OT:SUPERBOWL

[dice]

the only valid criticism is the TYPE of pass play called

I don't believe in splitting that hair. The type of pass is still part of the play call. Indeed its the most important part of the play call. Which is what renders the play call indefensible, and without question one of the worst big-play calls in the history of professional sports.

If you want to debate the merit of how a different type of pass call might have been a good idea, you might find me agreeing with that hypothetical. But it isn't relevant to what happened. And what happened was absolutely brutal.

the result WAS brutal. but it has little bearing on the quality of the decision. results-oriented thinking using a sample size of one is irrational

if marshawn lynch gets stuffed, a TO is called, he gets stuffed again and time runs out prior to getting another snap off, everybody's criticizing carroll for not mixing in a pass to ensure another play

[DuckIII]

I wonder if all the people that thought it was the worst call ever loved the aggressiveness of Caroll and company to throw the ball with 6 seconds in the first half.

I thought both were preposterously stupid.

you have 6 seconds left and a free crack at a touchdown prior to settling for the FG. how is it "preposterously stupid" to take advantage of that opportunity? even if 50% of the time you not only fail but RUN OUT OF TIME you come out ahead by taking the chance

conservative breakdown of what happens taking a shot at the end zone there: 33% TD, 33% incomplete/settle for FG, 33% run out of time/INT. avg points: 3.3. better than just taking the FG to begin with

great coaches play the percentages. they're more likely to look like a hero and more likely to look like a fool, but they're willing to risk the latter to make the correct decision

Lots of great coaches play the percentage of a 99% chance of getting 3 points and going into halftime down 4. I thought it was a stupid play call at halftime, but that's me. Reasonable minds can differ on that one. But as another poster noted, the circumstances aren't equatable anyway so its not a relevant point to what happened to end the game.

[DuckIII]

the only valid criticism is the TYPE of pass play called

I don't believe in splitting that hair. The type of pass is still part of the play call. Indeed its the most important part of the play call. Which is what renders the play call indefensible, and without question one of the worst big-play calls in the history of professional sports.

If you want to debate the merit of how a different type of pass call might have been a good idea, you might find me agreeing with that hypothetical. But it isn't relevant to what happened. And what happened was absolutely brutal.

the result WAS brutal. but it has little bearing on the quality of the decision. results-oriented thinking using a sample size of one is irrational

When I said "what happened" was brutal, I was referring to the moronic play call. Not the result. But yeah, the brutal result of the brutal play call, was brutal.

if marshawn lynch gets stuffed, a TO is called, he gets stuffed again and time runs out prior to getting another snap off, everybody's criticizing carroll for not mixing in a pass to ensure another play

Again, you are debating something that doesn't matter, which is the merit of "mixing in a pass play." Its generic to the point of being meaningless. If I have a championship thoroughbred and a nag, and I choose to race the nag at the Kentucky Derby and lose, its not a defense of my choice that I entered "a horse" in the race.

Defending the notion of "passing" doesn't defend that play call.

[WIN]

I thought both were preposterously stupid.

you have 6 seconds left and a free crack at a touchdown prior to settling for the FG. how is it "preposterously stupid" to take advantage of that opportunity? even if 50% of the time you not only fail but RUN OUT OF TIME you come out ahead by taking the chance

conservative breakdown of what happens taking a shot at the end zone there: 33% TD, 33% incomplete/settle for FG, 33% run out of time/INT. avg points: 3.3. better than just taking the FG to begin with

great coaches play the percentages. they're more likely to look like a hero and more likely to look like a fool, but they're willing to risk the latter to make the correct decision

Lots of great coaches play the percentage of a 99% chance of getting 3 points and going into halftime down 4. I thought it was a stupid play call at halftime, but that's me. Reasonable minds can differ on that one. But as another poster noted, the circumstances aren't equatable anyway so its not a relevant point to what happened to end the game.

6 seconds is more than enough time to take a shot at the endzone and still leave a couple of seconds in the quarter in case you get an incompletion. Not to mention they'd get the ball starting the 2nd half.

Of course, your personell has a lot to do with it, they clearly have a lot of trust in Wilson making the smart play as seen by that play and the call to throw the ball in the last drive of the game that cost them everything.

I think in the SB you should go big or go home in plays like the one ending the 1st half. Now the play where he got picked in the last drive of the game, simply wasn't necessary since they'd get a TD by calling it safe and just running it.

[BeatDaCavs420]

With me having money on the game I was screaming for Bill to call time out I just couldn't believe he just let it play out even more so with 3 time out left its like he was like we either going to win or lose right here

Glad it worked out how it did though but that could of been a mistake if they scored

[dice]

With me having money on the game I was screaming for Bill to call time out I just couldn't believe he just let it play out even more so with 3 time out left its like he was like we either going to win or lose right here

Glad it worked out how it did though but that could of been a mistake if they scored

it was a mistake. he got lucky

[WIN]

With me having money on the game I was screaming for Bill to call time out I just couldn't believe he just let it play out even more so with 3 time out left its like he was like we either going to win or lose right here

Glad it worked out how it did though but that could of been a mistake if they scored

I thought he would've called a TO, the announcers were also talking about how it was probably a good idea to do so. Oh how things turned after that lol, it's really amazing how big of a blunder that call was.

[TankOverlord]

With me having money on the game I was screaming for Bill to call time out I just couldn't believe he just let it play out even more so with 3 time out left its like he was like we either going to win or lose right here

Glad it worked out how it did though but that could of been a mistake if they scored

I thought he would've called a TO, the announcers were also talking about how it was probably a good idea to do so. Oh how things turned after that lol, it's really amazing how big of a blunder that call was.

I thought he'd call a TO as well, but maybe he wanted to let it play out and force Seattle to make a quick decision without the benefit of having a clear mind. Gotta believe if he calls time there, Seattle talks it over and calls a running play as anything else is lolbad with their personnel. Hard to imagine Belichick would be thinking on that level at the time and could bait them into it but who knows?

As for the play call, I can see something else outside the 1 yard line but not at the 1. QB sneak, bootleg or beast mode are the only logical choices. Throwing over the middle is ludicrous as there are too many moving parts that can go wrong. Under immense pressure you go with your stars, not your 3rd string WR. Unfair to expect them to execute a precise play like that. Not to mention the risk of someone on the line tipping it up or having it bounce off the receiver's hands into the air. They had plenty of time for 3 running plays, just a bad call.

Ironic that in a league full of ultra conservative coaches, an overly aggressive call loses the Super Bowl.