is Tom Brady ... a guy that spent the balance of the day beating you by throwing 3-8 yard route combinations that were designed to clear out space.
 
Sometimes I hate advanced metrics. They try try and drum up formulas and a bunch of other bullshit to try and prove it was a fucktarded call.
 
Last edited:
I don't have a problem with passing per se. I have a big problem with that pass to that player in that situation.
 
Our God damn identity says run the fucking ball. Last in run stop says run the fucking ball !! Win SB XLIX go home do some blow and bang some of Warren Sapps hoes!
 
We were way too concerned with not leaving time on the clock.

If we hadn't messed around after Lynch's first down run, we had time to run or pass on 2nd, and time to run or pass on 3rd, and call timeout for a play on fourth.

*Never* be afraid to score when you are trailing. When you are trailing, you loose 100% of the games where you do not score any more points.
 
Does the pattern depend on Kearse getting the best of Browner?

Yes?

Then call a different fucking pattern.
 
They had 3 tries from the 1 with the best back in the league and a timeout in hand. Fuck off with the metrics.

If you're worried about leaving time on the clock, you don't deserve to win anyways.
 
Last edited:
They had 3 tries from the 1 with the best back in the league and a timeout in hand. Fuck off with the metrics.

If you're worried about leaving time on the clock, you don't deserve to win anyways.
Click to expand...
I think there's a fair argument that they didn't have time for three runs. No way I'd have felt confident running into an 8 man box that they'd have had time to get everyone unstacked and get the final snap off.

Of course I don't think it would have taken three runs to get in, but I don't think they could have run three times. Two was probably the max. Throwing first guaranteed you had time for three shots at it. I've come around on the idea of throwing on second down. Throwing a slant to a dude with 15 grabs on the year, while counting on Kearse to outmuscle Browner to set it up was absolutely fucktarded.
 
They had 3 tries from the 1 with the best back in the league and a timeout in hand. Fuck off with the metrics.

If you're worried about leaving time on the clock, you don't deserve to win anyways.
Click to expand...
I think there's a fair argument that they didn't have time for three runs. No way I'd have felt confident running into an 8 man box that they'd have had time to get everyone unstacked and get the final snap off.

Of course I don't think it would have taken three runs to get in, but I don't think they could have run three times. Two was probably the max. Throwing first guaranteed you had time for three shots at it. I've come around on the idea of throwing on second down. Throwing a slant to a dude with 15 grabs on the year, while counting on Kearse to outmuscle Browner to set it up was absolutely fucktarded.
Click to expand...
Passing on the goal line is inherently risky. You run on 2nd down and if you don't make it, you call the final timeout and figure out what you want to do from there. An incomplete pass stops the clock on any down. Had they failed to run it in on 2nd, they still could have drawn up a pass play for 3rd down. Ever think of that?
 
They had 3 tries from the 1 with the best back in the league and a timeout in hand. Fuck off with the metrics.

If you're worried about leaving time on the clock, you don't deserve to win anyways.
Click to expand...
I think there's a fair argument that they didn't have time for three runs. No way I'd have felt confident running into an 8 man box that they'd have had time to get everyone unstacked and get the final snap off.

Of course I don't think it would have taken three runs to get in, but I don't think they could have run three times. Two was probably the max. Throwing first guaranteed you had time for three shots at it. I've come around on the idea of throwing on second down. Throwing a slant to a dude with 15 grabs on the year, while counting on Kearse to outmuscle Browner to set it up was absolutely fucktarded.
Click to expand...

Was this a great passing play to call? No. Was this great execution on anybody's part? No. But the main reason SEA lost was that Malcolm Butler made a fucking terrific play.
 
Passing on the goal line is inherently risky.
Click to expand...

Actually it's not, relatively speaking. Read the article linked above.

You run on 2nd down and if you don't make it, you call the final timeout and figure out what you want to do from there. An incomplete pass stops the clock on any down. Had they failed to run it in on 2nd, they still could have drawn up a pass play for 3rd down. Ever think of that?
Click to expand...

I guess you could do RUN-TO-PASS-RUN instead of PASS-RUN-TO-RUN. But then you're throwing into a less pass-friendly personnel matchup. If you have to pass once, as SEA did, second down was the least worst time to do it.
 
It's the worst play call I've ever seen considering the stakes. I'm of the opinion they shouldn't pass until they had to.

Zone read could have beaten an 8 man front. That's what I thought they were doing when I saw the formation.
 
They had 3 tries from the 1 with the best back in the league and a timeout in hand. Fuck off with the metrics.

If you're worried about leaving time on the clock, you don't deserve to win anyways.
Click to expand...
I think there's a fair argument that they didn't have time for three runs. No way I'd have felt confident running into an 8 man box that they'd have had time to get everyone unstacked and get the final snap off.

Of course I don't think it would have taken three runs to get in, but I don't think they could have run three times. Two was probably the max. Throwing first guaranteed you had time for three shots at it. I've come around on the idea of throwing on second down. Throwing a slant to a dude with 15 grabs on the year, while counting on Kearse to outmuscle Browner to set it up was absolutely fucktarded.
Click to expand...
Passing on the goal line is inherently risky. You run on 2nd down and if you don't make it, you call the final timeout and figure out what you want to do from there. An incomplete pass stops the clock on any down. Had they failed to run it in on 2nd, they still could have drawn up a pass play for 3rd down. Ever think of that?
Click to expand...
Of course I thought of that. But then it's obvious you have to pass on third down.

If you're going to have to pass, second down was the right time to do it, especially when you're in a spread formation against an 8 man box. They just ran the dumbest play possible. The whole reason why you are throwing is to ensure either a) touchdown or b) incomplete pass. So they ran a route that had them throwing to a guy who lined up four yards behind the LOS and delivers him the football before he crosses the goal line. Even if Lockette had caught that ball he got lit up and wouldn't have scored.

The advantage of throwing on second down was the element of surprise. How the fuck they didn't run play action if they were committed to passing is beyond me, especially when you can give Wilson the run pass option off of play action.
 
10922770_10153056855826100_6468412183778896483_n.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top