Had Johnson been coaching the Seahawks.....

[Nate Anderson]

Carroll still thinks that it wasn't a bad call.

 

[Skeptic]

Carroll still thinks that it wasn't a bad call.

And people wonder how coaches get such a reputation for air between the ears.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

That pass is typical of the NFL and a "pro set" offense. It's a bad call, but one that many NFL teams would also likely make.

/

Funny you should say that.
My wife and I commented that, since we quit watching pro ball regularly a few years ago, now when we watch a game there is something a little bit boring about the way offenses are run. I can't put my finger on it but it reminds me of a similar time many years ago when college basketball was more interesting than the NBA because the NBA was all about personal match ups and one on one play whereas colleges were running complex offenses than required intricate team work. This period of college basketball was interrupted by the Celtics who seemed to take us back to team play and systems and made pro basketball interesting again.

Anyway, that is a hurried, and perhaps bad, analogy to say that we found the first half kind of boring. Seattle seemed to just keep betting on the big play through individual athletic effort. New England was playing very cautiously against a tough defense. In the second half the offensive strategy by New England got more interesting to us while Seattle still, for the most part, seemed to rely on getting the one big play. Overall we found ourselves thinking many of the college bowl teams this year were much more interesting to watch on offense. They certainly seemed less predictable at times.

 

[cuttysark]

While everyone will say it was a bad play call look at it this way: Carroll finally won a Super Bowl for Robert Kraft.

 

[IEEEWreck]

The 'let's try a throw' thing is risky to me, but defensible.

What I don't get is the play. Do they not have a misdirection play that doesn't announce "NOW WE WILL THROW" and doesn't put the ball into major traffic?

Look, that int was brilliant work, but throwing an inside slant makes you vulnerable to a fast, smart defender on a team filled with fast, smart defenders. If you can beat a receiver for a ball coming in from above to the corner of the endzone? Fine, you get to win the superbowl. But putting it right where they have an opportunity to use their strengths to prevent an athletic contest for the ball? Mmm... not sure why you do that against the Patriots.

And I'd also just keep running it from under center.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

The 'let's try a throw' thing is risky to me, but defensible.

What I don't get is the play. Do they not have a misdirection play that doesn't announce "NOW WE WILL THROW" and doesn't put the ball into major traffic?

Look, that int was brilliant work, but throwing an inside slant makes you vulnerable to a fast, smart defender on a team filled with fast, smart defenders. If you can beat a receiver for a ball coming in from above to the corner of the endzone? Fine, you get to win the superbowl. But putting it right where they have an opportunity to use their strengths to prevent an athletic contest for the ball? Mmm... not sure why you do that against the Patriots.

And I'd also just keep running it from under center.

Exactly. A fade to the corner and if your guy ain't open, toss it in the 3rd row.

 

[Skeptic]

Exactly. A fade to the corner and if your guy ain't open, toss it in the 3rd row.

The problem is that every QB on the planet believes he can chunk in there. Wilson believed it. The whole idea of a pass there is nutso, no matter what you throw. The adage applies: when it is in the air it is anybody's football. Run it twice with Lynch. If they can't get one yard, they don't deserve the win. As they didn't with the pass.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

The problem is that every QB on the planet believes he can chunk in there. Wilson believed it. The whole idea of a pass there is nutso, no matter what you throw. The adage applies: when it is in the air it is anybody's football. Run it twice with Lynch. If they can't get one yard, they don't deserve the win. As they didn't with the pass.

Unless you run a play action fake that leaves your receiver uncovered and all alone. Truthfully, with Lynch, I'd have run it, too.

 

[ClydeBrick]

Exactly. A fade to the corner and if your guy ain't open, toss it in the 3rd row.

The only two options on that pass play in that circumstance, is to a wide open receiver or someone in the stands.

Anything else is too risky. Forcing that throw (with time and downs to spare) was a poor decision made by Wilson.

 

[MidtownJacket]

I still think they had a reasonable excuse for throwing the ball there.. if they didn't want to burn that timeout and had the wrong personnel it is what it is.

To me it is on the receiver for not making dang sure that the dback didn't have a chance to squeeze the play and steal the ball.. That was unacceptable.

 

[Skeptic]

I still think they had a reasonable excuse for throwing the ball there.. if they didn't want to burn that timeout and had the wrong personnel it is what it is.

To me it is on the receiver for not making dang sure that the dback didn't have a chance to squeeze the play and steal the ball.. That was unacceptable.

Yeah, well, I see the OC is now trying to shift the blame to the receiver for not being "stronger" after the ball. Hercules could not have done anything with it since the DB was 6-2 or so as I remember, and had a very strong inside position. (See GT-Georgia, OT). It was a lousy call and a bad throw. But it is nice to see that in Seattle the coaches have your back.

 

[MidtownJacket]

weird.. I was just reading an article about how CPC was taking the blame instead of leaving the OC out to hang: http://experience.usatoday.com/stor...call-interception-stunned-surprised/22729913/

...
Coach Pete Carroll said he was the one who made the play call, though offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell disputes that and said it was his decision. More likely than not, however, this is an example of Carroll taking blame for the backlash.

"It's just because of the match-ups," Carroll said. "At this time it seems like over-thinking, but they have goal line guys on, we have three wide receivers, a tight end and one back in that situation and they've got extra guys at the line of scrimmage. So we don't want to waste a run play on that."
...

 

[cuttysark]

I bet they NEVER would have thrown that slant pass if they knew it was going to be covered by a zero stars rated recruit playing in the Super Bowl. But they thought they had the match up.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

If CPJ were coaching the SeaTurkeys, the Turkeys would have won by 2 scores since he would have hogged the ball. The Pats with 4 less possessions would have scored two fewer times.

I don't care for NFL football because it is all flash and pass. I like the ground and pound games where you beat the **** out of the other team physically and impose your will via the clock too. The point of the game is to score more points than the other team IN 60 MINUTES. If you have the ball, they can't score.

But we won't go back to that ground game because passing is more "entertaining". The NFL is where they cram 60 minutes of football into 210 minutes and is all about entertainment.

 

[alaguy]

Most coaches would call a run, especially with Lynch in the backfield. But if you want to go rouge and call a pass...why call an inside slant? It really was a bizarre call.

EXACTLY my thought even before the play--DON'T get a deflection int

 

[TheGridironGeek]

If CPJ were coaching the SeaTurkeys, the Turkeys would have won by 2 scores since he would have hogged the ball. The Pats with 4 less possessions would have scored two fewer times.

I don't care for NFL football because it is all flash and pass. I like the ground and pound games where you beat the **** out of the other team physically and impose your will via the clock too. The point of the game is to score more points than the other team IN 60 MINUTES. If you have the ball, they can't score.

But we won't go back to that ground game because passing is more "entertaining". The NFL is where they cram 60 minutes of football into 210 minutes and is all about entertainment.

I agree with much of what you say, but I think you're selling the passing game a little short. The pass has won championships for a lot of NFL teams before and after the rule changes giving the offense advantages. But the one thing championship passing games have always had is power running to back them up. Look at the Rams in the 90s. They win a Super Bowl mixing a great RB/run blocking with throwing it around. Then, a legendary old-school HC is replaced by an Arena/CFL style one and they slowly slide back into the gutter to stay.

I would argue the most crucial component of the Flex is deception, not power. Power football is when you simply rely on your physical dominance, like the Power-I formation.

Never did get the memo on passes being more entertaining in general, especially NFL style passing. When the Falcons play the Saints they could all switch jerseys (and venues) and you wouldn't know the wiser if you didn't know the players. I was rooting for Gene Simmons' Arena team this year but in reality they had no chance because the AFL is "modeled" after the NFL, and is therefore completely homogenous. Every team runs the same basic finesse/pass offense so it's reduced to a track & field/skills competition.

 

[MidtownJacket]

I agree with GridironGeek - the beauty of CPJ's offense is the chess match that occurs. He is constantly changing splits and timing and other variables to set up plays for later in the series, game, or season.

Having said that, I don't know what he would've called there - but can say for certain CPJ goes with what is working so we would've likely seen either a roll out from RW or ML taking the rock hard to the end zone.

 

[Skeptic]

I agree with much of what you say, but I think you're selling the passing game a little short. The pass has won championships for a lot of NFL teams before and after the rule changes giving the offense advantages. But the one thing championship passing games have always had is power running to back them up. Look at the Rams in the 90s. They win a Super Bowl mixing a great RB/run blocking with throwing it around. Then, a legendary old-school HC is replaced by an Arena/CFL style one and they slowly slide back into the gutter to stay.

I would argue the most crucial component of the Flex is deception, not power. Power football is when you simply rely on your physical dominance, like the Power-I formation.

Never did get the memo on passes being more entertaining in general, especially NFL style passing. When the Falcons play the Saints they could all switch jerseys (and venues) and you wouldn't know the wiser if you didn't know the players. I was rooting for Gene Simmons' Arena team this year but in reality they had no chance because the AFL is "modeled" after the NFL, and is therefore completely homogenous. Every team runs the same basic finesse/pass offense so it's reduced to a track & field/skills competition.

Throwing the ball there is another reason NFL coaches are so conservative. They will now be even more so, but that call was wrong on so many levels it makes one wonder how many hits to the head these guys took before they got to where they are.

 

[Js-showman]

I thought similarly. However, my thought wasn't so much in regards to CPJ but in general. What team throws the football in that situation? Dumb. Very Dumb.

The Falcons would have done the same thing. How many times did Ryan throw the ball on 3rd and 2 this year. The Patriots would have done it too. I think the ball was on the 3 when Brady threw his last TD pass with about 2 minutes left in the game. The NFL has become ridiculously stupid with all of these pass happy teams in the league.

 

[Squints]

but that call was wrong on so many levels

Except it wasn't. This is kind of what I'm talking about. There's so much results based analysis going on here it's making my head spin. Everybody is looking at the play call in a vacuum and screaming about it while ignoring the game situation, giving no credit to the outstanding coaching job Belichick did in the last minute (straight up pure genius what he did with the no timeout and putting his goal line unit on the field essentially forcing Seattle to pass and drilled his defense on the exact play they would call, like I said genius), giving no credit to the unreal defensive plays made by Browner and Butler (like top 1% of defensive plays that could be made there they played it completely perfectly), nor giving blame to Russell Wilson for a bad throw at the worst possible time (threw it high and too close to the middle of the field). That's a standard goal line play! And right now what I think is happening is that a lot of you guys have a biased POV because of the heavily run focused offense that we run.

Bill Belichick did an interview today and here's a quote from it:

There has been a lot of criticism that I don't think is anywhere close to being deserved or founded," Belichick said Tuesday during his weekly appearance on sports radio WEEI in Boston. "That football team is very good, very well-coached, and Pete does a great job. "Malcolm and Brandon [Browner], on that particular play, just made a great play. I think the criticism they've gotten for the game is totally out of line and by a lot of people who I don't think are anywhere near even qualified to be commenting on it.

I bolded the last part for emphasis because that's what I think is happening right now. Everyone gnashing their teeth about how they should have run it has either done zero or very shallow analysis of the situation outside that one moment.