Everybody else is watching the Super Bowl.....

XofDallas wrote:I'm pretty sure RFC's a baseball fan....

I think his daughter plays softball.

EdThomas wrote:

DennisLee wrote:Actually I was thinking of the Packers "perfectly reasonable" decision to play it safe and just run the ball into the line 3 times nearing the end of their game against the Seahawks instead of attacking like they had been the rest of the game.

The other part of the Seahawks loss that you didn't mention was that even after the interception, they still had a slight chance because with the position of the ball, Brady couldn't just take the hand off and kneel, because he would have been in the end zone, or at least that would have been true if one of the Seattle defense hadn't knocked one of the other defenders off balance so he fell across the line before the ball was snapped.

Packers - I've never been a believer in the 3 dives into the line or the going into the total prevent defense. That said, I've never seen any numbers on the effectiveness of either approach. Wouldn't be surprised to see some sort of nnumber-crunching be done on that this offseason.
Seahawks - Good point. A positive for the Patriots here though was Brady as a "sneaker". He's done it a lot and he's a pretty big guy, 6'4" 220/230.
The penalty was sad. It detracted so much from the level of play at that time by both teams. That was a beautiful game. Neither team quit. THey played hard and well for 60 minutes. One thing I'd like to see the "analysts" bring out is the job the other Pat defensive back (Browner) did on his man. Browner had the guy on the line and Butler had the receiver behind him. The up guy's job was to screen/pick Butler from making a play. Browner prevented him from doing that thereby giving Butler a free path to the interception. For me, that was a beautifully executed play. I love to see running plays where a guard or tackle pulls through a hole and seals off inside inside defenders. I love to watch good womens basketball cuz they move and pass and play together so well.
IMHO,I think you're too hard on Seattle. They didn't lose this game, the Patriots won it.This was truly a game where it was too bad that someone had to lose.
Maybe we'll get a snippet tonight!

Ed, you are delusional. Seattle blew it! They had a bruising runner, Marshawn Lynch in the backfield. And second and goal from the half-yard line. Three tries to run it in. From the half-yard line!!! Heck, Wilson is a big boy himself, and a dangerous runner. A quarterback sneak, or a fake dive keeper! Midget League kids could have executed it.

One of the biggest WTFs in Superbowl history.

Besides. Football is becoming all about the commercials. Just second to a hopeful halftime display with a wardrobe malfunction.

They began losing my interest with all of the name changes. I'm waiting for The Dallas Cowboys to become Austin Cowboys. Or the Greenbay Packers to become the Milwaukee Packers.

Hindsite is 20/20. Because they had the best running back everyone expected the run, what had happened if that linebacker put his helmet on that ball and forced the fumble?

bigrunt wrote:Hindsite is 20/20. Because they had the best running back everyone expected the run, what had happened if that linebacker put his helmet on that ball and forced the fumble?

Of course everyone expected the run because they should have run it.

We're talking about Marshawn Lynch. A bruising hard to tackle runner. He's being paid $8.5M a season, and they don't think they can count on him for a half-yard in the biggest game of the season? What message are they sending to the owner and to Marshawn Lynch, and the fans? Heck, even if they'd announced, "we're going to run" Lynch would not have been denied a half-yard in three tries.

And if you are going to pass. A play action or a dive then a pass in the corner, OR an interception is very likely. As young kids you learn NOT to pass in that situation, against a goal-line stacked defense, in traffic!

Hindsight has nothing to do with it. EVERYONE knows beforehand that that play, in that situation, was a no-no.

And just like one of the announcers said, "run the ball, if I lose the game in that situation - going to my go-to runner, I can live with it!"

cthia wrote:Ed, you are delusional. Seattle blew it! They had a bruising runner, Marshawn Lynch in the backfield. And second and goal from the half-yard line. Three tries to run it in. From the half-yard line!!! Heck, Wilson is a big boy himself, and a dangerous runner. A quarterback sneak, or a fake dive keeper! Midget League kids could have executed it.

One of the biggest WTFs in Superbowl history.

Besides. Football is becoming all about the commercials. Just second to a hopeful halftime display with a wardrobe malfunction.

They began losing my interest with all of the name changes. I'm waiting for The Dallas Cowboys to become Austin Cowboys. Or the Greenbay Packers to become the Milwaukee Packers.

Hi,
That's first for "delusional"!
I'll assume you've watched enough football to know how a penetrating lineman can blow up a run in the backfield. You beastmode guys seem to forget things like that happen, often.
I can't recall any"expert" talking about how the Seattle O-line had pushed the Pats D-line around all day. Why? Because it hadn't happened all day. Carroll knew this. Belichick made the point very clearly when he sent out the 6 D-linemen with his 2 best line backers
You also ignore the situation 1. his 3 wides against the patriots 3 corners was the best matchup he'd seen all day 1.1 one if those corners was an undrafted rookie who'd been beaten badly two plays earlier (Butler said afterwards Wilson'd looked at him when they came out of the huddle) 2. that pick/slant play they called is virtually unstoppable as long as the ball is caught. How many times have you seen a slant not gain 3-5 yards?

i will give you credit for suggesting they might have run Wilson. You're the first I've heard suggest that.
My biggest problem with the "Dey shoulda run da Beast" hind-sighters is that it trivializes what was really a very well-played game by two very good and well-prepared teams.
Another problem for me is how the beastmode crap has overshadowed Richard Sherman's incredible act of good sportsmanship when he walked over to Brady with his hand oustretched on the last kneeldown.
My apologies for my rant.

"Besides. Football is becoming all about the commercials. Just second to a hopeful halftime display with a wardrobe malfunction."
****
Of the several hours of TV time for an NFL game, the total time that the ball is in play, for the entire game, is 11 minutes.

Steve

SHV wrote:"Besides. Football is becoming all about the commercials. Just second to a hopeful halftime display with a wardrobe malfunction."
****
Of the several hours of TV time for an NFL game, the total time that the ball is in play, for the entire game, is 11 minutes.

Steve

Wrong, the ball is in play for 60 minutes, not 11.

Anyway, we seem to forget that Lynch was 1 for 5 from the 1 this year.

Look at the stats.

Lynch had 5 rushes inside NE's 10 yard line. They were for 3,3,0,1 and 4 yards. Tell me that the Pats did not expect each one of those runs, yet Lynch failed to gain yards in only 1 of those rushes. Overall, Lynch rushed 24 times gained 102 yards, did not lose yardage on any of his carries and failed to gain at least 1 yard only 2 times. He gained 3 or more yards on 19 of his 24 carries. He did not fumble once.

Based on his performance inside the 10, Lynch had 20% of failing in his first carry, 4% cumulative chance of failing on his second and less than 1% cumulative chance of failing in that final carry. Based on his totals for the day, Lynch had a 10% chance of failing in his first carry, 1% cumulative on his second carry and less than 1/10 of a percent chance of failing on all three carries.

Wilson attempted 21 passes missed on 9 of them and had 2 of those misses intercepted. That's a 43% failure rate and on top of that if he fails there is a 22% chance of a turn over.

Purely based on actual performance, Wilson was the riskier play. Lynch touched the ball last prior to the 2 minute warning a 31 yard pass and a full minute of playing time before his 4 yard rumble to the 1. On that play everyone knew he was getting it. The NE LBs collapsed on the Seahawk left side and hit Lynch between the 2-3 yard line. He picked up that extra yard and a half anyway after contact.

Are you seriously telling anyone that saw that last play before the interception or the game or analyzed the stats that Lunch was NOT the best option on 2nd down by a country mile? Dude, the Seahawks did not push around the Pats' D-Line, Lynch got those yards on beastmode after contact all day long.

If anyone is delusional, its you. Either that or your are such a big Pats fan that your brains are beginning to lose their logical functions.

EdThomas wrote:

cthia wrote:Ed, you are delusional. Seattle blew it! They had a bruising runner, Marshawn Lynch in the backfield. And second and goal from the half-yard line. Three tries to run it in. From the half-yard line!!! Heck, Wilson is a big boy himself, and a dangerous runner. A quarterback sneak, or a fake dive keeper! Midget League kids could have executed it.

One of the biggest WTFs in Superbowl history.

Besides. Football is becoming all about the commercials. Just second to a hopeful halftime display with a wardrobe malfunction.

They began losing my interest with all of the name changes. I'm waiting for The Dallas Cowboys to become Austin Cowboys. Or the Greenbay Packers to become the Milwaukee Packers.

Hi,
That's first for "delusional"!
I'll assume you've watched enough football to know how a penetrating lineman can blow up a run in the backfield. You beastmode guys seem to forget things like that happen, often.
I can't recall any"expert" talking about how the Seattle O-line had pushed the Pats D-line around all day. Why? Because it hadn't happened all day. Carroll knew this. Belichick made the point very clearly when he sent out the 6 D-linemen with his 2 best line backers
You also ignore the situation 1. his 3 wides against the patriots 3 corners was the best matchup he'd seen all day 1.1 one if those corners was an undrafted rookie who'd been beaten badly two plays earlier (Butler said afterwards Wilson'd looked at him when they came out of the huddle) 2. that pick/slant play they called is virtually unstoppable as long as the ball is caught. How many times have you seen a slant not gain 3-5 yards?

i will give you credit for suggesting they might have run Wilson. You're the first I've heard suggest that.
My biggest problem with the "Dey shoulda run da Beast" hind-sighters is that it trivializes what was really a very well-played game by two very good and well-prepared teams.
Another problem for me is how the beastmode crap has overshadowed Richard Sherman's incredible act of good sportsmanship when he walked over to Brady with his hand oustretched on the last kneeldown.
My apologies for my rant.

EdThomas wrote:

cthia wrote:Ed, you are delusional. Seattle blew it! They had a bruising runner, Marshawn Lynch in the backfield. And second and goal from the half-yard line. Three tries to run it in. From the half-yard line!!! Heck, Wilson is a big boy himself, and a dangerous runner. A quarterback sneak, or a fake dive keeper! Midget League kids could have executed it.

One of the biggest WTFs in Superbowl history.

Besides. Football is becoming all about the commercials. Just second to a hopeful halftime display with a wardrobe malfunction.

They began losing my interest with all of the name changes. I'm waiting for The Dallas Cowboys to become Austin Cowboys. Or the Greenbay Packers to become the Milwaukee Packers.

Hi,
That's first for "delusional"!
I'll assume you've watched enough football to know how a penetrating lineman can blow up a run in the backfield. You beastmode guys seem to forget things like that happen, often.
I can't recall any"expert" talking about how the Seattle O-line had pushed the Pats D-line around all day. Why? Because it hadn't happened all day. Carroll knew this. Belichick made the point very clearly when he sent out the 6 D-linemen with his 2 best line backers
You also ignore the situation 1. his 3 wides against the patriots 3 corners was the best matchup he'd seen all day 1.1 one if those corners was an undrafted rookie who'd been beaten badly two plays earlier (Butler said afterwards Wilson'd looked at him when they came out of the huddle) 2. that pick/slant play they called is virtually unstoppable as long as the ball is caught. How many times have you seen a slant not gain 3-5 yards?

i will give you credit for suggesting they might have run Wilson. You're the first I've heard suggest that.
My biggest problem with the "Dey shoulda run da Beast" hind-sighters is that it trivializes what was really a very well-played game by two very good and well-prepared teams.
Another problem for me is how the beastmode crap has overshadowed Richard Sherman's incredible act of good sportsmanship when he walked over to Brady with his hand oustretched on the last kneeldown.
My apologies for my rant.

No apologies needed for ranting. It's football! I was ranting too!! Tired of losing Superbowl bets to my sister and brother.

Yes, I watch lots of football. Even better, I played lots of football. I played quarterback from 11 years old to 18 years old. And in junior high I played both ways, defensive end. I had a scholarship to play college ball. But I also had an academic scholy. I chose the latter. I can still throw the ball 70 yards flatfooted. I had referees on many occasions come up to me and tell me that they had no idea who had the ball. That's the idea. I never liked the fact that refs give the play away when they know where the ball is. Not with me! Now you see it. Now you don't. I was well coached before I was 12. State Fairs know me (woosh woosh woosh woosh, I'll take that largest Teddy Bear on the very top please for the little girl with tears in her eyes) All of my five sisters has tons of stuffed animals. Now their daughters and friends do too. Until the guy with the booth shuts down and runs me away. I used to walk into the endzone unmolested because no one knew I had the ball. I was so good, I would ask all my eligible receivers over which shoulder they prefer the ball on a long bomb, or whether they like a pocket catch or a hand catch. I'll put it there! I was a smart quarterback. A rare geek/jock combo. Enough back-patting because it's easy to brag w/o being able to prove it in a forum. But all true.

And yes. That pick/slant play is only unstoppable in open field where coverage is spread and the defense has to respect a long throw. In a goal line defense picks aren't as effective. Too much traffic and incidentals, and you know there's not going to be a long throw.

And the second half was much better running performance, because Lynch was given the chance.

But since you brought up overlooked facts. Try considering that no one seemed to know, (I haven't heard anyone say it) as to what benefit deflated balls represent. Are you kidding me? If a quarterback's hands aren't as large as some, a deflated ball affords much better grip, and you can hurl that sucker to the moon. It's also easier to catch - less bounce. Many collegiate QBs fall short of expectations because of one very common reason. An NFL football is very large in circumference compared to collegiate balls. Difficult to hold properly for many players, unless an unorthodox grip is employed. QBs that can throw without thread-assistance don't have that problem. ( ).

I agree about the sportsmanship.

coldsteel wrote:Wrong, the ball is in play for 60 minutes, not 11.

Anyway, we seem to forget that Lynch was 1 for 5 from the 1 this year.

Not that I watch anymore(once again I didn't even notice it was Superbowl day, until that morning).

I think he is referring to the fact while the game is "60 minutes long" how much "game" time is spent in a huddle? Lining up the two teams for the hike which is when the actual game is played. So forth and so on.

If it is actually 11 minutes between hike and tackle then they are doing better than I expected.

Enjoy,
T2M