NFL

Here's a horrifying game you can play during this Sunday's Super Bowl and the nearly 12 hours of pre- and postgame content: count the number of times you hear some variation of "deflated balls" and compare that to the number of times during Super Bowls XLV or XLVII you heard the phrases "two-time accused rapist" or "accused co-conspirator in a double murder." Or just compare "deflated balls" to "brain damage." Then see if the first number dwarfs a combination of the last three by an order of magnitude. It will.

http://www.mrdestructo.com/2015/01/everything-stupid-is-alive-and.html?m=1

It's going to be interesting if Carroll takes responsibility for the play call or if Wilson audibled into the slant. 

My guess is that it was the bench and Wilson's audible was to line the slant up on the rookies side.   Either way,  worst call EVAH.

EDIT : Pete Carroll fell on the sword.

vansmack wrote:
It's going to be interesting if Carroll takes responsibility for the play call or if Wilson audibled into the slant. 

My guess is that it was the bench and Wilson's audible was to line the slant up on the rookies side.   Either way,  worst call EVAH.

One minute left at the one with Lynch in the backfield??  ufb.

Not a Theismann, but still cringe-inducing:

that was seriously the worst play call ever.. i almost feel bad for the Seahawks….



buah ah ha ha ha


with Lynch and Wilson as options to power through/sneak it in…how could they do that?

That was seriously an awesome Super Bowl. So many twists and turns and shifts.

Brady is the best ever, and its not close.

Shemp wrote:

I somehow missed this commercial altogether and was very confused when this photo started coming up on everyone's Timeline last night. Heard about it on the radio this morning.

left shark ruled!

Why did Belichick not call a timeout prior to the interception?  It was as if they were giving up and conceding the game at that point.

Shemp wrote:
Why did Belichick not call a timeout prior to the interception?  It was as if they were giving up and conceding the game at that point.

They only had two left and he probably figured he needed both timeouts if they were to get a couple of long throws and a field goal after Seattle scored.  He wasn't conceding the game, just conceding a TD by Seattle.

If NE had called timout, then Seattle would have been able to run the ball three more times.  Without the TO, Seattle had to pass at least once, so it worked out pretty well for NE.

Nigel wrote:
If NE had called timout, then Seattle would have been able to run the ball three more times.  Without the TO, Seattle had to pass at least once, so it worked out pretty well for NE.

Seattle didn't need to throw.  They still had a TO.

Interesting take:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/02/02/bill-belichick-made-a-sneaky-smart-decision-that-might-have-contributed-to-fateful-play-call-by-pete-carroll/

I just couldn't believe Kearse made that catch..when he did I thought it was game over… then Beastmode almost got in the end zone!  I would have told Russell Wilson…either you give it to Beastmode or you take it in…that would have been the call on 2nd, 3rd and 4th down……and if I had thrown a pass I disagree with the pass called even if experts say it was high percentage.. the only pass I would have tried would have been in a corner of the end zone…..


But you can't take anything away from Brady in the 4th Quarter…..

Thing is Pete Carroll has been and is a cocky playcaller….how many times did he call crazy cocky plays and it worked???

But this was not the time for that!

Carroll's two biggest "failures" in his career are both attached to odd "X & 1 yard to go" calls, if you think about it.

Shemp wrote:

Nigel wrote:
If NE had called timout, then Seattle would have been able to run the ball three more times.  Without the TO, Seattle had to pass at least once, so it worked out pretty well for NE.

Seattle didn't need to throw.  They still had a TO.

Interesting take:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2015/02/02/bill-belichick-made-a-sneaky-smart-decision-that-might-have-contributed-to-fateful-play-call-by-pete-carroll/

They had three downs to work with, with 26 seconds and one timeout.  That's not enough time for three running plays.  They didn't need to throw on second down, though.

Yeah, that Post article is saying what I was trying to say.

Nigel wrote:
They had three downs to work with, with 26 seconds and one timeout.  That's not enough time for three running plays. 

To be fair, they had 26 seconds left because they let 30 seconds run off the clock. If they wanted to run on 2nd, 3rd, and 4th down with only one timeout, they could've done that by getting the play snapped 20 seconds earlier.

I think the smarter game-theory play for Belicheck is calling the timeout. The most likely outcome of Seattle's drive with 2nd down and goal at the one is a lead-taking touchdown. The Patriot's chance of winning is statistically more affected by having an additional 30 seconds, not the increased interception opportunity created by "forcing" Seattle to throw on one of the hypothetical 3 downs remaining.

EDIT: I do think if Belicheck calls a timeout and Carroll has 2 minutes to stand around and think about the call (and ~45 seconds on the clock at time of snap compared to ~28, he calls a run). Regardless of play call or time out strategy, Patriots obviously had a very small (football outsiders put it at 9% statistically) chance of winning going into that play and no run v pass or timeout strategy was going to significantly impact that.

Julian, wrote:

Nigel wrote:
They had three downs to work with, with 26 seconds and one timeout.  That's not enough time for three running plays. 

To be fair, they had 26 seconds left because they let 30 seconds run off the clock. If they wanted to run on 2nd, 3rd, and 4th down with only one timeout, they could've done that by getting the play snapped 20 seconds earlier.

I think the smarter game-theory play for Belicheck is calling the timeout. The most likely outcome of Seattle's drive with 2nd down and goal at the one is a lead-taking touchdown. The Patriot's chance of winning is statistically more affected by having an additional 30 seconds, not the increased interception opportunity created by "forcing" Seattle to throw on one of the hypothetical 3 downs remaining.

EDIT: I do think if Belicheck calls a timeout and Carroll has 2 minutes to stand around and think about the call (and ~45 seconds on the clock at time of snap compared to ~28, he calls a run). Regardless of play call or time out strategy, Patriots obviously had a very small (football outsiders put it at 9% statistically) chance of winning going into that play and no run v pass or timeout strategy was going to significantly impact that.

Belichick