I found the final meaningful play (the interception, not the kneel down) an interesting one, and one that you can easily use poker logic to review.  I also find the reaction to the results of that play, from the announcers to be blogger and the media “expert” consultants uterly ridiculous.  They all basically say the same thing, with the game on the line Pete Carroll and whoever the offensive cordinator made the worse call in the history of the Super Bowl.  You have to give it to Lynch, he's been unstopable, Bollocks.

First look at it from a time management perspective. The game wasn't on the line with this single play.  The situation was 2nd and goal at the 1, under 30 seconds to play, and one timeout remaining.  If you're smart about it you can get 3 shots to get that yard.  Because of having only having one timeout all 3 can't be runs however, you risk running out of clock.  If they ran the ball and got stuffed, they would have to call a timeout.  In order to maximize the likelyhood of running the most plays, therefore increasing thier chances of getting that touchdown, the next play would have to be a pass.  By passing when they did they kept all thier other options open.  They could run-call timeout-run again, they could run-call time out-pass, or they could pass-pass.  In other words the Seahawks kept thier range (of options) wide.

Second, although I don't claim to be a great football strategist, that particular play has a very high chance of success against that defensive set.  The Patriots have thier run stopping package out there and couldn't make any substitions even if they wanted to (without calling a timeout), and the cornerback they were attacking was an undrafted rookie.  The chances of that throw being intercepted are very very low.  For that play to turn out the way it did 2 cornerbacks had to make unbelievable plays (one cornerback jammed the reciever that was supposed to set the pick at the line in scrimmage, the other had to jump the route and intercept).  I would go so far to say the chances of making a touchdown are greater than the chances of an incompletion.  Choosing to run because you're concerned about an interception would be the equivelent of not calling a 20bb shove with AK because they might have AA, and you'll still have a workable.  You can't be overly concerned with super unlikely worse case scenerios. 

Third, the worse coaching decision during that time was Bellichick not calling a timeout with a over a minute to go.  This should be a brainer.  If Seattle scores in the next 2 plays New England gets the ball with with about a minute to go to get into field goal range.  Kinda like Brady's first Super Bowl (except this would be for a tie and not a win).  It also limit's Seattle's options.  If they throw 2 incompletions but still get a touchdown, that just means New England gets the ball back with about 50 seconds and 1 timeout.  It makes incompletions much more costly.  Basically not calling a timeout is a horrible play.

So I guess the lesson is to consider all of your options, think ahead, and don't be results oriented.  Bad play gets rewarded sometimes.  I supposed another lesson is that the media and so called experts (former and current players and whatnot) are mostly results oriented, level one thinkers that can only communicate in cliches.  In other words, dumb asses.