All Forums | NFL Betting

I'm a Seahawks fan and...that was the right call.

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 9738
Posts: 205
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 278
Posted: #126
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:


Because you are 100% positive that running the ball would have resulted in a touchdown...and you were also 100% positive that a throw would have resulted in an interception.

I can just sense the smiles everybody else must have at the poker table when you sit down.

We deal in odds and probabilities.  Smart coaches and gamblers try to maximize their chance of winning. Its a bit of a close call but I believe Carroll made the right call.  At the very least, it was far from being the worst call ever.

Ok lets lose the "worst call ever" verbiage. It was a turrrible call. You have a beast that has been able to get you a yard pretty much all season. 30 precious seconds were wasted between 1rst down and 2nd down. If you line up in a hurry you most likely force belli to burn one but if he don't then you still have at least 30 seconds left, 2 more downs and a timeout. JUST TURRRIBLE.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #127
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

The counter-argument is that if you run it on second and don't get in, you HAVE to throw it on 3rd.  That puts you at a disadvantage.

You have a 3 play series.  The only way to run 3 plays with NE not knowing what you are going to do on at least one of those plays is to throw on second down.


Exactly. 

Running would have had slightly higher probability of success on 2nd but would have lowered the probs for 3rd and 4th.  Overall, I think passing was better but I admit it was a close call.

I've yet to hear anything resembling a numerical argument for why it was the "worst call ever".  That just strikes me as the worst kind of 20/20 hindsight possible.



 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2011
Posts: 3173
Posted: #128
“@Harvard_Sports: SEA was second in the league in power situations, getting stuffed just 17% of the time. Lynch converted 17 of 20 3rd/4ths & short this year.”
not a savior
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 17917
Posted: #129
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

The counter-argument is that if you run it on second and don't get in, you HAVE to throw it on 3rd.  That puts you at a disadvantage.


No because you have a timeout.  You get it with 23 seconds left.  You can call 2 plays, run and pass, run and run.  WIth the timeout plenty of time to figure out 2 plays, if the 1st doesn't work

in my theory anyways
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2001
Posts: 59911
Posted: #130
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:


I knew you'd agree with me on this.  I can tell you are one of the very few sports bettors that actually makes money.

I used to post a lot on here and I remember agreeing with you often.  I stopped betting when Matchbook closed to Americans.  I had a particular live betting strategy that wouldn't have worked pregame.  Anyway, I haven't been on this site in years.  

I had to comment about this though.  It reminds me of Belichicks 4th and 2 situation.  Another good call that was horribly misunderstood.


Not a winning gambler today, that's for sure. 

The gambling landscape has changed drastically in the last 10 years.  Some days I feel like I am just hanging on by fingernails to the bare minimum I need to be profitable.  But for some reason I have been handicapping the NFL much better in the last 3 years, so not packing it in yet.

GL

Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2001
Posts: 59911
Posted: #131
Quote Originally Posted by line_tamer:

Ok lets lose the "worst call ever" verbiage. It was a turrrible call. You have a beast that has been able to get you a yard pretty much all season. 30 precious seconds were wasted between 1rst down and 2nd down. If you line up in a hurry you most likely force belli to burn one but if he don't then you still have at least 30 seconds left, 2 more downs and a timeout. JUST TURRRIBLE.

But if you line up quickly on second down and score with 40 seconds left, you give NE 40 secs with 2 timeouts to kick a FG.

That is not what you want to do.

They played it exactly right IMO.

You have to be careful of results bias.  Just because it happened the way it happened doesn't mean the decision was right or wrong because of the result.

So your suggestion would have been to rush up to the line on second down, and try to score with 40 secs left?  For real?

Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 17917
Posted: #132
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

I've yet to hear anything resembling a numerical argument for why it was the "worst call ever". 

it's not numerical it's common sense.  the entire game is on the line.  you have the best running back in the game, the "beast", and a running passer and you call a precision pass from the 2 yard line.

it's like you're the chicago bulls the nba championship is on the line and you fake jordan to get the ball to pippen for the shot it just rattles people to all hell

that said the ne cornerback made a play for the ages.  incredible
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #133
Quote Originally Posted by line_tamer:

Ok lets lose the "worst call ever" verbiage. It was a turrrible call. You have a beast that has been able to get you a yard pretty much all season. 30 precious seconds were wasted between 1rst down and 2nd down. If you line up in a hurry you most likely force belli to burn one but if he don't then you still have at least 30 seconds left, 2 more downs and a timeout. JUST TURRRIBLE.


I don't see why Belichick would consider calling a timeout if you lined up in a hurry.  It seems to me like you are doing him a favor by running the play quickly.  

I agree it would be better to go quickly if you knew the play was going to be unsuccessful.  Perhaps you think its "conservative" to assume the play would be unsuccessful.  But if it succeeded you made a really big error, by giving Brady 20 extra seconds. 


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 3634
Posted: #134
The real fact is if the Seahawks score a TD, whatever play was great. If they don't score, then whatever play call was awful by the public. People and analysts are confusing expectation with outcome. This is not forward thinking.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #135
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:

it's like you're the chicago bulls the nba championship is on the line and you fake jordan to get the ball to pippen for the shot it just rattles people to all hell

Its interesting that you mention that.  I feel that NBA teams go to their star with the game on the line far too often.   Defensive teams know that they can double team the star.  Meanwhile another guy is wide open.  The worst guy in the NBA is a better wide open shot than the best double covered yet they coach by cliche and think you need to go there with the game on the line.  Many games are lost that way.  Tangent for another thread....

I'm curious.  Do you guys think that the Seahawks should just run Lynch every single time from the 2 yard line?  Do you realize the advantage that gives the defense in preparation?  


 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 278
Posted: #136
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

But if you line up quickly on second down and score with 40 seconds left, you give NE 40 secs with 2 timeouts to kick a FG.

That is not what you want to do.

They played it exactly right IMO.

OMG! Are you serious. I am down four points in the SUPER BOWL and I DON'T want to score and go up by three. The last thing on my mind is what Tom Brady is gonna do with 40 second when I am now up by 3. I'll take my chance with the lead. This was not a midseason non conference game. If it were I MIGHT see your point. But I doubt it.

You have to be careful of results bias.  Just because it happened the way it happened doesn't mean the decision was right or wrong because of the result.

So your suggestion would have been to rush up to the line on second down, and try to score with 40 secs left?  For real?

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2001
Posts: 59911
Posted: #137

OMG! Are you serious. I am down four points in the SUPER BOWL and I DON'T want to score and go up by three. The last thing on my mind is what Tom Brady is gonna do with 40 second when I am now up by 3. I'll take my chance with the lead. This was not a midseason non conference game. If it were I MIGHT see your point. But I doubt it.

That tells me you know very little about strategy.

Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #138
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

Not a winning gambler today, that's for sure. 

The gambling landscape has changed drastically in the last 10 years.  Some days I feel like I am just hanging on by fingernails to the bare minimum I need to be profitable.  But for some reason I have been handicapping the NFL much better in the last 3 years, so not packing it in yet.

GL



Its really hard.  Most people don't respect the fact that oddsmakers are actually pretty good at what they do.  If a team is a 3 point favorite, its possible that they should be a 2.5 or a 3.5, but they probably shouldn't be a 6 or a 7.  There is a lot of randomness involved.  I had a fairly good system for beating live ingame odds, because they were created by the kind of people that thought Marshawn Lynch had an 82% chance of scoring on a run and not by trained professionals.  I miss Matchbook.  I made good money there. Maybe I'll move to Equitorial Guinea one day so I can bet legally
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 278
Posted: #139
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:


I don't see why Belichick would consider calling a timeout if you lined up in a hurry.  It seems to me like you are doing him a favor by running the play quickly.  

I agree it would be better to go quickly if you knew the play was going to be unsuccessful.  Perhaps you think its "conservative" to assume the play would be unsuccessful.  But if it succeeded you made a really big error, by giving Brady 20 extra seconds. 


Pete did him a favor by subbing which allowed bill the opportunity to sub likewise. This is where 30 seconds were burned up. You line up with the same personnel that just got you 4 yards and all you need is one and I am 99.99999999% sure it would result in a TO or a TD

This call would have been a good call in the 4th preseason game with your players trying to earn a practice squad position.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 278
Posted: #140
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:


Exactly. 

Running would have had slightly higher probability of success on 2nd but would have lowered the probs for 3rd and 4th.  Overall, I think passing was better but I admit it was a close call.

I've yet to hear anything resembling a numerical argument for why it was the "worst call ever".  That just strikes me as the worst kind of 20/20 hindsight possible.


New England 28.Seattle 24 as opposed to Seattle 31 New England 28                                                                                There you go. There is your numerical argument.

 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 17917
Posted: #141
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:

I'm curious.  Do you guys think that the Seahawks should just run Lynch every single time from the 2 yard line?  Do you realize the advantage that gives the defense in preparation?  

Nobody's saying that.

It's about the context.  The entire game is on the line, you give the ball to your best player, period.  You live and die by your best guys, not gimmick plays.  The Patriots were dead meat, and I think everybody knew it, and they went the other direction.

As Dennis Green would say 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #142
Quote Originally Posted by line_tamer:

Pete did him a favor by subbing which allowed bill the opportunity to sub likewise. This is where 30 seconds were burned up. You line up with the same personnel that just got you 4 yards and all you need is one and I am 99.99999999% sure it would result in a TO or a TD

This call would have been a good call in the 4th preseason game with your players trying to earn a practice squad position.


Oh...I totally think that you were one of the people I used to make a lot of money off of in the old days.

"99.99999999% sure"

Yep.  You are an idiot.  Thats 100% sure.

There really isn't that much difference between 1st and goal from the 5 and 2nd and goal from the 1 in a defensive playcalling perspective.  Belichick was happy leaving the people he had in there.  At this stage in the game, the timeouts were useful for clock purposes not subbing.  

Did you really mean to imply that the fact that the last play was a success (moderate success as a 4 yard run) would have correlated with the next play, much less correlated to such a degree that Belichick would have panicked into burning a very useful timeout for a defensive realignment from what he just called for the same Seattle players?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 278
Posted: #143
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

OMG! Are you serious. I am down four points in the SUPER BOWL and I DON'T want to score and go up by three. The last thing on my mind is what Tom Brady is gonna do with 40 second when I am now up by 3. I'll take my chance with the lead. This was not a midseason non conference game. If it were I MIGHT see your point. But I doubt it.

That tells me you know very little about strategy.

My strategy in that situation is simple. Take advantage of my good fortune and miraculous catch by my receiver and take the lead in the super bowl with less than a minute to play. Then use the ensuing 8 minute television timeout to figure out how to stop brady from tying the game. I am not an apologizing loser under this scenario.

 

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #144
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:


Nobody's saying that.

It's about the context.  The entire game is on the line, you give the ball to your best player, period.  You live and die by your best guys, not gimmick plays.  The Patriots were dead meat, and I think everybody knew it, and they went the other direction.

As Dennis Green would say 

Cliche!!!

I hear this argument all the time in baseball.  In other words, never throw a change up with the game on the line.  But if the batter is expecting a fastball, perhaps your fastball isn't your best play.  Perhaps, the change up is the best play for that very reason.  

If your rule is to only do certain things in certain situations, you are predictable and being predictable is the best way to lose.  

BTW,  "gimmick" plays have a much better overall success rate than straight up the middle runs.  I'd argue gimmick plays are your best plays but thats another discussion.


 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #145
Quote Originally Posted by line_tamer:

My strategy in that situation is simple. Take advantage of my good fortune and miraculous catch by my receiver and take the lead in the super bowl with less than a minute to play. Then use the ensuing 8 minute television timeout to figure out how to stop brady from tying the game. I am not an apologizing loser under this scenario.

 


I get the feeling that you are the kind of poker player that slowplays AA, sees the flop come out 822, calls the BB's all in and then whines that you had him beat when he turns over 72o.

Nobody is saying that you shouldn't take the lead.     What we are saying is that quicksnapping it doesn't dramatically change the play's probability of success.  Whether its 40,50,60,70%, I think you would see that any given prob, you are worse off giving Brady an extra 20 seconds on success even if it means costing yourself that 20 seconds on failure.  After all the time helps far more when you need 40 yards than when you need 1.  

No offense, but you really aren't very smart...Are you?
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 17917
Posted: #146
So tall guy if you were Carroll you'd call the same play in the same situation. Be honest 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 17917
Posted: #147
And for all those defending Carroll I got the same question 2nd down game on the line 2 yard line 1 timeout 30 seconds you do what
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 278
Posted: #148
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:


Oh...I totally think that you were one of the people I used to make a lot of money off of in the old days.

"99.99999999% sure"

Yep.  You are an idiot.  Thats 100% sure.

There really isn't that much difference between 1st and goal from the 5 and 2nd and goal from the 1 in a defensive playcalling perspective.  Belichick was happy leaving the people he had in there.  At this stage in the game, the timeouts were useful for clock purposes not subbing.  

Did you really mean to imply that the fact that the last play was a success (moderate success as a 4 yard run) would have correlated with the next play, much less correlated to such a degree that Belichick would have panicked into burning a very useful timeout for a defensive realignment from what he just called for the same Seattle players?

Yes IDIOT that is what I am implying. Line up with the same players that got you from the 5 to the 1 and run the same play. If bill does not call a time out then you are now in the lead. Seattle had the momentum and they FUGGED UP.NOW GET OVER IT IDIOT.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #149
Quote Originally Posted by line_tamer:

Yes IDIOT that is what I am implying. Line up with the same players that got you from the 5 to the 1 and run the same play. If bill does not call a time out then you are now in the lead. Seattle had the momentum and they FUGGED UP.NOW GET OVER IT IDIOT.



This is why you are a losing gambler.
 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 482
Posted: #150
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:

So tall guy if you were Carroll you'd call the same play in the same situation. Be honest 


Perhaps not the exact same pass.  Somebody said play action would be good there.  I think I agree.  Thats a little bit nitpicky though.  I definitely would have passed.
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.