Are you sure? That sounds exaggerated. It definitely wasn’t context-free. Some examples:
None of which consider the specific pass play that they chose to run, nor the specifics of the personnel matchup.
An awkward position? They couldn’t have ran on all three plays and if you have to have a pass play, 3 WR against a goal line defense is a good place to use your passing play.
In a vacuum, it could be a good place! But in the specific context it wasn’t, because New England still easily overmatched the Seattle receivers. Neither Baldwin or Kearse was ever going to get open against that coverage (and they didn’t), which meant that Wilson had one viable target—a downfield specialist not a possession receiver, covered by a specialist corner, running an inside slant (possibly the riskiest possible route in that situation). And all this from the shotgun, meaning there was no worry about a run. Carroll and Bevell knew all this before the snap, but they still chose to run that play. I think they must have known they’d been out-thought, but didn’t want to call a timeout there, and so went ahead anyway.
Suppose Seattle had done the kind of thing teams normally do when they pass from the 1-yard-line—come out showing run, then run a play-action, say with Wilson rolling out, with one tight end and one receiver to look for plus the chance of running it in himself, plus the easy option of throwing the ball away. Then 538′s analysis would make sense. But that’s not at all what happened. 538 doesn’t mention the passing numbers in that situation from shotgun formation. It’s like putting your money in penny stocks, and then defending your decision with the generic claim that equities are a good investment.
I see. I thought that you meant context as in Seattle/NE but it seems that you mean the formation and stuff. I think that what you’re saying makes sense now.
Personally I’d give more weight to:
The threat of running it from the shotgun.
The chances that a SEA receiver gets open vs. that goal line defense.
… and so I still don’t think it’s an awful decision. I think Wilson should have understood the situation and only made a really safe throw, and so the play call wasn’t that risky. But I do agree with you that play action would have been better, especially with a roll out.
None of which consider the specific pass play that they chose to run, nor the specifics of the personnel matchup.
In a vacuum, it could be a good place! But in the specific context it wasn’t, because New England still easily overmatched the Seattle receivers. Neither Baldwin or Kearse was ever going to get open against that coverage (and they didn’t), which meant that Wilson had one viable target—a downfield specialist not a possession receiver, covered by a specialist corner, running an inside slant (possibly the riskiest possible route in that situation). And all this from the shotgun, meaning there was no worry about a run. Carroll and Bevell knew all this before the snap, but they still chose to run that play. I think they must have known they’d been out-thought, but didn’t want to call a timeout there, and so went ahead anyway.
Suppose Seattle had done the kind of thing teams normally do when they pass from the 1-yard-line—come out showing run, then run a play-action, say with Wilson rolling out, with one tight end and one receiver to look for plus the chance of running it in himself, plus the easy option of throwing the ball away. Then 538′s analysis would make sense. But that’s not at all what happened. 538 doesn’t mention the passing numbers in that situation from shotgun formation. It’s like putting your money in penny stocks, and then defending your decision with the generic claim that equities are a good investment.
I see. I thought that you meant context as in Seattle/NE but it seems that you mean the formation and stuff. I think that what you’re saying makes sense now.
Personally I’d give more weight to:
The threat of running it from the shotgun.
The chances that a SEA receiver gets open vs. that goal line defense.
… and so I still don’t think it’s an awful decision. I think Wilson should have understood the situation and only made a really safe throw, and so the play call wasn’t that risky. But I do agree with you that play action would have been better, especially with a roll out.