BGonline.org Forums

Answering Falafel

Posted By: Joe Russell
Date: Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 11:43 a.m.

In Response To: Answering Falafel (Paul Weaver)

There were two overriding reasons that Bellichik did not call a TO: (1) if he did, it would give Seattle the option of running three times, since Seattle had a TO. By not calling a TO, Seattle was going to be forced to pass on either 2nd or 3rd down. Obviously, the Pats feared the run more, therefore loaded the box with 8-players and did not call a TO; (2)Seattle had three wide-outs in the game, if Bellichik called a time-out, it would not only give the Seahawks the option of running three times, it would allow them to bring in their run package on 2nd down. It might have just boiled down to that alone. I am not sure Bellichik went through all the thinking about making the Seahawks pass, he may have just assumed they were going to run, loaded the box, and did not call a TO that would allow Seattle to change personnel.

Messages In This Thread

• asking DR Chuck Bower
  falafel -- Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 2:41 a.m.
  • Answering Falafel
    Paul Weaver -- Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 7:13 a.m.
    • Answering Falafel
      Joe Russell -- Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 11:43 a.m.
      • Answering Falafel
        Seth -- Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 3:02 p.m.
    • Answering Falafel
      falafel -- Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 12:44 p.m.
  • asking DR Chuck Bower
    Chuck Bower -- Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 7:44 p.m.
    • asking DR Chuck Bower
      Keene -- Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 10:15 p.m.
      • asking DR Chuck Bower
        Steve Mellen -- Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 11:11 p.m.
  • here is a interesting article about that call
    Fatboy -- Thursday, 5 February 2015, at 11:21 p.m.