Uglysasquatch wrote:
A lot of unfair criticism of Carroll over that. I think I read somewhere that was the 1st goal line interception in the 4th quarter all year. The stats showed throwing was a good idea. As well, they only had 1 time out left. If they run the ball, they're forced to use that time out with 2 plays left if they don't score. What do you do then, throw and have another chance if you don't make it or run and lose the last down due to no time if you don't get in again?
The simple answer (as Smash pointed out, kinda) is to just put your run package into play, and run three plays. If you don't have to substitute, you can easily run all the plays you have left in the time allotted. The time out just makes it that much easier. But that's the simple answer for a reason. The danger with this approach is that if you do get stopped (especially if for a loss, which is not uncommon that close to the goal line), you're screwed. Also, run plays are vastly more likely to generate offensive holding calls, which would immediately eliminate any advantage you have. But yeah, despite this, still probably their best bet at that point. One needs only look at the dejected faces of the Patriot players just prior to the interception to realize they all assumed that a running touchdown was close to a sure thing that close to the goal line.
I guess my criticism isn't so much that Carroll went with a pass play, cause I can understand why he might do that, but the choice of play. First off, Wilson is pretty terrible at fast short passes. You're choosing to run a play that works really well when executed by someone like Brady, or Manning, or half dozen other quarterbacks in the league. Not Wilson though. Worse, that particular play is very susceptible to interception if not thrown/timed just right, precisely what you don't want to do in this situation. You're throwing into the line of scrimmage, where defenders are allowed to contact receivers, so it's easy for the receiver to get out of position, or get delayed just a half step. Also, there's lots of people in the area anyway. So lots of random stuff that can happen. Not something you really want to risk in this situation unless you are *very* confident in your quarterback being able to accurately and quickly throw that pass (something Wilson hadn't been able to do all game). Oh. And in addition to the risk of a cut-off resulting in interception (as happened), this play also has the risk of deflection resulting in interception as well. The quarterback has to throw fast. Which often means too hard. To a receiver that's trying to get into position quickly and may not have time to get his hands into position. In the front of the end zone. With people running around in the back of the end zone. Executed perfectly, it's nearly impossible to defend against. When not? It's a high risk play IMO.
If I were going to call a pass play, I would have faked a run to the left, had the right side receiver run left across the back of the end zone, while the right end drifts out to the right side of the end zone. Assuming the defense even remotely bites on the fake (which they kinda have to given the short field), Wilson can roll out to the right and force the corner to choose to defend against the pass, or the run. It's a pretty safe play because Wilson only throws if it's completely clear, and he's a good enough runner that he can force that situation. Absolute worst case, he just tosses the ball out of the side of the end zone (or runs out of bounds, but if he's close enough to make that remotely worth doing, he should just dive for the end zone). Obviously, this is just an example of the kind of play I'd call. The point being that Wilson has some serious strengths as a quarterback. He's fast. He's big. He can run if needed (or if just beneficial). He can toss a mean long ball if he has time to set. What he's not good at is fast short timed routes.
Dunno. I'm not a football coach or anything, but "play to your strengths" seems like a pretty obvious way to go. They had three shots to get into the end zone and honestly plenty of time for either run or pass plays. There's a ton of plays that IMO would have played far better to the strengths of the Seahawks offense than the one they called. Maybe Carroll knew something we all don't, but I don't think it's unfair to criticize his choice of play. I get that sometimes "do something the other guy doesn't expect" is the way to go, but in a situation where "do what you're good at" has a very high probability of winning the game for you, just go with that instead.
Edited, Feb 4th 2015 6:28pm by gbaji