Finishing teams off

[lukerguy]

The Seattle Seahawks very easily could have lost Sunday's game against Carolina.

After extending their lead to 30-10 with 7 minutes left, the Sehawks found themselves on 3rd and 11 in their own territory with 2 minutes left. Does anyone have confidence that the defense would have stopped CAR after giving up 2 straight long TD drives in "prevent" defense? I sure don't.

To those who have played HS or College football, you know that it's a lot easier to play loose when you're coming from behind. You're already faced with the the idea of losing, and since you're already losing, you have nothing more to lose. When your winning, you have everything to lose, and such your play calling becomes more conservative, your hands get a little tighter, and doubt can enter the picture.

Why is it that the Patriots, when leading against inferior teams, seem to blow them out, and often? Why is it the Seahawks have a tendency to let teams back in?

The Seahawks couldn't bring any pressure on defense from their base front 4 in prevent D... And they didn't even try sending blitzes either. Many teams, when up, will actually bring more pressure.. Sure it opens up the big play, but it also has a much better upside than letting a team score in 71 seconds with no pressure in prevent defense as the Seahawks did Sunday.

So, how do you fix it? I'm not more knowledgable than NFL coaches, but if I had to try to fix the problem.. here's what I'd suggest. Copy those who do it regularly- the Patriots.. What do they do?

1) Get pressure on the opponent's QB, while maintaining deep help. Disguised blitzes with linemen and and LBs showing at the line then dropping. When leading big, you have a huge advantage, you know they aren't going to be running the ball. Use that advantage!
2) Don't change your game planning. If they had success running on 1st down, run on 1st down. If they had success with play action, run play action &/or boots. If they had success with short passing games, run short passing games. If they're loading the box, and man coverage with no safety help, take a shot. Run screens, keep the playbook fully open.
3) Mentally: coach your players to think of it as 0-0 game. They shouldn't be protecting the ball anymore or less than they did earlier in the game- it's always important.

The Seahawks used to be able to put away bad teams.. Remember the 58-0 drubbing of the Cards years ago? The difference? Pressure on D. The Hawks could rotate their line and get consistent pressure with their front 4... so teams could get down by 20 points, and still only have 2-3 seconds to throw the ball. Tons of sacks, INTs, fumbles and 3rd and long. Offensively, the read option confused teams and sort of kept them on their heels more.

Anyways, this has been bothering me all week. Imagine if they hadn't converted 3rd and 11. We could easily be talking about 31-30 loss when up 30-10 with 7 min left. I know they came through, but it was too close for a team of their caliber ( and CAR).

 

[SoulfishHawk]

But they DIDN'T lose. 11-3
Why in the world does it matter how winning a game looks??? :34853_doh:

10-1 in one score games. They put away teams 10 times this year already. Style points mean nothing in the NFL. Win by 1, win by 20. You still put away the team you played. You put them in the Loss column. Do I want them to hold those healthy leads at the end? Absolutely. But that's just not how this team does things, and it likely isn't going to change. They were in control of MANY of these games that looked scary at the end. Healthy leads on Atlanta, Philly, Carolina, Pitts etc. I prefer they go for the throat and just keep smoking teams when they have the lead.
But the got the Win. And as Metallica says, Nothing else Matters.

 

[ivotuk]

I appreciate where you're coming from, but this is a completely different team. A team without 3 HOF players in the secondary, but instead, young players, 6 rookies, and a modified game plan once Bobby Wagner went out.

I know that didn't take away the frustration I felt towards the end of the game, but it helped me relax in the aftermath.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I feel like we've been running around this track since the beginning of the season.

Defense. That's what this is about.............as in our defense isn't good enough to step on a team's throat so our offense can put these games away.

58-0 means you've got a nasty defense that literally punches the other team in the mouth until they give up. When's the last time you saw this version of the defense do that?

So when the offense gets a lead, the defense needs to hold that lead, and more importantly punch the other offense in the mouth into submission.

As we saw in the SF and Eagles game, when everyone's healthy they can certainly play well. But when guys are hurt, they're in trouble and can easily give up leads in a hurry.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Like Ivotek says, it's frustrating as it's happening. But they win it in the end, and that gets me right back to relaxing and enjoying the win. Well, after a couple drinks :irishdrinkers:

You guys have a great xmas! I appreciate being able to come on here and talk football. Hope everyone has a safe holiday.
11 Days off, so I look forward to coming back here on the 31st and talking about that #1 Seed! :drool:

GO HAWKS!!!

 

[lukerguy]

But they DIDN'T lose. 11-3
Why in the world does it matter how winning a game looks??? :34853_doh:

10-1 in one score games. They put away teams 10 times this year already. Style points mean nothing in the NFL. Win by 1, win by 20. You still put away the team you played. You put them in the Loss column. Do I want them to hold those healthy leads at the end? Absolutely. But that's just not how this team does things, and it likely isn't going to change. They were in control of MANY of these games that looked scary at the end. Healthy leads on Atlanta, Philly, Carolina, Pitts etc. I prefer they go for the throat and just keep smoking teams when they have the lead.
But the got the Win. And as Metallica says, Nothing else Matters.

You're right: it doesn't matter in the scope of a one week effort. Winning 30-24 versus 37-10 make no difference in one single week.

But it does matter if the style you play could allow for a collapse in the future. Just because things work out for you in the past doesn't mean they will workout in the future.

If you're a top team, and you're up 30-10 against a bad team, you should never be in a situation where you're 50/50 odds of losing the game.

It's the same reason the Packers lost to the Seahawks in the NFCC game. They played not to lose at the end. Remember Russ was picked off for the 4th time, and Peppers told the GB player to go down, rather than potentially score a TD or get into FG range? The packers ran it every time and got stuffed... they could have easily won if they kept their foot on the gas.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

How many fans leave the game in Arizona when the lead is 30 to 3? You can move the whole of the seahawk fans into the lower level on the Cards home side at the second half and still have room for friends.

They are not letting them back in on purpose, but are trying different things that may be necessary for the next series of plays next week. Some people call it backing off, some people call it Bevelling, some people call it learning what your backup players have available in the event the primary goes down for the count.

I know that this is all speculation...but it does fit the scenario that I concept.

Have a wonderful day.

 

[loafoftatupu]

Carroll has been doing this for years, the difference is that we don't have a secondary that plays the ball like we used to. It is literally PC trying to use clock and playing the odds. He wins this gamble nearly every time in the end but it looks awful. I do not like seeing it happen when there is still 8-10 minutes in the game. With Marshawn this was gravy and Carson is getting there, he has closed some games out so the feel SHOULD change in time.

 

[John63]

The problem you have is as long as OUR miracle worker keeps working the miracles no one will want to change. We have winning records, we get into the playoffs. An though we have only won the big prize 1 out of the 9 years this great winning method has been used, it does not matter. People are happy, hey were in every year, and we won one. that's all that matters the hunger even in fans to win the SB is gone. There is another thread related to this, and most keep saying we are 50+-o in game were we lead by 4 or more after halftime, which is great still can't figure out if this is so great why only 1 SB win though. I mean NE has won several during the same time. It appears for some the goal was to be GB and win one and be happy not be NE and win many.

 

[xray]

There were a few games ; as a fan ; that I wanted the Hawks to stomp an opponent when they had the chance ; but they wouldn't or couldn't ... the defense seems to have a problem with late game hurry-up offenses . They get slapped in those situations . IMO

 

[rcaido]

To be fair, allowing the Falcons to come back has help given them new life. Im sure if we blew out the Falcons game, Quinn would have been fired...After that game, they got confidence & beat the Saints almost twice & 49ers...

Who knows, maybe the Panther can beat the Saints.

58-0 Merry x-mas

 

[jammerhawk]

But they DIDN'T lose. 11-3
Why in the world does it matter how winning a game looks??? :34853_doh:

10-1 in one score games. They put away teams 10 times this year already. Style points mean nothing in the NFL. Win by 1, win by 20. You still put away the team you played. You put them in the Loss column. Do I want them to hold those healthy leads at the end? Absolutely. But that's just not how this team does things, and it likely isn't going to change. They were in control of MANY of these games that looked scary at the end. Healthy leads on Atlanta, Philly, Carolina, Pitts etc. I prefer they go for the throat and just keep smoking teams when they have the lead.
But the got the Win. And as Metallica says, Nothing else Matters.

Soulfish, I completely agree with your post.

I do however understand the frustration many here express about the W's being less stylistically pretty. of course every fan of every team wants to win 43-3 or close to that so the throats of the opponent have been truly stepped upon. That later part is measured in terms of the season scoreboard and there it's down to W's and Ls. There, nothing else matters.

What we see again and again is foot taken of the gas pedal or a scratch out a W from behind situation. We all here are victims of the 'Cardiac Kids' who have Ws now in 11 games, are 3-1 in the Divisional games to date, and 8-2 in Conference results. The losses have all been close except for the egg laid against the Rams, the team lost a close game to NO and kept the game close with Baltimore until close to the end.

I suspect a few here quietly think the team isn't as good as it's record, and there they'd be wrong. Just to remind everyone the team is the #1 ranked team in the NFC, that said apparently the AP voters don't think the team is all that great either as only 2 guys made the Pro Bowl, so I guess there must be a lot of guys who must have been close but didn't make it. I suspect a few here as well don't quietly believe the team will go all the way in the playoffs or win a bye either. There, time will tell. I'm prepared for a few more great W's even if they are ugly to others.

Style is great if style points counted on the scoreboard or in standings, but they just don't and I'd rather have the ugly Ws than great style but a L.

I get a sense that this season's team has exceeded even Pete's expectations but is a solid team, with young capable talent at a lot of positions. JS has found the team guys who want to be here and who play hard. The team has a genuine sense of 'can do' mentality and is resilient so even if behind by a lot is capable of coming back. Somehow as well I have a sense there has been some sandbagging going with Pete and we haven't seen the whole playbook from the team, there only time will tell as well. The resiliency is very important this time of the year when the opponents are all mostly pretty good teams and are in every game for the long fight. In a sense I was happy the team lost badly to the Rams b/c they know the sense of losing b/c they forgot their core principle of always believing they can come back and playing to accomplish that end. The lesson will be fresh and the team has earned it's present lofty ranking. The team wins games.

The team gets to finish up now with 2 home Divisional games which are never easy games b/c of how well each of the two teams know each other. While I am always concerned about AZ playing Seattle our team matches well against them and even if the score is closer and the game is uglier than some here would like I believe the Hawks will pull out another W. We should never think any game against the Cardinals will be an easy game, it won't be.

I don't know who could safely pick the winner of the final game for the Divisional championship if SF beats the Rams and the Hawks beat the Cardinals, but if some of walking wounded are back by then and the team plays as well as it can play I'd expect a close and exciting and maybe nerve racking contest where our guys resiliency will be tested as will theirs. I'm happy the Digits will have a bare knuckle fight this weekend with the Rams who are still scratching for a late WC playoff spot even if they need some help. as much as I hate saying it, Go Rams!

My belief is even Vegas will have a hard time setting a spread for the final Seahawks game. 13-3 would certainly be sweet as would a bye.

Who'd have thought it, earlier this year?

 

[ivotuk]

How many fans leave the game in Arizona when the lead is 30 to 3? You can move the whole of the seahawk fans into the lower level on the Cards home side at the second half and still have room for friends.

They are not letting them back in on purpose, but are trying different things that may be necessary for the next series of plays next week. Some people call it backing off, some people call it Bevelling, some people call it learning what your backup players have available in the event the primary goes down for the count.

I know that this is all speculation...but it does fit the scenario that I concept.

Have a wonderful day.

This is an excellent point. The reason Pete's teams are good every year is because he gets the rookies playing time. so when a veteran goes down, we don't get linked like Etric Pruitt in xl.

Pete did the same thing at USC, playing freshmen, and it pays off,year after year.

Pete's philosophy has been successful, albeit stressful. Run the ball, eat up the clock, wear out the opposing defense, and rest yours.

Even so, half of our defensive starters were out late in the game. Bobby Wagner, Quandre Diggs, Jadeveon Clowney, Ziggy Ansah, Shaquille Griffin. So Pete went conservative on the game plan to not get beat deep. It barely worked, but it did work.

 

[chris98251]

Having played sports most my life up until I was almost 40 playing with a lead is much easier, you keep the pressure on with offense, they feel more pressure trying not to let you score again, on defense your playing down hill, you have a lead, you can take and dictate what you do, read and jump a route maybe, blitz, and with a league if they happen to read it and get a gain or a score it isn't devastating your offense is putting the heat on and will get it back and not having to restart momentum.

That and you take that will to win and hope away from the opposition, they start thinking how much better you are then them, that they are not going to beat you etc. That effects their play and effort.

 

[Hawkpower]

The problem you have is as long as OUR miracle worker keeps working the miracles no one will want to change. We have winning records, we get into the playoffs. An though we have only won the big prize 1 out of the 9 years this great winning method has been used, it does not matter. People are happy, hey were in every year, and we won one. that's all that matters the hunger even in fans to win the SB is gone. There is another thread related to this, and most keep saying we are 50+-o in game were we lead by 4 or more after halftime, which is great still can't figure out if this is so great why only 1 SB win though. I mean NE has won several during the same time. It appears for some the goal was to be GB and win one and be happy not be NE and win many.

They aren’t being deprived of Super Bowl wins because of Pete’s philosophy.

Pete’s philosophy has won them every game with a nice halftime lead since 2012.

Every single game. No losses.

No. Losses.

Other factors have kept your coveted trophies away.

 

[SantaClaraHawk]

You know how people say, "you're only as good as your record"? Well that includes point differentials. We're playing that way because that's as good as we are.

 

[RolandDeschain]

But they DIDN'T lose. 11-3
Why in the world does it matter how winning a game looks??? :34853_doh:

It's not about how it looks, it's about how it can result in losses that should have been wins - which has happened to us, and will undoubtedly happen again.

It's like when you know someone who drives 30MPH over the speed limit at a minimum everywhere they go. You KNOW eventually it's going to bite them in the ass.

Why is this so hard to understand?

 

[lukerguy]

But they DIDN'T lose. 11-3
Why in the world does it matter how winning a game looks??? :34853_doh:

It's not about how it looks, it's about how it can result in losses that should have been wins - which has happened to us, and will undoubtedly happen again.

It's like when you know someone who drives 30MPH over the speed limit at a minimum everywhere they go. You KNOW eventually it's going to bite them in the ass.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Exactly. There's actually cognitive bias for this:

Gambler's Fallacy. The human brain has difficulty understanding probability and large numbers, so you are naturally inclined to believe that past events can somehow change or impact future probabilities.

For example, there are many people who try to analyze the past performance of the stock market in order to pick future stocks that should be winners, usually with terrible results (there's a reason why very few money managers outperform the S&P 500). This is a product of the Gambler's Fallacy, and it can get you, your clients, and your businesses into a great deal of trouble.

How does this hold you back? In most cases, past events don't change the future unless you let them, so you need to take great care when attempting to learn from the past. It's fine to look to the past for insights, but don't fall into the "past performance dictates future performance" trap.

 

[olyfan63]

The Seattle Seahawks very easily could have lost Sunday's game against Carolina.

After extending their lead to 30-10 with 7 minutes left, the Sehawks found themselves on 3rd and 11 in their own territory with 2 minutes left. Does anyone have confidence that the defense would have stopped CAR after giving up 2 straight long TD drives in "prevent" defense? I sure don't.
-snip-
Anyways, this has been bothering me all week. Imagine if they hadn't converted 3rd and 11. We could easily be talking about 31-30 loss when up 30-10 with 7 min left. I know they came through, but it was too close for a team of their caliber ( and CAR).

Thank you for this awesome post!

I wonder what the success percentage calculation was on that 3rd and 11? 20%? Yes, it's Russell, but it sure felt like we were unbelievablly close to losing 31-30 before that conversion.

I understand and support Pete in playing the young guys, but damn! Scoring a TD in 70 seconds?
Such a horrible performance from basically a 2nd team defense? From Pete's point of view, this should be unacceptably close to a horrendous *miscalculation* on his part. The Carolina offense made it look like taking candy from a baby in that 4th quarter.

I don't know what Pete's scheme change plans are for this situation, but *something* has to change! I don't say this from the point of view of an "outraged fan", but from the viewpoint of a coach and a guy who likes to think I understand a lot of how Pete's mind works. I'd like to think Pete looks at this as a wake-up call, unacceptably close, but on this one, I really don't know. Did it get Pete's attention enough? Will he talk over with his coordinators adjustments to his "Prevent" (us from winning) defense scheme and adjustments on the offensive side to keep the pressure on, and snuff out rallies? Does Pete see all this as a non-issue, that he never really even felt threatened, that he felt he and the team could turn back on the juice at any moment needed?

Here's how I'd like to think Pete would approach it. Remember, Pete is still learning and refining himself as a coach. He learned from the Percy Harvin fiasco. He learned from the Malcolm McDowell fiasco. So... I DO think this truly caught Pete's attention. I think Pete is in a state of UTTER DISMAY at how poorly the JV defense played (nor sure what else to call that unit), and DISAPPOINTMENT in how the offense failed to burn clock and/or get another score. I also think Pete is nearly as disappointed with the OFFENSE, for failing to PROTECT the battered, now-JV defense. I do think Pete is taking this very seriously, after reflecting on it, of how to do a better job of keeping teams down. I believe Pete is really thinking this over, because the late-game sequence of events in Carolina is FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE with Pete's self-described IDENTITY as a COMPETITOR. The defense simply didn't COMPETE on those last two drives. So I'm pretty sure Pete is giving this serious thought and discussing this with the coordinators and other coaches, as well as the players.

What will Pete DO about this problem? I do believe he now considers it an actual problem. Obviously, he is talking it over with Norton and Schotty. Clearly, the film study and position group work this week is going to be looking a lot at key plays during the Panthers' comeback. I think a number of players will be challenged to do better than they did on specific plays, and the young guys will get things clearly pointed out to them, and now they'll be understanding and listening based on firsthand experience. The guys in on D didn't COMPETE. The problem could even be something as simple as misinterpreted communication from Pete. Maybe Pete said to Norton and Schotty after Diggs and Wagner went down, "Let's just get out of here healthy, that's our #1 priority right now." If Pete instead said something to Norton like, "We've got them down; they'll be mostly passing. Let's try out some of those blitz packages we've been working on, see if we can get pressure on that QB and give some of our young guys a chance to show us something".

It was like Pete STOPPED COMPETING after the score hit 30-10. The irony is it was the opposite of preseason Pete, where he is out there coaching as hard as he can, through the final seconds of the 4th quarter, trying to get the rookies and roster bubble guys to compete as hard as they can, make some plays and win the game. As a fan, we see the vets and roster locks cheering on the 3rd stringers, and truly cheering them on and being happy for their success. Why is this climate suddenly absent in the regular season? It's like the guys get the impression that they are just supposed to play soft D, don't get injured, and start thinking about that more than just playing Seahawk football.

As a youth soccer coach, I always LOVED it when, up a few goals, I'd put my second tier players into key roles, and see them fight hard and make plays, see them COMPETE HARD and show the learning and development that had been occurring in practice, and have my star players focus on setting up the second tier players rather than padding their own stats. Certainly not letting the opponent back into the game through indifferent, lackluster play. The same was true when down several goals against a superior opponent; there's plenty of learning and development that can occur in that situation.

I'm cautiously optimistic that Pete is working on this letdown-with-a-lead issue. We shall see... It could be almost as simple as him changing his messaging to the coordinators and assistants.

One more thing... WHERE THE HELL WAS L.J. COLLIER?? Did anyone even know he was on the field??!!

 

[xray]

The playoffs will soon be here ; and the Hawks will not be facing any 5 or 6 win teams anymore . The NFC is loaded this season going into the post season . If the Hawks are fortunate enough to get a good lead in a playoff game and decide to play it safe to protect that lead ; I feel that they will not fair very well . The defense is not good enough to hold off a good offense with their " prevent D ". Not in the playoffs . IMO