PDA

View Full Version : Some Less Discussed Observations From The Super Bowl



CanDB
02-02-2015, 05:32 PM
I think we have heard and discussed most of the obvious stuff that happened in the SB (ie. Seattle's "disastrous" play call), so I thought I'd offer some things that caught my attention, even if not the most talked about:

1) Chris Matthews, who played 2 years for our CFL team - The Winnipeg Blue Bombers, who was barely on the roster, comes up with the onside kickoff against Green Bay, and then has a whale of game yesterday, and is a great candidate for MVP if Seattle wins. This, after not catching a ball in The NFL! (I know, this was a story, but had to mention it again, given he played here in Winnipeg!):D

2) Bill Belichick looked like a deer in the headlights in the last minute, not knowing what to do with his time outs. If Seattle wanted to, they could have basically killed the clock with the winning score....didn't happen, as you know.

3) The key play of the game might have been Lane's interception on Tom Brady.....given his ensuing injury changes the way Seattle defends for the rest of the game.

4) Perhaps there is karma.....Seattle seemed too lucky in NFC Final against Green Bay, but then makes a play that almost no one sees coming to lose. Also proves that Wilson is human.

5) Another key play was the missed pass interference call, that was not called, when the Pats Dback tripped but reached out to trip The Seattle receiver with his arm. I forget who the players were, but that would have been a good gain when Seattle was having trouble moving the ball in the 4th Q.

6) The fact that Seattle lives by the sword, and ultimately died by the sword. Listen, not letting them off the hook, but they do make a lot of calls that most would not. Think about the fake field goal against The Pack, and the TD yesterday with a few seconds left in the 1st half. Hey, if it works, you're a hero!

CanDB
02-02-2015, 05:56 PM
Further to, now that I hear Carroll's side of the play call, it does make a little more sense, and it brings to light how critical that time out was after the circus catch. That time out was a villain in the end. Carroll says they had to use it because they needed it after the lengthy wait for the circus catch call to be made, plus they probably had to look at the play upstairs, to determine if they needed a challenge.

So, with less than a minute on the clock and one time out, Carroll still wanted 3 plays to get it done, and therefore he could not run on the 2nd down. Failing to score would have meant using up their last time out, which means they probably couldn't run on 3rd down, for fear of running out the clock. By passing first, which he was confident doing, even an incompletion assured them that they could still run or pass, on 3rd and 4th downs. He said they were all clear on that strategy. BUT, that really shows how important that 2nd time out taken was.

Rancid
02-02-2015, 07:25 PM
Carroll's explanation is like putting lipstick on a pig. It is still a pig.

One he will be riding for quite some time.

LSIGRAD09
02-02-2015, 08:46 PM
I now know, without a reasonable doubt, that Vinovich is.......a NE fan.

JakeNbake
02-02-2015, 08:51 PM
I now know, without a reasonable doubt, that Vinovich is.......a NE fan.

What about the "Running into the Kicker" penalty and the helmet to helmet on Eddelman. THere were missed calls both ways. Vinovich is just a horrid ref.

fallforward3y+
02-02-2015, 09:12 PM
Further to, now that I hear Carroll's side of the play call, it does make a little more sense, and it brings to light how critical that time out was after the circus catch. That time out was a villain in the end. Carroll says they had to use it because they needed it after the lengthy wait for the circus catch call to be made, plus they probably had to look at the play upstairs, to determine if they needed a challenge.

So, with less than a minute on the clock and one time out, Carroll still wanted 3 plays to get it done, and therefore he could not run on the 2nd down. Failing to score would have meant using up their last time out, which means they probably couldn't run on 3rd down, for fear of running out the clock. By passing first, which he was confident doing, even an incompletion assured them that they could still run or pass, on 3rd and 4th downs. He said they were all clear on that strategy. BUT, that really shows how important that 2nd time out taken was.

Agreed, the 2nd time out should be blamed more than the play call. His explanation is great, but the 'captain hindsight' crowd seemingly prefers to blame a coach for not knowing players wouldn't execute the play well.

Not sure I agree about the Lane injury though. Their game plan seemed to work very well even when he was in there, I think they would have been able to still attack Seattle's defense.

I was amazed by Chris Matthews' performance, especially since he had never caught a pass in the NFL before. The Seahawks are incredible with big plays down field in the passing game more than most people realize imo, they seem to be able to do it even with back ups. I don't think I've ever seen so many 20 plus yard passes completed in the Super Bowl.

Wilson makes bad plays at times, however imo every QB does. He played pretty well though I thought, he was great with big plays down field and did a great job making guys miss.

fallforward3y+
02-02-2015, 09:19 PM
What about the "Running into the Kicker" penalty and the helmet to helmet on Eddelman. THere were missed calls both ways. Vinovich is just a horrid ref.

I had that play in mind in case there was a bad call that went against the Seahawks. If the running into the kicker penalty is called NE may have been able to get a bigger lead on the Seahawks early.

CanDB
02-02-2015, 09:20 PM
Agreed, the 2nd time out should be blamed more than the play call. His explanation is great, but the 'captain hindsight' crowd seemingly prefers to blame a coach for not knowing players wouldn't execute the play well.

The more you watch the pic, the more amazing it is. Butler bounces off the receiver first and still catches the ball. That's just not normal, and would happen about 1 time out of 100. The ball was actually not in too bad a place, though it had to be quicker. Then again, it might have been caught and still not made it in for a TD.

dizzolve
02-02-2015, 09:25 PM
Is it true that Winnipeg is the coldest city in the world with more than 1m people

beastlyskronk
02-02-2015, 09:32 PM
There is absolutely nothing that can be said to make me believe passing the ball there was a good call. You have lynch, let him do what he does. Or let Wilson run the zone read with that little pass option. Or throw a fade route, but don't run a rub route with your two most inexperienced receivers. There is no other passing option on that play and it has to come out quick. With Wilson being so short I doubt he could even see butlers break on the ball.

beastlyskronk
02-02-2015, 09:35 PM
I had that play in mind in case there was a bad call that went against the Seahawks. If the running into the kicker penalty is called NE may have been able to get a bigger lead on the Seahawks early.

I hate this rule more than any other rule. I'm glad it was only 5 even though it should have been 15. There was no possible way for him to avoid the punter.

bronx_2003
02-02-2015, 10:01 PM
No matter how anyone slices it up that was the worse play call I have ever seen.... And it has nothing to do with hindsight, everyone I was watching with said there's no way lynch will get stopped here and we couldn't believe he didn't get the ball.

The pats hadn't stopped him all game, there is zero chance they stop him making one yard in 2 plays.

If lynch gets the ball Seattle win... Its that simple.... And that will go down as the worse play call in SB history

canadiansbronco
02-02-2015, 10:51 PM
Still can't believe Seattle went offside right after the pick :laugh:

They had another shot and went offside hahaha, sadly that is something I could totally see us do

LSIGRAD09
02-03-2015, 12:31 PM
What about the "Running into the Kicker" penalty and the helmet to helmet on Eddelman. THere were missed calls both ways. Vinovich is just a horrid ref.

Pssh, he was only trying to cover it up!

MileHighInNY
02-03-2015, 01:14 PM
What about the "Running into the Kicker" penalty and the helmet to helmet on Eddelman. THere were missed calls both ways. Vinovich is just a horrid ref.

Yeah, Vinovich is almost certainly the worst ref in the NFL, but he's not biased, just completely incompetent.

Assassin27
02-03-2015, 01:18 PM
I now know, without a reasonable doubt, that Vinovich is.......a NE fan. You got that right!!!!!!!

Assassin27
02-03-2015, 01:20 PM
No matter how anyone slices it up that was the worse play call I have ever seen.... And it has nothing to do with hindsight, everyone I was watching with said there's no way lynch will get stopped here and we couldn't believe he didn't get the ball.

The pats hadn't stopped him all game, there is zero chance they stop him making one yard in 2 plays.

If lynch gets the ball Seattle win... Its that simple.... And that will go down as the worse play call in SB history Maybe even sports history

dizzolve
02-03-2015, 01:25 PM
Vinovich is one that the NFL has control over. How else does he get these big games? Not as a result of good statistics -surely

CanDB
02-03-2015, 05:42 PM
Is it true that Winnipeg is the coldest city in the world with more than 1m people

Actually we're between 700,000 - 800,000, but it's nice to hear that others think we're that big.;)

I don't think that would be true, even if they compared cities of our size and larger. Sure, winters can be quite cold, but our summers can get hot, even if not for long periods. And we typically enjoy nice springs and early autumns. In fact, I love the change of seasons, minus some of the cold!

Then again, you will see plane after plane after plane heading south in winter, therefore many of us think winters are cold except for the annual "really warm part", when we go on vacation.;)

fallforward3y+
02-04-2015, 01:55 AM
I hate this rule more than any other rule. I'm glad it was only 5 even though it should have been 15. There was no possible way for him to avoid the punter.

I don't even think it should be a 5 yard penalty, unless there was some clear blatant intent to hit the punter as opposed to running into them trying to block the kick.

However, I don't like a lot of PI rules either. My main point was that in case people started talking about the refs bailing out the Patriots, I had that play in mind.

fallforward3y+
02-04-2015, 02:05 AM
No matter how anyone slices it up that was the worse play call I have ever seen.... And it has nothing to do with hindsight, everyone I was watching with said there's no way lynch will get stopped here and we couldn't believe he didn't get the ball.

The pats hadn't stopped him all game, there is zero chance they stop him making one yard in 2 plays.

If lynch gets the ball Seattle win... Its that simple.... And that will go down as the worse play call in SB history

Saying 'zero chance of stopping them' about a goal line is a joke imo, and it seems to consist with my opinion that people are blowing a call way out of proportion. I've seen all sorts of goal line stands, if I did a search I bet I could find several instances of a bad run defense stopping a beast of a back with more than 1 shot at a goal line.

Goal line running is tough, guys crowd up near the LOS, and the playing field becomes largely leveled, both sides have a good chance at the stop, with apparent over matches not being as big of over matches as they may seem in that situation.

Pats have Vince Wilfork, one of the beastliest D-lineman in the NFL. He would have probably been tough to move and made it a struggle. There would have been the time that it took to hand it off to Lynch after snapping the ball which would give Pats defenders time to get a push. Wilfork may have been difficult to move, and if someone knifes underneath and gets to Lynch's legs or gets penetration, they could have been stopped.

And why do people keep saying he ran all over them that game? He played fairly well, but people are acting like they got completely gashed, it was only 4.2 yards a carry.

There is also a big difference in short yardage running and running in other situations, so comparing them seems pretty ridiculous to me. The Pats stopped Lynch in a short yardage situation earlier in the game.

Rastic
02-04-2015, 06:26 AM
I don't even think it should be a 5 yard penalty, unless there was some clear blatant intent to hit the punter as opposed to running into them trying to block the kick.

I disagree. Intent should not be a factor in that situation. A punter is particularly exposed during his kick, especially on his plant leg. In that position he has little to no chance of defending himself, let alone avoid, a hit. Somebody could intend only to try and block and misjudge, get pushed, whatever, and he could blow out the punters plant leg.

The chance for major injury is too big to even want to consider intent which is why the rule is the way it is (except for Vinovich who just didn't know better).

fallforward3y+
02-04-2015, 03:24 PM
I disagree. Intent should not be a factor in that situation. A punter is particularly exposed during his kick, especially on his plant leg. In that position he has little to no chance of defending himself, let alone avoid, a hit. Somebody could intend only to try and block and misjudge, get pushed, whatever, and he could blow out the punters plant leg.

The chance for major injury is too big to even want to consider intent which is why the rule is the way it is (except for Vinovich who just didn't know better).

I didn't think of it that way, you may be right. I guess it seems kind of 'lame' to get a free first down off of a guy barely running into a kicker without any mal intent, plus it could be hard to determine what was blatant and what was accidental so for practical purposes it may be best to simply keep it the way it is.

One thing that I don't think should be a penalty though, is if a blocker accidentally pushes the guy trying to block the punt into the punter, because then it was forced by the blocker.

The rule may make it tougher on guys trying to block punts, but I'm not really too concerned with that because imo it should be difficult to block a punt or a field goal.

I'm glad to see an attitude from you of it being about Vinovitch at times poorly judging calls over it being some pro Pats conspiracy. Bad calls commonly happen probably in every game, however when they happen in favor of the Pats there seems to be more of an idea of it being about pro Pats conspiracies. I had a feeling some bad call in NE's favor would be brought up, so I was actually glad that they got that call wrong, and also that the announcers highlighted that it was the incorrect call.