Remember when this happened?
>>76109556
My favorite sport moment of all time
>>76109556
this is what convinced me sports are rigged
A. Why does Wilson just throw the ball right to corner? You can see him moving towards the receiver from a mile away.
B. giving it to lynch would have probably been better
>>76109556
BI-THREADLY REMINDER
Remember when this happened?
>>76109617
>2007
No, nobody remembers that
>>76109582
>A. Why does Wilson just throw the ball right to corner?
Because it's a pick play. That's who you're supposed to throw it to. He doesn't get to view the game from the angle viewers do, there's no way he saw Butler before he throws the ball.
>B. giving it to lynch would have probably been better
Yep.
>>76109617
13 yo me audibly said "It's not happening." after that catch was made.
US TWELVES
fuck seattle
I hope it rains or snows every day of your miserable life in your shithole town
>>76109556
Yeah, but no one cares anymore. It's older than the internet
>cheatriots fans trying to be /outteam/ this bad
Boston fans are just as cringey as Shittatle
>NOOOOOOOO!
>Oh my God, how could he do that?
>>76110369
I saw the play and the PAT live. I still can't believe this happened.
I watch it once or twice a week still, so sure.
>>76109556
still confused why in football, this doesn't count as a touchdown for the seahawks in this situation.
The ball crossed the goal line and was caught. It shouldn't matter who caught it, that's a touchdown. In basketball/hockey/soccer it doesn't matter what team the person who makes the goal is on, just as long as the ball goes past the goal line it counts.
So really if the rules made any sense, the seahawks should have won this game
>>76110369
Never gets old.
>>76110454
>Patriots do bad
>Brady tries to inspire
>Packers do bad
>Rodgers runs away and cries
>>76110427
Best answer I have is
>handegg
>making sense
but now I kinda wanna see a version of football where defenders swat the fuck out of balls in the end zone.
>>76109582
It's always the height of intellectual power to suggest a team should have tried something else after a play has failed. But it's especially silly in this case.
Seattle had one timeout remaining. The ball was snapped 25 seconds left in the game. If they had ran and failed they would have needed to call a timeout.
It would have been 3rd and goal with about 20 seconds left. Meaning, they pretty much would have had to pass on 3rd down, if they wanted to make sure they got all 4 attempts at scoring. And if it played out this way it would have been obvious Seattle was throwing on 3rd Down.
So that's the first thing everyone who has said this (about 97.3% of everyone on Earth) has ignored.
The next thing is the fact that the unstoppable Lynch had been, many times. Stopped, that is, in short yardage situations, including the goalline. In fact the Pats themselves had stuffed Lynch in a short yardage situation that very game. Vince Wilfork, for his limitations, is one of the greatest run stoppers in the history of the NFL (he basically would bench press the o-lineman off him and then have a clean shot at any runner coming through the middle to either side).
I'm not saying another hand off would have been a horrible call. But what I really object to is which pass play they called. With Wilson's mobility (obviously the Pats were keying on the read option, so thinking pass only here) a play where he could see what was happening and would have had a choice to try for completion or throw it away (most teams like fade routes, but Pats had a couple of CBs who made that dangerous as well). The play they called, the pass needs to be thrown right away (not unlike Brady's 2-point conversion to tie SB51 - if Freeny had played the passing lane instead of predictably racing up field Brady would have little chance of completing that pass). Not good in that situation. As seen.
>>76109582
It's funny that the tying play in SB51 Freeny was offsides so Pats would have had another chance even if they'd been stopped.
But the fact that if Adam missed that kick against the Raiders in 2001 the game was over, and they went on to win it all, that couldn't have been fixed. (Before anyone mentions the tuck - bad rule, right call. Pats had it called against them twice in the 2001 Reg season, so would have been bullshit if they didn't get it then).
Not getting to attempt the field goal because Cousins knelt instead of spiking the ball
>>76109617
Honestly believe if the Pats won that game, Belichick would have been assassinated by some nutter. So it's never bothered me that much.
>>76110569
Because it's not about the ball, like in those other sports, it's about possession. It's often seen as a metaphor for war, gaining territory. You don't win a war because your enemy is sitting in his livingroom. You need to sit there, with the ball.
>>76109676
it's the receivers fault, you can never let the DB get that ball, if he jumps the route you have to just level him even if it means taking a penalty
>>76110427
kek, no. the ball has to cross the endzone under your team's possession. the other team can use the endzone as a valid field of play. if they were on offense backed up the other team wouldnt get a td when they drop back into their own endzone
>>76110369
amazing
>>76110659
>it's the receivers fault, you can never let the DB get that ball, if he jumps the route you have to just level him even if it means taking a penalty
You're a complete retard who has never played football I'm guessing. There's no time for the WR to react, it's a pick play you stupid fuck. They literally time the throw so both the QB and WR know when to be ready to make it happen. Plus the WR wasn't even looking at his defender, his eyes were on the QB and the ball.
>>76109556
Version with Sherman's reaction.
>>76110454
hmmm what was in there?