Superbowl coaching

[flamingrey]

Great challenge by Belichick on the Manningham reception. It's a play you just have to challenge, and he came up with the challenge very fast considering the offense was moving quick to snap the ball. Marvin doesn't throw that flag.

Another great call by Belichick allowing the Giants to score the TD. Only thing he could've done better was allowing them to score on 1st down instead of 2nd down. Coaches never do this and it boggles my mind.

Not sure if it was Coughlin's call, but after the first TO in the 2nd half with the play clock winding down backed within their 10 yard line, they came out with a slight delay after their snap count causing a d-lineman to jump offsides giving them a free play on 3rd down. Great call.

I long for a coach that can make big calls in big moments.

 

[Gypsumstack]

Belichick was right there to see that catch, so I'm not sure it was a great challenge. If there is any doubt in your mind, you throw the flag, for sure...but he probably had a better view of the catch than the ref making the call did.

 

[flamingrey]

Considering the ref made the correct call on the field, based on your logic, Belichick never would've challenged the call since he would've agreed with the ref. In which case, to believe the catch was good, but to still have the state of mind to challenge it considering the circumstances of you having little to lose but a lot to gain, makes it a great call in a big moment.

 

[Gypsumstack]

No, I was saying his perspective of it made it a bad challenge and may have cost his team the Lombardi Trophy.

Like I said, I can't fault him completely for challenging it, but given his great view of the play and the fact the Pats lost a time out they dearly needed at the end of the game, it was far from a genius call. But that is all hindsight, so it's pretty much moot.

 

[vancelot23]

It was a bad challenge because the call on the field was correct and the missing TO was HUGE at the end of the game.

 

[flamingrey]

No, I was saying his perspective of it made it a bad challenge and may have cost his team the Lombardi Trophy.

Like I said, I can't fault him completely for challenging it, but given his great view of the play and the fact the Pats lost a time out they dearly needed at the end of the game, it was far from a genius call. But that is all hindsight, so it's pretty much moot.

I think that's the kicker here. It's not reasonable to have expected him to have seen whether Manningham got both feet down with possession. He's not trained like the refs are to see it, and even they miss those calls all the time. Nonetheless, at that juncture in time, it's a must-challenge. You have too much to lose if it really wasn't a catch and it's not challenged. And if you recall the play, Manningham didn't get full possession of the ball with his first attempt. He barely got his feet down. It's about as close as you can get.

Hindsight is 20/20. It was a great call at that time. Additionally, another timeout would have decreased the length of the hail mary. Not a game-breaker.

 

[cincygrad]

Marvin says you use the challenge to change direction of the game, or something like that..... In Marvin we trust.

 

[futballiscool]

For the Pats it would have been nice to preserve the timeout, but I thought the Manningham play was too close and way too important not to challenge

 

[Cincyfan78]

You've got the lead, and a chance to take some serious wind out of the Giants sails. At that point in the game, you are not worried about perserving your time-outs. It was the right call at the time. The fact that the N.E. defense couldn't stop them from scoring doesn't change that fact because it then becomes hind-sight, and as we all know...it's 20/20.

 

[vancelot23]

My hindsight needs glasses.