Yea you're right no team should ever pass the ball at the goalline ever again because of that one play.. Seems like dopey Diaco let that, like you go to his head and we lost because of it.
Being a 'Hawks fan for the last 38 years, I've had about 20 months' time to ruminate over that life-draining, franchise-diminishing play (from my perspective) and talk about it with hundreds of other Seahawks fans. It will probably be with me until I croak. One timeout left, second and goal from the one. Ball snapped with 26 seconds left. With Wilson (who, like Shirreffs, can run) at QB, here are your options:
QB rollout to the right, with the option to pass or throw. Any pass should be thrown where only the receiver has a chance at the ball. The worst thing that should happen is that Wilson tries to score himself, gets tackled inbounds, and you have to burn the timeout.
QB throws a fade route into the end zone (preferably back corner, but sideline is acceptable), where only the receiver has a chance at the ball. Worst thing that should happen is an incomplete pass. An experienced QB can also check to see if anyone is uncovered, of course (based on pre-snap motion, it looked like Lynch was actually going to be open as a receiver on that play, and possibly TE Luke Willson)
Call a running play and let someone (most likely Lynch in that situation, but Wilson would be acceptable) try to push the ball over the goal line. This does risk a fumble, but the worst thing that should be expected is a tackle inbounds and a need to burn the timeout.
What the Seahawks chose: a pass play into the center of the field in which Wilson had no discretion to target another receiver besides Lockette once the ball was snapped (though the QB could have audibled out of the play if the Pats didn't follow WR Baldwin over to the left during pre-snap motion, which would have left Seattle with a 2-on-3 in terms of right-side wide receivers). Statistically, the risk of an INT on a pass from the one-yard-line was about 1%, but we all know what happened. Browner overmatched Kearse, and Butler had a lane to make his jump at the ball and snatch it out of Lockette's hands after Lockette cut behind Kearse and turned toward Wilson and the ball. Because the ball was thrown a little in front of Lockette rather than right on his body, Butler was able to get there first.
That one hurt from a strategy perspective because that particular pass play interjected unnecessary risk into the mix, and relied on a faulty assumption (that Kearse could push Browner back a couple of yards, forcing Butler to alter his route). I personally don't think Lynch would have scored on a running play from that formation the way the Pats were lined up, but I think a different pass play would have worked - really, anything that gave Wilson discretion to make his own decision as to where to throw the ball. Carroll did what Diaco did, to an extent - took discretion away from his QB and made an error in judgment to boot, so the QB was stuck running a play that was not going to work.
What surprises me is that, with the amount of national conversation that went on around that play, Diaco apparently hadn't worked through his own "what would I do from the one-yard-line in that situation" priority list. He was stuck on the knee-jerk, most basic analysis of "run the ball, stupid." So, not only was he not prepared to call the next play after the catch at the 1-yard-line (using the timeout, which is really inexcusable), but he defaulted to the "judgment of the masses" and ran a pretty obvious play that was likely not to leave time for a follow-up.