-
Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Access to private conversations with other members.
- Fewer ads.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How about a Super Bowl 49 thread?
- Thread starter I Should Coco
- Start date
schiezainc
Well-Known Member
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if that factored into it at all. Given Lynch's general assholish behavior this season, and especially during media week, who knows what he would have said if put in that spotlight?
I still think it's an IDIOTIC call. If you're really that worried about trying to kill the clock, why would you do anything that could risk stopping the clock? Let's say Butler doesn't react quite as fast. There's still a chance that ball could have been deflected, knocked down, knocked in the air, etc. On the other side of the coin, you've got the league's best RB and he needs to get ONE YARD in three plays when he was averaging over FOUR YARD per carry prior to that. The only potential risk in running Lynch there is that he fumbles and he only had two fumbles in 343 attempts all season.
The other side to this is ... why not run Wilson if you really didn't want Lynch to get the glory? They're on the one-yard line. He should have been able to sneak that in.
I still think it's an IDIOTIC call. If you're really that worried about trying to kill the clock, why would you do anything that could risk stopping the clock? Let's say Butler doesn't react quite as fast. There's still a chance that ball could have been deflected, knocked down, knocked in the air, etc. On the other side of the coin, you've got the league's best RB and he needs to get ONE YARD in three plays when he was averaging over FOUR YARD per carry prior to that. The only potential risk in running Lynch there is that he fumbles and he only had two fumbles in 343 attempts all season.
The other side to this is ... why not run Wilson if you really didn't want Lynch to get the glory? They're on the one-yard line. He should have been able to sneak that in.
LongTimeListener
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2009
- Messages
- 40,531
I love a good conspiracy theory, lord knows, but this has to be the dumbest one I've ever heard.
Yes. With a minute left in the Super Bowl, the Seahawks are thinking not about scoring but about how the next day's MVP press conference is going to go.
JayFarrar
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2005
- Messages
- 9,931
This past NFL season there's been 67 play calls on the one-yard line where it was a pass. The first 66 times were for touchdowns. The 67th and the Seahawks final play was an interception. Taking it to rush attempts, I forget the total breakdown but twice fumbles lost. The most likely outcome in previous Rush attempts was a gained yardage but no score.
So numbers wise calling a pass play was unconventional but statistically solid.
So numbers wise calling a pass play was unconventional but statistically solid.
Guy_Incognito
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2004
- Messages
- 15,704
What? Every single time any team passed from the 1 all season it was a TD?
LongTimeListener
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2009
- Messages
- 40,531
I don't think that's right -- this is the tweet I saw:
Mike Sando, ESPN.com @SandoESPN · 20h20 hours ago
#NFL teams this season threw 66 TD passes with 1 INT on passes from the 1-yard line. That 1 INT was ... well ... tonight.
So it's a 66-1 ratio but I can't imagine that it was 67 and only 67 total pass attempts.
Mike Sando, ESPN.com @SandoESPN · 20h20 hours ago
#NFL teams this season threw 66 TD passes with 1 INT on passes from the 1-yard line. That 1 INT was ... well ... tonight.
So it's a 66-1 ratio but I can't imagine that it was 67 and only 67 total pass attempts.
Rusty Shackleford
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2004
- Messages
- 2,350
So a compilation of QBs went 66-67 passing with 66 TDs? Dont need to be calling plays for the Seahawks to realize that doesnt make sense.
JayFarrar
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2005
- Messages
- 9,931
Okay, the article I read wasnt clear on the number of attempts. Just the results were 66 touchdowns and one interception.
I'm trying to dig through football outsiders to see if I can come up with a total number of attempts.
But that still doesn't change that an interception was the least likely outcome of throwing there.
I'm trying to dig through football outsiders to see if I can come up with a total number of attempts.
But that still doesn't change that an interception was the least likely outcome of throwing there.
schiezainc
Well-Known Member
Calling a pass play? Perhaps. Calling THAT pass play? No freaking way.
The Seahawks beat the Pats by using their height advantage on just about every completed pass. Not sure why they figured now would be the time to go for a short quick hit. Idiotic.
Even your average NFL fan knows if you throw into the end zone, you put it where your receiver AND ONLY YOUR RECEIVER can get it.
If they were going to go with a pass, they should have thrown one to the corner and hoped Matthews would get it over Butler or whoever else was covering him.
There simply is no debate here. Dumbest play call in the history of the Super Bowl, quite possibly the history of sports.
The Seahawks beat the Pats by using their height advantage on just about every completed pass. Not sure why they figured now would be the time to go for a short quick hit. Idiotic.
Even your average NFL fan knows if you throw into the end zone, you put it where your receiver AND ONLY YOUR RECEIVER can get it.
If they were going to go with a pass, they should have thrown one to the corner and hoped Matthews would get it over Butler or whoever else was covering him.
There simply is no debate here. Dumbest play call in the history of the Super Bowl, quite possibly the history of sports.
