Super Bowl 49: Why didn’t they run? OPINION

In a poll taken at school most students chose the Seahawks to win the Superbowl.

Twenty seconds left. The Seahawks are lined up at the one yard line after a circus-like catch by receiver Jermaine Kearse. They have two time outs left, and it’s only second down. Naturally, one could predict the rest of the game; with their number one rushing offense and arguably the best running back in the league, Marshawn Lynch, they would run the ball and use that timeout until he inevitable crossed the plane and won the football game, and their second consecutive Super Bowl.
Except they didn’t. Instead, quarterback Russell Wilson decided to throw an incredibly risky pass in the end zone that was immediately intercepted by Patriots player Malcom Butler, thus allowing New England to take the knee and win their fourth Super Bowl title. This, of course, begs the question; why didn’t they just run the football?
There are those who claim a conspiracy is responsible; with the NFL’s recent trouble and heavy fining of running back Marshawn Lynch, who makes a fool of them every time he goes on camera, some believe that the NFL would not allow him to win the biggest game of them all in front of a record breaking television audience. Others merely believe that it was a bad decision by Seattle, plain and simple. However, there are certain factors that make the decision to pass not as confusing as it appears.
To begin, the receiver being thrown to, Ricardo Lockette, was an undrafted wide receiver; he had only caught 18 passes in his entire two year career. In the biggest game of them all, he probably wasn’t the best choice for Russell Wilson. Wilson himself seemingly held on to the football far more than he needed to, thus giving Malcom Butler the perfect amount of time to intercept the pass.
Was it truly what some people claim is “the worst play call in Super Bowl history”? Probably not, but whether conspiracy or unpreparedness, one thing is for sure; it wasn’t the smartest of decisions.