A Tale of Two Halves

[themunn]

But where are the points in the 2nd half? Gotta' be able to finish games and put teams away. When the game was on the line, him and the offense didn't get it done.
They scored ZERO POINTS at Santa Clara. Let me guess, it has nothing to do with Geno, he's above any criticism.

Look, Geno can be better, but we had the ball 3 times in the 2nd half. We scored a field goal on the first of those 3 drives, the 2nd and third drives were killed by holding penalties (incidentally, both by Lewis). 25 minutes of the 2nd half had gone before we got to possess the ball a third time, and by that time we are 4 points down, chasing the game, we are seeking a TD or nothing - if the defense had managed a SINGLE stop in the 2nd half (the QB fumbling an RB handoff doesn't count), perhaps we have the opportunity to settle for a field goal and kill/win the game (for sure we could have run the clock down further) instead of having to go for it on 4th and 18. Then we're talking about scoring on 2/3rds of our possessions in the 2nd half, including a game winning drive.

Or maybe if Lewis hadn't been pinged for a hold when Penny gets the ball to the 9 we score the TD we need. Perhaps if the defense had been able to make a SINGLE stop in the 2nd half we might have had a 4th or 5th opportunity to score and get points. Perhaps perhaps perhaps. Perhaps Geno is not the answer, but he is far from the biggest issue right now (in fact, perhaps Damien Lewis is the biggest problem on the offense right now, not Geno).

As for the 49ers - Wilson's Bronco's had the ball THIRTEEN times against the 49ers and only managed to score twice (1 FG, 1 TD), likewise the Bears first 5 drives went for a TOTAL of 26 yards and an interception. Sure they had a wild rush in the 3rd quarter, but the 49ers have a *really* good defense and will probably have more than 1 shut out this year - it doesn't excuse our poor performance, but that's ancient history now - many of the issues we saw in that on the offensive side of the ball have been resolved. What needs fixed (and has done for at least 3 years now) is the D first and foremost

 

[sc85sis]

Couldn't see the game live, so I quickly did the condensed version yesterday. Damian Lewis had a holding penalty that put us behind the chains on our last drive. That killed the momentum. Penny got it down inside the 10 and it was called back. That was followed by a sack and the pick to end our chances to win it. I can't help wondering what might have been if he didn't get called for that hold.

The D also let Patterson run all over them in the third quarter.

 

[jammerhawk]

GeeNo has proved he is a good solid backup, but he's truly not a starter. Is he really the best choice for the team now? Maybe this will be unpopular but this is a weak team so far and likely soundly in the bottom 10 in the league.

Pete is seriously risk adverse, but I'd rather see Lock and higher risk but with excitement rather than dink, dunk, then just not enough when it counts. Perhaps he's not truly a choker but he isn't getting it done when it's needed.

At this point GeeNo has not scored in how many quarters in the second half of 3 games? THE ANSWER IS 8. Although they did score a FG in the 3rd Q against Atl.. This is three points for the O in 6 quarters in the second half of all the games this year.

Perhaps it's easy to pin things on him when catchable balls get dropped, the running game is abandoned, and stupid penalties snuff out drives contribute to a big part of his weakness. Worse still is a D that cannot stop diddly squat. Opponents will run on the Hawks all year until they can seal the edges and the ILBs play gap sound D, and they improve their tackling. However, that tackling was markedly better against Atlanta.

The Hawks are sucking in the 2nd half of games.

 

[BASF]

GeeNo has proved he is a good solid backup, but he's truly not a starter. Is he really the best choice for the team now? Maybe this will be unpopular but this is a weak team so far and likely soundly in the bottom 10 in the league.

Pete is seriously risk adverse, but I'd rather see Lock and higher risk but with excitement rather than dink, dunk, then just not enough when it counts. Perhaps he's not truly a choker but he isn't getting it done when it's needed.

At this point GeeNo has not scored in how many quarters in the second half of 3 games? THE ANSWER IS 8. Although they did score a FG in the 3rd Q against Atl.. This is three points for the O in 6 quarters in the second half of all the games this year.

Perhaps it's easy to pin things on him when catchable balls get dropped, the running game is abandoned, and stupid penalties snuff out drives contribute to a big part of his weakness. Worse still is a D that cannot stop diddly squat. Opponents will run on the Hawks all year until they can seal the edges and the ILBs play gap sound D, and they improve their tackling. However, that tackling was markedly better against Atlanta.

The Hawks are sucking in the 2nd half of games.

You forgot to switch accounts when you posted this.

 

[CallMeADawg]

But where are the points in the 2nd half? Gotta' be able to finish games and put teams away. When the game was on the line, him and the offense didn't get it done.
They scored ZERO POINTS at Santa Clara. Let me guess, it has nothing to do with Geno, he's above any criticism.

This has all been explained to you in other threads.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

GeeNo has proved he is a good solid backup, but he's truly not a starter. Is he really the best choice for the team now? Maybe this will be unpopular but this is a weak team so far and likely soundly in the bottom 10 in the league.

Pete is seriously risk adverse, but I'd rather see Lock and higher risk but with excitement rather than dink, dunk, then just not enough when it counts. Perhaps he's not truly a choker but he isn't getting it done when it's needed.

At this point GeeNo has not scored in how many quarters in the second half of 3 games? THE ANSWER IS 8. Although they did score a FG in the 3rd Q against Atl.. This is three points for the O in 6 quarters in the second half of all the games this year.

Perhaps it's easy to pin things on him when catchable balls get dropped, the running game is abandoned, and stupid penalties snuff out drives contribute to a big part of his weakness. Worse still is a D that cannot stop diddly squat. Opponents will run on the Hawks all year until they can seal the edges and the ILBs play gap sound D, and they improve their tackling. However, that tackling was markedly better against Atlanta.

The Hawks are sucking in the 2nd half of games.

I've said from week one of the pre-season that I'd rather see how high the upside of Lock this year is, rather than endure a season of knowing what we already know about Geno, that he's a mediocre backup.

At least Lock can sling it around and push the ball downfield. Yeah he might throw a pick or two a game, but at least he can move the offense.

Pete obviously doesn't think this team is as bad as everyone else does, which is why he's playing it safe with Geno rather than see what Lock can do. IMO short sighted.

 

[hoxrox]

I've said from week one of the pre-season that I'd rather see how high the upside of Lock this year is, rather than endure a season of knowing what we already know about Geno, that he's a mediocre backup.

At least Lock can sling it around and push the ball downfield. Yeah he might throw a pick or two a game, but at least he can move the offense.

Pete obviously doesn't think this team is as bad as everyone else does, which is why he's playing it safe with Geno rather than see what Lock can do. IMO short sighted.

More damning than Locks picks and turnovers, is his ability to read coverages pre-snap. Not recognizing blitzes and adjusting for that are drive killers. Geno might not be hero-balling, but he can read coverages.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

More damning than Locks picks and turnovers, is his ability to read coverages pre-snap. Not recognizing blitzes and adjusting for that are drive killers. Geno might not be hero-balling, but he can read coverages.

I understand all this.

My point is if we know the Hawks are going to suck (and EVERYONE outside of Pete Carrol thinks this), then why not find out what you have in Lock so you know what the rebuild needs going forward at the QB position.

Now maybe Pete and John already know what they have in Lock, a backup QB. If that's the case and they've already made that determination? Great I guess.

But I think he still has some upside to explore, and this is the season to find that out.

 

[LeaveLynchAlone]

I've said from week one of the pre-season that I'd rather see how high the upside of Lock this year is, rather than endure a season of knowing what we already know about Geno, that he's a mediocre backup.

At least Lock can sling it around and push the ball downfield. Yeah he might throw a pick or two a game, but at least he can move the offense.

Pete obviously doesn't think this team is as bad as everyone else does, which is why he's playing it safe with Geno rather than see what Lock can do. IMO short sighted.

I understand your opinion, but it fails the test when viewing from the macro. This Seahawks iteration is one heavy on development. In the very very short season thus far development has been happening.

Failures, mistakes, and ineptitude is simply part of the growth process. I understand the narrative surrounding Pete by many fans and TV personalities as a has-been senile old coot. The reality is Pete is always working towards learning, growth, and improvement and as such I am very optimistic for the development of the current roster.

Geno has outperformed most expectations after just 3 games this year. I expect as the team becomes more experienced the non-existent second half scoring issue will fade into our memories as newfound criticism takes the spotlight is some minds.

Complaining about the details of any moment or part of a game with such a limited sample size is complaining about the obvious without considering the bigger picture.

Have the Seahawks had some successes on both sides of the ball this year? If your viewpoint is no, then I don't expect anything that occurs will change your mind, which is fine by me.

Pete Carroll is a coach, a leader of men, and a builder of a culture of abundance of can of success through positivity, practice, study, and hard work. Pete is playing the long game and that gives me a perspective to have great deal to look forward to this season and beyond.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Pete Carroll is a coach, a leader of men, and a builder of a culture of abundance of can of success through positivity, practice, study, and hard work. Pete is playing the long game and that gives me a perspective to have great deal to look forward to this season and beyond.

This is where you lost me.

If he's playing the long game then why is he starting the QB with no upside knowing Geno won't be the starter beyond this year?

He's playing the short "I'd like to keep my job and make the locker room happy by playing the QB everyone likes and doesn't make as many mistakes as the other QB."

The only answer I'll accept on this debate is if Pete and John don't think Lock has anymore upside and he's reached his potential. Other than this, it makes no sense to go with the safer QB as opposed to the QB with the higher upside and higher potential.

 

[Msfann]

I've been harsh on Geno but I think he did fine in this last game. You cant expect any QB to automatically score a touchdown when down by 4 with time running out.
I think the D was to blame since they cant stop jack shiat.

 

[jammerhawk]

For me there is no narrative as far as Pete is concerned, I like Pete. I do hate seeing my team look consistently inept on D and so restricted on O. I do think the team is headed in the right direction but I want more than than I've seen. I just think there is this conservative approach from Pete that needs to be varied to allow them to take more risks. It isn't like this is going to be a playoff year anyway.

- I'd like to see a running game. I'd like them to be more determined to stay with it when it doesn't work to start with.
- I'd like to see a D that can actually stop the run. They are not doing that bad against the pass.
- I don't mind Geno but would like to know what the team really has in Lock. The sample size we've seen was pretty small.
- I want to see the rookies get more playing time.

 

[LeaveLynchAlone]

This is where you lost me.

If he's playing the long game then why is he starting the QB with no upside knowing Geno won't be the starter beyond this year?

He's playing the short "I'd like to keep my job and make the locker room happy by playing the QB everyone likes and doesn't make as many mistakes as the other QB."

The only answer I'll accept on this debate is if Pete and John don't think Lock has anymore upside and he's reached his potential. Other than this, it makes no sense to go with the safer QB as opposed to the QB with the higher upside and higher potential.

The long game is about developing a winning team. Geno has done more than you or I or anyone outside of the franchise had expected.

I understand if you come with the opinion that Geno is a washed up retread who has no upside then your hope to see Lock makes sense. As Geno has been able to perform as a starting QB it doesn't make much sense to make a change in this moment - certainly Pete sees it this way. Geno's performance has been impressive considering he's seen as a washed up retread by so many. Try letting go of your opinion based upon the minutiae of the present and the failures of the past and look towards what happens over time.

What could help you is to think of Geno as a rookie, not unlike Russell in 2012. Playing conservatively with a few splash plays is a possibility to find success. Geno has surprised me and I am happy to see where he can take this team. If he stops developing or worse yet begins to regress over a fair number of games then bring on Lock, but I cannot see the reasoning behind that move as of today.

Assuming the defense gets straightened out, this year will very likely exceed most expectations.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I've been harsh on Geno but I think he did fine in this last game. You cant expect any QB to automatically score a touchdown when down by 4 with time running out.

Yes, that's exactly what you should expect out of your starting QB, the confidence that he can drive the offense downfield and win you games.

This is a parity league where that's literally the difference between winning and losing on a weekly basis, the teams with QB's that can win games in the 4th, and teams that can't.

If you don't have that confidence in your QB? Then he's not a starting QB.

 

[WmHBonney]

I've said from week one of the pre-season that I'd rather see how high the upside of Lock this year is, rather than endure a season of knowing what we already know about Geno, that he's a mediocre backup.

At least Lock can sling it around and push the ball downfield. Yeah he might throw a pick or two a game, but at least he can move the offense.

Pete obviously doesn't think this team is as bad as everyone else does, which is why he's playing it safe with Geno rather than see what Lock can do. IMO short sighted.

The problem is that the "pick or two" a game will be converted into 10-14 points with our defense. This defense can't stop anybody.