ok dude. i only wanna say this one more time. the quick slant statistics are garbage. throw them out the freaking window. for about 10 reasons, but here are the top 2:
1. seattle's formation was recognizable. even a no name rookie who is now a new england legend recognized the formation, and if you think about if you were in his shoes, you would have seen it coming also. if bevell were able to strategize out of the box, the best outcome of this formation would have been for kearse to fight out, then go in, followed by lockette faking the slant, and taking an out, kind of like edelman's whirl routes that toasted simon. butler rockets in the second lockette goes in, therefore if lockette fakes in and runs a hard out underneath kearse, he's all alone in the flat probably taking on a recovering butler head on at the 1 millimeter line, if not completely all alone. but....
2. how many combo rub quick slants are ran at the 1? why does your wonderful stat not include that? it shouldn't be included on the play sheet whatsoever at the 1 yard line. it gives the receivers no space to work. it almost guarantees the inside receiver will get jammed. its dumb. even when the seahawks successfully ran this play against the saints a couple years ago, it was from the 2. that extra yard opens up a world of wriggle room for the undercut.
if one more person tells me how many quick slants in the nfl did not get intercepted this year....
let alone how many "quick slants" has seattle even successfully converted this year? So, let's use a play we have almost zero practical use from this year
(i mean honestly, was the failed slant to lynch at carolina and the succesful td slant to lynch our only ones of the year?)
so you are wrong. i am not criticizing because "it didn't work". i am criticizing because in the most epic moment in franchise history bevell leaves his brain in the hotel and goes with a play we don't call almost ever. almost 75% of our passing attack i would estimate is off of playaction. i know bevell thought the receivers getting seperation was a problem for playaction, but guess what, when russ's quick drop slants or stick routes total about 5% of our total offense on the year, you just don't do it. you have russ get out of the pocket, run around, and see if Doug can shake free. if not, throw it away, or try for the pylon with russ scrambling.
This was EXACTLY like Navy a couple 5 or 6 years back. they came in to Ohio State, opening day, when the buckeyes were like the 6 seed. in the 2nd half Navy had ohio state on the ropes because they could not defend the triple option. so navy, down 8, on the oh state like 7 yard line, with about 2 mins left, lines up on i believe 3rd down, IN A PRO SET, which mind you they hadn't done literally all day long. All day they ran a triple option offense and by the 2nd half Ohio State was looking stupid trying to defend it. Navy ran some kind of combo route just like seattle, and got it picked off. oh state takes it to the house. game. if you lose with wishy washy bullcrap because the other teams' "goal line defense" psyched you out, shame on you. i don't care what pete says, i freaking love the guy, i don't care what the public says, i don't care what blount says,
ON THE 1 YARD LINE YOU RUN THE BALL WHEN YOU HAVE A FRANCHISE RECORD HOLDING RUSHING OFFENSE WITH 30 SECS LEFT IN THE SUPER BOWL, WITH MARSHAWN LYNCH.
Debate over. Pete was wrong. Bevell was wrong. Please stop with the bullcrap pseudo arguments. We'll rise from the ashes because Pete is a terrific coach. i also take the points at the half. that is why pete is a head coach and i fix airplanes. but he is not God, and he is not perfect, and we can't expect him to be. he was wrong. it's ok. the million ways we defend a decision always seem to make it tolerable. for the cold hard facts, read the ALL CAPS again.