You're crazy. That was an awful playcall. Lynch had been dominating the Patriots all game in the run. It's 2nd down and you have two timeouts to burn with arguably the best running back in the league sitting on the 1 yard line? You hand the ball off.INFORMER wrote:I'm sure they would have tried Lynch if the pass was incomplete.
I don't have a problem with the play call.
Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
The only way you lose the game, at that point, is on a turn over. You do EVERYTHING to limit that possibility. Throwing a slant route into coverage isn't that.INFORMER wrote:I'm sure they would have tried Lynch if the pass was incomplete.
I don't have a problem with the play call.
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
The gossip in Seattle is, maybe they didn't call running plays at the end for Marshawn Lynch because the team is a little bit embarrassed about his bad image and his refusal to talk to media, along with the fact that he doesn't have a new contract yet, so they wanted Russell Wilson to make the big play and get the win and be the face of the franchise. Sounds overthought to me, but I guess there could be something to it.
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
That's a silly rumor considering Seattle offered Lynch a contract extension before the Superbowl. It was a bad play call by Darrell Bevell and Pete Carroll, plain and simple.Mori Chu wrote:The gossip in Seattle is, maybe they didn't call running plays at the end for Marshawn Lynch because the team is a little bit embarrassed about his bad image and his refusal to talk to media, along with the fact that he doesn't have a new contract yet, so they wanted Russell Wilson to make the big play and get the win and be the face of the franchise. Sounds overthought to me, but I guess there could be something to it.
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
IF you throw any pass at all, it is away from the defense where there is NO chance of an interception.Indy wrote:The only way you lose the game, at that point, is on a turn over. You do EVERYTHING to limit that possibility. Throwing a slant route into coverage isn't that.INFORMER wrote:I'm sure they would have tried Lynch if the pass was incomplete.
I don't have a problem with the play call.
Synchronicity and all that jazz, man.
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
Right. Fade to corner, if at all. Not into the defense and a very short field.
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
It wasn't just a slant. It was a pick play that Butler read perfectly. I think it's more of a case of him making a great play than Carroll making an awful call.
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
It can be both. You are supposed to eliminate opportunity for the defense, not increase it.INFORMER wrote:It wasn't just a slant. It was a pick play that Butler read perfectly. I think it's more of a case of him making a great play than Carroll making an awful call.
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
It's the end of the season. Score a touchdown and you'll win the Super Bowl. "No, thanks, I'll pass."
Synchronicity and all that jazz, man.
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
Yeah, they clearly weren't trying to score a touchdown.
Re: Game Day: Suns (28-20) @ Warriors (36-8), Sat 1/31/15
INF, relax. It was just a joke I heard that I was "passing" along.INFORMER wrote:Yeah, they clearly weren't trying to score a touchdown.

Synchronicity and all that jazz, man.