Passing on second down was the correct call.

PurpleJ

dnc said:

PurpleJ said:

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.

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.

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?

TTJ

dnc said:

PurpleJ said:

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.

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.

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.

TTJ

PurpleJ said:

Passing on the goal line is inherently risky.

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

PurpleJ said:

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?

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.

RoadDawg55

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.

dnc

PurpleJ said:

dnc said:

PurpleJ said:

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.

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.

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?

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.

HeretoBeatmyChest

Zone read or bring in 2 TE's and do a play action and have one of the TE's sneak out. In either play Lynch is still involved.

dnc

HeretoBeatmyChest said:

Zone read or bring in 2 TE's and do a play action and have one of the TE's sneak out. In either play Lynch is still involved.

Agreed

d2d

topdawgnc

Pete gambled Bill would call a timeout, he didn't.