All Forums | NFL Betting

Bellicheck timeouts

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2277
Posts: 24
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 1396
Posted: #1
Has any1 heard or know why New England didn't take a time out after lynch run.   As I recall they had 2 timeouts which then would suggest they should have used to give brady another chance.   Am I missing something??   
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 12243
Posted: #2
According to 90% of this site, it is because the game was scripted and he knew they were going to get the INT on 2nd down
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2015
Posts: 39
Posted: #3
Quote Originally Posted by LETGOPACK1234:

According to 90% of this site, it is because the game was scripted and he knew they were going to get the INT on 2nd down

Apparently, 90% of this site are delusional morons who can't fathom the simple fact that Butler just made an excellent defensive play.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #4
i've asked a few different people.  i think it's a worse decision than the slant pass.  i don't see any reason for it, unless belichik's plan was to let seattle score, which obviously would have changed once it became clear seattle wasn't running the ball.  i don't know. 

but, otherwise, not calling a timeout made no sense.  if seattle had won the game like they should have, i imagine belichick would have been asked this question quite a few times.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2015
Posts: 39
Posted: #5
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:

i've asked a few different people.  i think it's a worse decision than the slant pass.  i don't see any reason for it, unless belichik's plan was to let seattle score, which obviously would have changed once it became clear seattle wasn't running the ball.  i don't know. 

but, otherwise, not calling a timeout made no sense.  if seattle had won the game like they should have, i imagine belichick would have been asked this question quite a few times.

You Sea backers with your "Shoulda coulda" crap..just like GB should have won if they went for a TD on one of two goal line opps. Just take the loss and shut up with your ifs and buts.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #6
fastlove, i have no idea what you are going on about.  whatever you just said has nothing to do with my post.

i wouldn't mind discussing belichik not taking a timeout with someone who does understand that issue.  shiek? 
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #7
it's just odd to see a guy like belichik do it.  you don't normally see new england make those kind of huge mistakes.  maybe he just took himself out of the game after that catch by kearse.

but, he obviously woke up after the INT because it was smart, although fairly obvious, to get seattle to jump offsides on their 1st down play.  
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 1396
Posted: #8
I don't know how many timeouts ne had but if they had 2 then from my perspective belichick made a massive blunder.   The chance of Seattle scoring was bout 90 % so he could have ensured that goat got the ball back w at least 50 seconds.    Carrols Fuch up took him off hook.   But what really blows my mind is I can't even see where any1 has even asked him which makes me ? Whether I may be incorrect on # of timeouts ne had.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 1147
Posted: #9
One theory I read is that Belichick played his game of "chicken" with Carroll on who would be the first to call a timeout, and once he saw that the Seahawks were letting the clock run down, he felt like they had to throw on 2nd down, so he essentially baited the Seahawks into throwing there.  I do not buy that whatsoever.  He has to try and leave his team with as much time as possible.  I really think that Belichick had a rare moment when he froze, and did not make the right time management decision, and he certainly would have been ridiculed had the Seahawks scored, which the odds were certainly in the favour of them getting a TD.  Could you imagine if the Seahawks scored with little time left and Belichick is sitting there with 2 timeouts that were not used properly?  He got saved this time by Butler, but Belichick obviously has a record of making the right decisions here, so he gets a pass.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #10
shiek, i never watch the post game press conferences because i can't stand these media people asking the same stupid questions over and over.  somewhere, someone had to have asked belichik about this.  right?  if not, why bother even having the post game press conference.

gee, i agree, i don't like that theory at all.  seattle had some time to work with, but NE needed every second assuming seattle scores, which belichik had to assume.  i agree he must have been pissed at that catch by kearse and lost focus. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2008
Posts: 1207
Posted: #11
either he knew exactly how the game was going to end OR. he was going to let seattle score and save those 2 timeouts for the last 25 seconds they would of had left.

i was more wtf at the look of bels face when they showed him on camera. looked calm as fcuk. and wilson looked normal after he threw that interception
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 1396
Posted: #12
I agree w clubd I actually think that after getting screwed out of last 2 SBs he said here we go again and froze.   Ironically a much bigger bonehead move than Carroll but because of his past he will get a pass.   Or maybe as some1 suggested maybe he was playing chicken w Carrol to see who would take timeout 1st and in essence got Carroll to make the mistake.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2007
Posts: 956
Posted: #13
It really isn't any kind of mystery, and certainly not a conspiracy that Belichick let the clock run in that spot.  I was talking with a friend about afterwards.  That was a chaotic moment in the game,  but the pressure was on Seattle. With the clock running- Belichick made no personnel changes - and put the onus on the Seahawks brain trust to make that snap decision on the next play.  In fact - knowing tendencies as well as Belichick does - he was probably well aware this would be the play called.   If he had stopped the clock , maybe Seattle has time to regroup and with that "extra" time-out may have well felt more comfortable running Lynch.   Personally I think it was a brilliant tactical move on his part NOT to call the time out and make Seattle do the right thing under the gun.  
Oh, and all these people that think this game was fixed are delusional,  Could not have been scripted no way in hell you morons.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2008
Posts: 1147
Posted: #14
Quote Originally Posted by numbersbuster:

It really isn't any kind of mystery, and certainly not a conspiracy that Belichick let the clock run in that spot.  I was talking with a friend about afterwards.  That was a chaotic moment in the game,  but the pressure was on Seattle. With the clock running- Belichick made no personnel changes - and put the onus on the Seahawks brain trust to make that snap decision on the next play.  In fact - knowing tendencies as well as Belichick does - he was probably well aware this would be the play called.   If he had stopped the clock , maybe Seattle has time to regroup and with that "extra" time-out may have well felt more comfortable running Lynch.   Personally I think it was a brilliant tactical move on his part NOT to call the time out and make Seattle do the right thing under the gun.  
Oh, and all these people that think this game was fixed are delusional,  Could not have been scripted no way in hell you morons.

I understand your reasoning, but do you really think that Belichick thought he would get a pick there?  No chance.  It was a clear mistake by Belichick not calling timeout.  The odds of Seahawks getting a TD were very favourable.  The Seahawks also did not have to make a "snap decision" on 2nd down.  They let the clock run down themselves.  They could have easily ran the play at the 35-40 second mark, and ran the ball, or did a bootleg, or play-action, whichever.  So in the end, the odds of a TD were high, so the only saving grace for the Pats would be TIME.  Belichick was bailed out by Butler.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2005
Posts: 7407
Posted: #15
Only thing I can think of was Bell was fully planning on letting Seattle score once Lynch got down to the 1 yard line.

But even if they were gonna allow them to score....why not call a timeout and give Brady a minute to get a FG?

Strange.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2014
Posts: 397
Posted: #16
pats were winning? duh 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2012
Posts: 121
Posted: #17
Quote Originally Posted by numbersbuster:

It really isn't any kind of mystery, and certainly not a conspiracy that Belichick let the clock run in that spot.  I was talking with a friend about afterwards.  That was a chaotic moment in the game,  but the pressure was on Seattle. With the clock running- Belichick made no personnel changes - and put the onus on the Seahawks brain trust to make that snap decision on the next play.  In fact - knowing tendencies as well as Belichick does - he was probably well aware this would be the play called.   If he had stopped the clock , maybe Seattle has time to regroup and with that "extra" time-out may have well felt more comfortable running Lynch.   Personally I think it was a brilliant tactical move on his part NOT to call the time out and make Seattle do the right thing under the gun.  
Oh, and all these people that think this game was fixed are delusional,  Could not have been scripted no way in hell you morons.
truly believe he said do or die. if they score so be it and he also very well knew if he took a timeout the seahawks would regroup and draw a better play and likely run the ball. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2013
Posts: 3267
Posted: #18

For all you whack jobs and conspiracy nuts, if BB was going to let them score he would have called a timeout after Lynch got to the 1 yard line and let them score on 2nd down, instead what he did is he let the clock run and put all the pressure on Seattle's offense and put the game in his defense's hands. I don't think he expected a turnover but he expected his team to stand tough down there and prevent the TD. Had he burned the timeout with 58 seconds left Seattle probably runs on 2nd down and either scores or makes New England burn another timeout. At the time I thought BB made a horrible decision not to call timeout but looking at it from the angle of him forcing Seattle's hand and making them run a play with regrouping is the genius behind BB's thinking. Listen to Butler about the last play and about how many times they worked on that in practice and how much film was watched on that play and formation and you will then know why BB is the greatest coach the game has ever seen. He preaches situational football and practices it every day, the man is a football genius and having the best QB in NFL history doesn't hurt.

BB

TB

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 1396
Posted: #19
I'd like to hear it out of his mouth if that is the case.   Also, a genius would not have allowed the td at end of 1st half, especially after time out (tackle recr).     
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2010
Posts: 7900
Posted: #20
Quote Originally Posted by Gee_Gee:


I understand your reasoning, but do you really think that Belichick thought he would get a pick there?  No chance.  It was a clear mistake by Belichick not calling timeout.  The odds of Seahawks getting a TD were very favourable.  The Seahawks also did not have to make a "snap decision" on 2nd down.  They let the clock run down themselves.  They could have easily ran the play at the 35-40 second mark, and ran the ball, or did a bootleg, or play-action, whichever.  So in the end, the odds of a TD were high, so the only saving grace for the Pats would be TIME.  Belichick was bailed out by Butler.

Obviously it was not a mistake. The Patriots won. Had be called a time out, they may have lost.   Most likely.actually. So he did the best thing possible. Let it run and keep pressure on Sea chickens. Genius 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2004
Posts: 1375
Posted: #21
Why take a timeout and let Seattle set something up??  Let them use timeouts, which is what Coach Bill could've been thinking.  Sometimes it works to let the game play out.  Anyway, Great gameplan
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2001
Posts: 5545
Posted: #22

I have seen Belichick do the same thing before. It puts so much pressure on Seattle to come up with a play quickly.

It was a genius move by my man Bill.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 1396
Posted: #23
Well then he's got some brass 1s to not give goat time to win 1.   Do u recall the circumstances where he did it previously?
 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2010
Posts: 230
Posted: #24
Did you hear what Butler said. he knew what play was going to be. called. no, nobody asked Bill about timeout but I woul love to kno. I also believe he put pressure on Seattle by not calling timeout. I got a gift and thanks bill for not calling a timeout
All Forums | NFL Betting
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.