Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
So Leroy tells us that without the benefit of hindsight, he votes to two running plays instead of a pass and two running plays. NO ONE WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR TWO PLAYS INSTEAD OF THREE PLAYS BEFORE THE INTERCEPTION.
Originally posted by: Boilerman
So Leroy tells us that without the benefit of hindsight, he votes to two running plays instead of a pass and two running plays. NO ONE WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR TWO PLAYS INSTEAD OF THREE PLAYS BEFORE THE INTERCEPTION.
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroyQuote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Possibly inn 10 seconds you can line up and snap the ball. There is no time to look over the defense, no time to audible to a different Marshawn Lynch running play.
One pass, and two runs would give them plenty of time. Three runs likely never happens, and if it does, it's with a super rush.Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroyQuote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
The 2nd down snap happened at exactly 26 seconds (not at 28), and the BEST they would have done on a running play is to stop the clock with 18 seconds to go. That gives them one more rushing play, and time likely runs out.
The best plan was to pass, then rush twice.Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroyQuote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Hindsight is 20/20. Here are the two options given the clock and only one timeout. There was not two timeouts as everyone seems to think, and this can be confirmed by watching the final play on Youtube.
1. 3 plays..............one pass, then Marshawn Lynch, then Marshawn Lynch again
2. 2 plays..........Marshawn Lynn, then Marshawn Lynch
Who the hell, without the knowledge of hindsight, chooses two plays instead of three?
Well, you're completely wrong about this. They could have easily run it three times with one time out AND 28 SECONDS ON THE CLOCK.
One Run. 7 Seconds. Time Out. Two Run 7 Seconds. Now You've got 15 Seconds to line up and run a third time. Lynch probably would have scored on the first one though.
Ok..we'll use your numbers....your saying a running play at the goal line takes 8 seconds (I don't think so, but Ok).
26 - 8 = 18. 18 - 8 = 10. You've got 10 seconds to line up and snap the ball. Pretty easy, really. Besides, the way Lynch was running at the end, it would have only taken one play anyway. Why even risk the INT? It was a stupid play call. Almost everyone in the world agrees. Almost.
Well Seattle was the best rushing team in the NFL. You play to your strength. You've got to trust your team can get one yard...no fancy passes...no audibles. Just line up your big men and push....just like the previous play where Lynch just gashed them for 5. It was a boneheaded play call and it lost them the game. If they can't get one yard handing the ball to beastmode 3 times they deserve to lose.
No. I vote one running play for a touchdown. But if that doesn't work they could still run it two more times.
