Sort of explains why the Rams "stole" the Slave-to-the-Businessman away from us by so GROSSLY overpaying him.
Those last-second, seat-of-the-pants stolen wins sting!
jlwaters1 wrote:Poeple let's get a grip here. PC even said in his presser on WED that in retrospect he should have let him throw it more. .
volsunghawk wrote:The Radish wrote:To bad all this wondrous stat stuff hasn't translated into more wins.
I'm with the side that thinks the only stats that count are wins/losses. All the rest are merely things for fans to do with the wasted time between games.
Wondered how long it would be until someone posted a version of this sentiment.
Wins are a team result. They require everyone to step up. And one way to see who is stepping up and playing well is - gasp - to look at the statistics they generate.
And I know this is blasphemous to some around here, but it's possible to want the team to win more WHILE AT THE SAME TIME being excited about how well our rookie QB is playing.
mikeak wrote:jlwaters1 wrote:Poeple let's get a grip here. PC even said in his presser on WED that in retrospect he should have let him throw it more. .
Missed the presser but glad PC admitted what everyone already knew. I guess I just have a problem when people getting paid millions aren't as good as analyzing opponents as people getting paid zero....
lots of people had that game nailed on this board based on film. It shouldn't have been a retrospective conclusion
The issue with the final drive - yes one play away by Wilson and the offense but also several plays where we had to convert a 3rd down. We should have enough faith in our starting qb to put him in a position to succeed through that drive. Not be one missed play from a possible loss. WR's have been known to drop a pass or two...
scutterhawk wrote:theENGLISHseahawk wrote:
So you're putting those two losses on the offense? I must've watched two different games to you. Because the Lions game, our offense did more than enough on the day and were let down by a ragged looking defense. And in the Miami game - it was far from perfect - but a much vaunted defense let the Dolphins run to the tune of over 6YPA and gave Ryan Tannehill a nice little kick start too after a rough last few weeks.
Not saying the offense was great against Miami (although it was more than good enough against Detroit). But there's only one unit responsible for those two defeats.
Unless I'm missing something, the team with the highest score wins the games, and resting on a small lead has come back to bite us in those two games, because Pete was expecting the Defense to hold onto the lead by going with the failing Prevent Defense.
When we lost to the Lions, Pete would have done well by adopting Wilsons resolve, and not make the same mistake again.
Is it possible that by going a little more with Wilson in that Miami game that we still lose?, certainly, but we'll never know for sure.
Pete stuck to his guns and it worked against him because he played right into the Dolphins Coaches game plans.
Pete didn't have near enough lead to rest on keeping with his run game.
He didn't have enough score cushioning to stay predictable.
I guess what gets me the most, is that Pete isn't making use of all the advantages that he has at his disposal.
theENGLISHseahawk wrote:So by your theory, if you lose 55-54 the offense is to blame? After all 'the team with the highest score wins the game'.
Offense put us in a position to win vs Detroit. Special teams and Wilson put us in position to win vs Miami. On both occasions, the defense had very, very bad games. There's your answer to why we lost both.
Hasselbeck wrote:Offense was driving for the GW FG last week, where the defense as bad as they played would have been let off the hook.. and instead of being aggressive, Bevell basically went vanilla and we had to punt.. ultimately preceding the Tannehill drive.
Fact or fiction?