{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/2/2015 7:08:28 PM
4
I agree they should have run it but I would blame Wilson for the terrible throw more than the call itself. Also, Lockette got blown up on that hit. Perhaps he should have made a stronger move to the ball too.
English
-
Being a prior qb wilson needs to body the ball more to him not lead him the way he did. Also the reciever was jogging not moving in full speed he could have at least stopped the interception
-
I think by the time he realized Butler was there it was too late. Butler blew him out before Lockette could have broken up the play. Although I think they should've ran it I still don't think the call was that bad. The intent was to catch the Pats off guard since they assumed it was for sure that Lynch would get the ball. This goes more on Wilson and Lockette than it does the play call.
-
But still lynch has not had a negative rush this season and yards after contact was at 3 so the guy is a power house. I would have ran it 3 straight times. And if they did do a throwing play I would have don't a similar play to the one that they completed to Baldwin earlier in the game
-
Edited by Raymonator: 2/2/2015 10:50:52 PMHas not had one negative rush all season? Where do you find such rediculous info? He absolutely had a negative rush. Check the play by play of Seattle @ SF on NOvember 27th. In the first quarter the play states: 1st and 10 at SF 10 - (2:21) M.Lynch left tackle to SF 13 for -3 yards (C.Borland). Lynch is good but get off his nuts bro! I only looked at one game and found one immediately knowing that the SF pass rush got him at least once. I don't know how many negative rishes he had, probably not many, but your comment made me laugh.
