Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

pete told Shotty to take more shots and less run plays...

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
  • This right here is going to be the elephant in the room all season if Pete continues to override the game plan. He needs to stick to the defensive side of the ball.

    Carson was averaging 4+ YPC, the passing game was total crap, yet you choose to call 14 or so passing plays in a row while down by one score.
    "Practice without improvement is meaningless" - Chuck Knox
    User avatar
    2_0_6
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2790
    Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:40 pm
    Location: South Seattle


  • 2_0_6 wrote:This right here is going to be the elephant in the room all season if Pete continues to override the game plan. He needs to stick to the defensive side of the ball.

    Carson was averaging 4+ YPC, the passing game was total crap, yet you choose to call 14 or so passing plays in a row while down by one score.


    Wont matter. He picked an OC that he could mold and mock into what he wants to do. We are screwed with Pete ball on offense. Pete will never succeed without a top 3 defense because his offense is JUST THAT BAD.

    Through 2 games...
    Carson 5.8 YPC
    Penny 2.2 YPC

    Pete's O coordinator main requirements are.....

    Image
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5280
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • 2_0_6 wrote:This right here is going to be the elephant in the room all season if Pete continues to override the game plan. He needs to stick to the defensive side of the ball.

    Carson was averaging 4+ YPC, the passing game was total crap, yet you choose to call 14 or so passing plays in a row while down by one score.


    Link?

    Please link to story or video where Pete is quoted from.
    ITS A GREAT TIME TO BE A SEAHAWK FAN !
    User avatar
    pmedic920
    * .NET Official Stache *
     
    Posts: 16908
    Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:37 am
    Location: On the lake, Livingston Texas


  • pmedic920 wrote:
    2_0_6 wrote:This right here is going to be the elephant in the room all season if Pete continues to override the game plan. He needs to stick to the defensive side of the ball.

    Carson was averaging 4+ YPC, the passing game was total crap, yet you choose to call 14 or so passing plays in a row while down by one score.


    Link?

    Please link to story or video where Pete is quoted from.


    It was on the post game broadcast last night, don't have an audio link.

    Image
    "Practice without improvement is meaningless" - Chuck Knox
    User avatar
    2_0_6
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2790
    Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:40 pm
    Location: South Seattle


  • pmedic920 wrote:
    2_0_6 wrote:This right here is going to be the elephant in the room all season if Pete continues to override the game plan. He needs to stick to the defensive side of the ball.

    Carson was averaging 4+ YPC, the passing game was total crap, yet you choose to call 14 or so passing plays in a row while down by one score.


    Link?

    Please link to story or video where Pete is quoted from.


    I've been hearing this on 950 also and will confirm. I'll find something...
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5280
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • pmedic920 wrote:
    2_0_6 wrote:This right here is going to be the elephant in the room all season if Pete continues to override the game plan. He needs to stick to the defensive side of the ball.

    Carson was averaging 4+ YPC, the passing game was total crap, yet you choose to call 14 or so passing plays in a row while down by one score.


    Link?

    Please link to story or video where Pete is quoted from.


    at 2 minutes 30 seconds in the presser you'll hear it.

    https://youtu.be/gbFcenGgH6U
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5280
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • Seymour wrote:
    2_0_6 wrote:This right here is going to be the elephant in the room all season if Pete continues to override the game plan. He needs to stick to the defensive side of the ball.

    Carson was averaging 4+ YPC, the passing game was total crap, yet you choose to call 14 or so passing plays in a row while down by one score.


    Wont matter. He picked an OC that he could mold and mock into what he wants to do. We are screwed with Pete ball on offense. Pete will never succeed without a top 3 defense because his offense is JUST THAT BAD.

    Through 2 games...
    Carson 5.8 YPC
    Penny 2.2 YPC

    Pete's O coordinator main requirements are.....

    Image


    And without something newish and novel done nearly as well as you can expect (read option) there is literally nothing I can envision that will make Pete's stated vision work, nor is there anything going on that would allow bizarro Pete's vision to work (This hamfisted avoidance of a bang bang bang passing game that doesn't allow defensive subs which can then be exploited by the running game)
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3057
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • pmedic920 wrote:
    2_0_6 wrote:This right here is going to be the elephant in the room all season if Pete continues to override the game plan. He needs to stick to the defensive side of the ball.

    Carson was averaging 4+ YPC, the passing game was total crap, yet you choose to call 14 or so passing plays in a row while down by one score.


    Link?

    Please link to story or video where Pete is quoted from.


    Listen to Pete's post-game presser. He absolutely said it.
    User avatar
    FlyingGreg
    * Master Chief *
     
    Posts: 9302
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:19 am
    Location: Blue Springs, Missouri


  • Seymour wrote:
    2_0_6 wrote:This right here is going to be the elephant in the room all season if Pete continues to override the game plan. He needs to stick to the defensive side of the ball.

    Carson was averaging 4+ YPC, the passing game was total crap, yet you choose to call 14 or so passing plays in a row while down by one score.


    Wont matter. He picked an OC that he could mold and mock into what he wants to do. We are screwed with Pete ball on offense. Pete will never succeed without a top 3 defense because his offense is JUST THAT BAD.

    Through 2 games...
    Carson 5.8 YPC
    Penny 2.2 YPC

    Pete's O coordinator main requirements are.....



    See the outrage after the first two games will start building momentum. At some point I (personally) believe that PC will be told to but out even if it is by the OC.

    The OC knows his job is on the line. He hasn't won a super bowl - he will tell PC that he needs to call the game
    mikeak
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7303
    Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • I love Pete, but it has hit a point with him. He has to adapt or I want him out as HC.
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 12750
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Seattle, WA


  • fundamentally, why take out potential quick positive plays for long developing plays when pass rush was getting to Russ consistently while holding the ball?
    User avatar
    Coug_Hawk08
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4318
    Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:26 am


  • Coug_Hawk08 wrote:fundamentally, why take out potential quick positive plays for long developing plays when pass rush was getting to Russ consistently while holding the ball?


    I have no idea. Supposedly its to limit turnovers because those put the defense in a bad position, which makes no sense to me because

    1. We can't pass protect so we are taking sacks on those deep plays
    2. If you throw it deep when no one is open to avoid the sack - you risk throwing a pick
    3. Strip sacks are a thing
    4. Losing yards on sacks harms the defense due to worse starting field position
    5. A dink and dunk approach down the field mixing in some runs would actually help the D by giving them rest
    6. Who is our deep threat besides Lockett? All the deep safety has to do is shade to his side and that takes away the deep ball
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


  • Coug_Hawk08 wrote:fundamentally, why take out potential quick positive plays for long developing plays when pass rush was getting to Russ consistently while holding the ball?


    He likes the big play because of its psychological value on the opposing defense. Breaks them down, discourages them, etc.

    Of course, it has to work first.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 15889
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • I don't know if he told Shotty to pass more or if he's trying to protect his OC because the game plan looked exactly like it did against Denver. Did Pete ask Shotty to do this too?

    One thing is for sure. Pete likes to run the ball. He did this at USC. He did this with BeastMode. He drafted Penny in the first round. He praised Carson from day one.

    At halftime he told the reporter we need to run more and we need to get the ball out faster.

    All I know is this. Russell looks unconfortable running this offiense. I first thought he held onto the ball too long because he doesn't trust his WRs. In addition, he's hurried, because there's only 5-9 seconds on the clock when he gets to the line. No time to make adjustments.

    But, the 4th qtr changed everything. The no huddle gave RW time to make changes at the line. He fired the ball with confidence, no hesitation taking the, "He doens't trust his receivers out of the equation". And we ran the ball more.

    I know this included the terrible interception and funble, but for the first RW looked comfortable. And a lot better.
    truehawksfan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 742
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:55 pm


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    Coug_Hawk08 wrote:fundamentally, why take out potential quick positive plays for long developing plays when pass rush was getting to Russ consistently while holding the ball?


    He likes the big play because of its psychological value on the opposing defense. Breaks them down, discourages them, etc.

    Of course, it has to work first.


    This is like a joke in an anime where some person has 'The Ultimate Move' that works every time, 20% of the time
    mrt144
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3057
    Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:21 pm


  • Blitzer88 wrote:I love Pete, but it has hit a point with him. He has to adapt or I want him out as HC.


    Or at the least relinquish full game day input - DC runs the defense and OC runs the offense.
    “How vain it is to sit down to write when you have not stood up to live.”

    - Henry David Thoreau
    User avatar
    bbsplitter
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 504
    Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:39 pm


  • Pete style of play has given us the 2nd best win percentage since Wilson arrived. So it is working, as frustrating to watch at times. Very slow start but strong finish.

    If Wilson doesn't throw the pick 6 and we score in the drive would break Turbrusky/bears spirit. We didn't finish. We still had time to come back but then the fumble happen. This rarely happens in the 4th for us.
    User avatar
    rcaido
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 496
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:47 pm


  • Well, it WAS working. But the talent level isn't near what it was. He's not adjusting, and it's getting very tiresome.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9995
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • Pete's style of offense worked when he had Marshawn Lynch, a near HOF quality RB, to bail out his bad decisions and take most of the focus of the defense.

    He also needed a defense full of HOF players to keep his offense in the game.

    Once he lost those, his system stopped working.

    It doesn't work for a very good reason.

    It is stupid.
    TwistedHusky
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3271
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:48 pm


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:Well, it WAS working. But the talent level isn't near what it was. He's not adjusting, and it's getting very tiresome.



    How much of it is injuries? We probably beat the Broncos if he had Baldwin or our Kicker didn't miss. What if we had KJ?

    Bears was just bad, but again no Baldwin...No KJ...No Wagner despite our defense was good enough to win that game.

    We still have the talent to play Pete style football.
    User avatar
    rcaido
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 496
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:47 pm


  • And it's not just us on here, it's everyone on both local stations........everyone is confused as to what they are doing with the play calling this year. They drove it down our throats that they were gonna' pound the rock. It works, and they go away from it. They claim they are going to do things to help Russ. None of these things have happened.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9995
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • TwistedHusky wrote:Pete's style of offense worked when he had Marshawn Lynch, a near HOF quality RB, to bail out his bad decisions and take most of the focus of the defense.

    He also needed a defense full of HOF players to keep his offense in the game.

    Once he lost those, his system stopped working.

    It doesn't work for a very good reason.

    It is stupid.


    His defense for now is keeping them relatively in the game, but I get your point
    “How vain it is to sit down to write when you have not stood up to live.”

    - Henry David Thoreau
    User avatar
    bbsplitter
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 504
    Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:39 pm


  • That depleted D played with a lot of heart last night. Was really proud of that.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 9995
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


  • truehawksfan wrote:I don't know if he told Shotty to pass more or if he's trying to protect his OC because the game plan looked exactly like it did against Denver. Did Pete ask Shotty to do this too?

    One thing is for sure. Pete likes to run the ball. He did this at USC. He did this with BeastMode. He drafted Penny in the first round. He praised Carson from day one.

    At halftime he told the reporter we need to run more and we need to get the ball out faster.

    All I know is this. Russell looks unconfortable running this offiense. I first thought he held onto the ball too long because he doesn't trust his WRs. In addition, he's hurried, because there's only 5-9 seconds on the clock when he gets to the line. No time to make adjustments.

    But, the 4th qtr changed everything. The no huddle gave RW time to make changes at the line. He fired the ball with confidence, no hesitation taking the, "He doens't trust his receivers out of the equation". And we ran the ball more.

    I know this included the terrible interception and funble, but for the first RW looked comfortable. And a lot better.


    Wilson has looked more comfortable in the 4th quarter since college. There was a notable uptick in his stats in that quarter. The previous 3, he was mediocre. It's always been his calling card.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 15889
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • rcaido wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Well, it WAS working. But the talent level isn't near what it was. He's not adjusting, and it's getting very tiresome.



    How much of it is injuries? We probably beat the Broncos if he had Baldwin or our Kicker didn't miss. What if we had KJ?

    Bears was just bad, but again no Baldwin...No KJ...No Wagner despite our defense was good enough to win that game.

    We still have the talent to play Pete style football.


    No we don't. Do you think Rivers, Cousins, Rodgers, Goff, Jimmy G, and Mahomes are going to be as bad as Keenum and Mahomes? I don't. We've got five picks in the last two games, I don't see us maintaining that pace. Those turnovers have helped us keep the games close thusfar against mediocre opponents.

    The only starter missing on offense was Baldwin. Throw in Fluker if you want to, but he wouldn't have done much to save us from the sacks because pass blocking is his weakness. The offense was atrocious. Pete ball is antiquated and we don't have the talent to make up for it any more. We haven't for years.

    You bring up that we have the 2nd best win percentage since Russ got here. That's great, but how much of that is buoyed by 11, 13, and 12 win seasons, the last of which was four years ago? The last three years have been 10, 10, and 9. That's still pretty good, but not elite. Good enough for the sixth, fifth, and eight best records in the NFC those years. Now we're staring down the barrel of an 0-2 season having played two of the easiest games on our schedule. We need to go 10-4 after this to have a shot at the playoffs.
    adeltaY
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3281
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


  • SoulfishHawk wrote:That depleted D played with a lot of heart last night. Was really proud of that.


    :ditto:
    kf3339
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2663
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 pm


  • adeltaY wrote:
    rcaido wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Well, it WAS working. But the talent level isn't near what it was. He's not adjusting, and it's getting very tiresome.



    How much of it is injuries? We probably beat the Broncos if he had Baldwin or our Kicker didn't miss. What if we had KJ?

    Bears was just bad, but again no Baldwin...No KJ...No Wagner despite our defense was good enough to win that game.

    We still have the talent to play Pete style football.


    No we don't. Do you think Rivers, Cousins, Rodgers, Goff, Jimmy G, and Mahomes are going to be as bad as Keenum and Mahomes? I don't. We've got five picks in the last two games, I don't see us maintaining that pace. Those turnovers have helped us keep the games close thusfar against mediocre opponents.

    The only starter missing on offense was Baldwin. Throw in Fluker if you want to, but he wouldn't have done much to save us from the sacks because pass blocking is his weakness. The offense was atrocious. Pete ball is antiquated and we don't have the talent to make up for it any more. We haven't for years.

    You bring up that we have the 2nd best win percentage since Russ got here. That's great, but how much of that is buoyed by 11, 13, and 12 win seasons, the last of which was four years ago? The last three years have been 10, 10, and 9. That's still pretty good, but not elite. Good enough for the sixth, fifth, and eight best records in the NFC those years. Now we're staring down the barrel of an 0-2 season having played two of the easiest games on our schedule. We need to go 10-4 after this to have a shot at the playoffs.


    10, 10, 9 is good...We made the playoffs 2 out 3. If walsh didn't cost 2-3 games we are in again, throw in all the pro bowl injuries yeah i think that was pretty amazing.

    As for no Baldwin, that's a huge...That would be like no Malone for Stockton to dish it out too. That's his go to guy on 3rd down which we have been absolutely horrible so far. Everyone else is pretty much new except for Locket which as you notice he has been connecting with.

    If we are still losing once we have Bladwin, KJ, & Wagner back then yeah, i say we change the game plan.
    User avatar
    rcaido
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 496
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:47 pm


  • adeltaY wrote:
    rcaido wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Well, it WAS working. But the talent level isn't near what it was. He's not adjusting, and it's getting very tiresome.



    How much of it is injuries? We probably beat the Broncos if he had Baldwin or our Kicker didn't miss. What if we had KJ?

    Bears was just bad, but again no Baldwin...No KJ...No Wagner despite our defense was good enough to win that game.

    We still have the talent to play Pete style football.


    No we don't. Do you think Rivers, Cousins, Rodgers, Goff, Jimmy G, and Mahomes are going to be as bad as Keenum and Mahomes? I don't. We've got five picks in the last two games, I don't see us maintaining that pace. Those turnovers have helped us keep the games close thusfar against mediocre opponents.

    The only starter missing on offense was Baldwin. Throw in Fluker if you want to, but he wouldn't have done much to save us from the sacks because pass blocking is his weakness. The offense was atrocious. Pete ball is antiquated and we don't have the talent to make up for it any more. We haven't for years.

    You bring up that we have the 2nd best win percentage since Russ got here. That's great, but how much of that is buoyed by 11, 13, and 12 win seasons, the last of which was four years ago? The last three years have been 10, 10, and 9. That's still pretty good, but not elite. Good enough for the sixth, fifth, and eight best records in the NFC those years. Now we're staring down the barrel of an 0-2 season having played two of the easiest games on our schedule. We need to go 10-4 after this to have a shot at the playoffs.


    This. We are going to get throttled when we start playing good teams.
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1009
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    adeltaY wrote:
    rcaido wrote:
    SoulfishHawk wrote:Well, it WAS working. But the talent level isn't near what it was. He's not adjusting, and it's getting very tiresome.



    How much of it is injuries? We probably beat the Broncos if he had Baldwin or our Kicker didn't miss. What if we had KJ?

    Bears was just bad, but again no Baldwin...No KJ...No Wagner despite our defense was good enough to win that game.

    We still have the talent to play Pete style football.


    No we don't. Do you think Rivers, Cousins, Rodgers, Goff, Jimmy G, and Mahomes are going to be as bad as Keenum and Mahomes? I don't. We've got five picks in the last two games, I don't see us maintaining that pace. Those turnovers have helped us keep the games close thusfar against mediocre opponents.

    The only starter missing on offense was Baldwin. Throw in Fluker if you want to, but he wouldn't have done much to save us from the sacks because pass blocking is his weakness. The offense was atrocious. Pete ball is antiquated and we don't have the talent to make up for it any more. We haven't for years.

    You bring up that we have the 2nd best win percentage since Russ got here. That's great, but how much of that is buoyed by 11, 13, and 12 win seasons, the last of which was four years ago? The last three years have been 10, 10, and 9. That's still pretty good, but not elite. Good enough for the sixth, fifth, and eight best records in the NFC those years. Now we're staring down the barrel of an 0-2 season having played two of the easiest games on our schedule. We need to go 10-4 after this to have a shot at the playoffs.


    This. We are going to get throttled when we start playing good teams.


    We beat the Eagles & Patriots last year...We lose to shit teams like the Redskins and Cardinals. Its frustrating but it seems like we always play to our competition.

    I wish we can be aggressive and take chances on bad teams. Play Pete ball against really good teams.
    User avatar
    rcaido
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 496
    Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:47 pm


  • I'll admit it right now. If Dallas destroys our offense like the first 2 weeks....I'm bumping the Tank thread. Not that it will really help the future (with poor draft choices)....but to put Paul Allen on red alert so he can "up periscope" from his Octopussy.

    Image
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5280
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


  • rcaido wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    adeltaY wrote:
    rcaido wrote:

    How much of it is injuries? We probably beat the Broncos if he had Baldwin or our Kicker didn't miss. What if we had KJ?

    Bears was just bad, but again no Baldwin...No KJ...No Wagner despite our defense was good enough to win that game.

    We still have the talent to play Pete style football.


    No we don't. Do you think Rivers, Cousins, Rodgers, Goff, Jimmy G, and Mahomes are going to be as bad as Keenum and Mahomes? I don't. We've got five picks in the last two games, I don't see us maintaining that pace. Those turnovers have helped us keep the games close thusfar against mediocre opponents.

    The only starter missing on offense was Baldwin. Throw in Fluker if you want to, but he wouldn't have done much to save us from the sacks because pass blocking is his weakness. The offense was atrocious. Pete ball is antiquated and we don't have the talent to make up for it any more. We haven't for years.

    You bring up that we have the 2nd best win percentage since Russ got here. That's great, but how much of that is buoyed by 11, 13, and 12 win seasons, the last of which was four years ago? The last three years have been 10, 10, and 9. That's still pretty good, but not elite. Good enough for the sixth, fifth, and eight best records in the NFC those years. Now we're staring down the barrel of an 0-2 season having played two of the easiest games on our schedule. We need to go 10-4 after this to have a shot at the playoffs.


    This. We are going to get throttled when we start playing good teams.


    We beat the Eagles & Patriots last year...We lose to shit teams like the Redskins and Cardinals. Its frustrating but it seems like we always play to our competition.

    I wish we can be aggressive and take chances on bad teams. Play Pete ball against really good teams.


    I believe we beat the Eagles because our guys got up for that game. The rest of the time they were uninterested and checked out because they were tired of Carroll and carrying him. They're gone now and Wilson is starting to get there too as seen by the reaction to the timeout.

    Alternatively, if we do play to the level of our competition, that is a sign of poor coaching and preparation.
    NJlargent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1413
    Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:02 pm




It is currently Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:33 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information