Sarlacc83 wrote:

Tech Worlds wrote:

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:[quote="Tech Worlds"]I hope Pete Carroll is not our Mike Singletary.

A coach of a very talented team that can't get them over the hump. Then another guy comes in and wins with the existing talent.

Singletary was in charge of a shambolic mess. He was so unhinged, there was no way he should've ever been given the gig on a full time basis.

I understand that but he was still the coach of a very talented team. It took another coach to get them to perform

A talented team built built with multiple high picks which is now in its prime (and at the risk of falling off because of their age).[/quote]

I don't want to hijack the thread but I don't think they are really that old.

Tech Worlds wrote:I hope Pete Carroll is not our Mike Singletary.

A coach of a very talented team that can't get them over the hump. Then another guy comes in and wins with the existing talent.

I like Pete. I want him to succeed but there may be the possibility that he is good at building an NFL team more then coaching one.

Well... we have Tom Cable on staff right now. He can coach a non-talented team to wins. I don't see why he couldn't do it with the talent we have. Gruden is also available. Do I want either thing happening? Not unless Pete decides he's done and just up and retires, but there are good options out there. Just so long as it isn't Mike Martz.

SharkHawk wrote:

Tech Worlds wrote:I hope Pete Carroll is not our Mike Singletary.

A coach of a very talented team that can't get them over the hump. Then another guy comes in and wins with the existing talent.

I like Pete. I want him to succeed but there may be the possibility that he is good at building an NFL team more then coaching one.

Well... we have Tom Cable on staff right now. He can coach a non-talented team to wins. I don't see why he couldn't do it with the talent we have. Gruden is also available. Do I want either thing happening? Not unless Pete decides he's done and just up and retires, but there are good options out there. Just so long as it isn't Mike Martz.

You said "Good" options Shark. No need to mention Martz after that.

Sarlacc83 wrote:A talented team built built with multiple high picks which is now in its prime (and at the risk of falling off because of their age).

I think that's what people often forget when they start saying, "OMG the FO has had almost 3 full YEARS to turn the team around! Why aren't we blowing teams out left and right yet?!"

The 49ers had 8 straight seasons without a winning record, burning through 3 head coaches, and racking up high draft picks left and right. They had 6 top-12 picks over that timeframe (and don't forget the high 2nd, 3rd, etc. picks they had, too). It took years of good drafting and time for players to develop before all of that paid off - and it still required a HC who knew how to take advantage of all the talent.

I don't know if Carroll has the gameday chops to get us a Lombardi. But I do know that genuine, ground-up rebuilds take time, which is unfortunate for those fans whose expectations are aimed a bit too high (in my view).

(And please bear in mind that I said "expectations" rather than "desires/goals/etc." Of course the goal should always be a championship, but realistically, we're not quite ready to truly challenge for one.)

I think you're short-changing me a bit Vols.

I understand, completely, the rebuild that was required and the job that's been done. My frustration is the fact I've seen more accomplished with less. And right now, this team can run the ball, throw deep, is respectable in other aspects of the passing game, has a talented and good defense and its .500.

I've seen teams win with less than that, period. I'm happy and understanding of the work Pete and staff have done, truly I am, but its time to win now. Teams with less find ways to win. Dolphins, Steelers to name 2 less talented teams winning now, with less.

Just because I'm a Seahawks fan, doesn't mean I need to have less expectations than other fans. If this team was in; Pitt or NY it wouldn't be acceptable, period. Because we're Seahawks fans we need to accept 4 year rebuild plans, that wouldn't fly in more established football towns?

Fact is; Harbaugh, Coughlin, Bellicheck, Tomlin, McCarthy WOULD have winning records with this team. That's what I want Pete to become. And, I think he can.

But this nonsense that Seattle has to judge differently than other NFL cities is just that, nonsense.

hawksfansinceday1 wrote:

SharkHawk wrote:

Tech Worlds wrote:I hope Pete Carroll is not our Mike Singletary.

A coach of a very talented team that can't get them over the hump. Then another guy comes in and wins with the existing talent.

I like Pete. I want him to succeed but there may be the possibility that he is good at building an NFL team more then coaching one.

Well... we have Tom Cable on staff right now. He can coach a non-talented team to wins. I don't see why he couldn't do it with the talent we have. Gruden is also available. Do I want either thing happening? Not unless Pete decides he's done and just up and retires, but there are good options out there. Just so long as it isn't Mike Martz.

You said "Good" options Shark. No need to mention Martz after that.

Haha. Right you are my friend. Right you are. Thanks for the good laugh. Sadly though, there are still people out there that think Martz can coach. I mean... fox thinks enough of the guy to let him call games. Make it stop. Make it stop!!!

Probably too late to add anything meaningful to the discussion, but I would blame Sherman for the bomb to Young. He took his eyes off the WR completely and lost track of him.

What I would blame Pete for are the scheme issues that allow teams to throw 5 yard passes on 3rd and 10 and still get the 1st downs. I'm reasonably sure those plays are scheme issues and not talent issues- it's not like the lions were breaking tackles to get those extra 5-10 yards after the catch. The Lions did their homework and exploited the short-middle just like Arizona, St. Louis, Green Bay, and New England did.

pe is correct. Unless you find our losses to lame-ass Arizona, weak-ass St Louis, punk-ass San Fran, and pussy-ass kitty's acceptable. In which case, you see us as over-achieving this year. And I can't hang with that.

They should go bandit on 3rd and long, with Kam sniffing out the run. Okay, maybe not, but mix it up and get aggressive for the pass.

The Young TD was on Sherman/Chancellor. According to Pete, they relaxed, thinking the play was going somewhere else and got burned. Great pocket move by Stafford to step away from the sack attempt coming from behind him and delivering a good strike.

Coughlin was almost ran out of NY before he became the man with the plan. What helped him was Eli finally getting it as a starting QB. One could hope that Pete, for all his warts, can become that stabilizing force for the Seahawks. I'm Still In!

I'm still in too doc. And, actually, I have a feeling Wilson will cover all Pete's warts as much as Eli covers Sweater Vests (Coughlins).

kearly wrote:Probably too late to add anything meaningful to the discussion, but I would blame Sherman for the bomb to Young. He took his eyes off the WR completely and lost track of him.

What I would blame Pete for are the scheme issues that allow teams to throw 5 yard passes on 3rd and 10 and still get the 1st downs. I'm reasonably sure those plays are scheme issues and not talent issues- it's not like the lions were breaking tackles to get those extra 5-10 yards after the catch. The Lions did their homework and exploited the short-middle just like Arizona, St. Louis, Green Bay, and New England did.

Your voice of reason is appreciated Kip, however it is like the tree that falls in the forest. If no one is there to hear it, does it make any noise?

bestfightstory wrote:pe is correct. Unless you find our losses to lame-ass Arizona, weak-ass St Louis, punk-ass San Fran, and pussy-ass kitty's acceptable. In which case, you see us as over-achieving this year. And I can't hang with that.

I'd say right along with this... if you can beat New England and Green Bay then you have NO reason to lose to Detroit. The way the league is now with parity and all, you're going to lose a couple you shouldn't have. But not ALL of them. Losing to Arizona was bad enough, but week 1. We understand. Where was the improvement in St. Louis? That game of all games should have whipped the team into a frenzy where there was no way in hell they walk into Detroit and get beat by a Lions team that is worse than the Rams.

These are different times in the NFL. Players have much more power and are subsequently/consequently much more vocal in voicing their displeasure(s). I am referring to comments made by E.T. Comments that I agree with. OTOH, aside from Coughlin and Bill, there's not many active coaches more old school than Pete. Emphasis on the word school, as his success has predominately been in the college ranks. College coaches are not known for taking a lot of input from their players, so it will be interesting to see how Pete handles this. He, being a bit more with the times than most his age, may react in a positive manner and I hope he does because he can't expect the D to win every frikin' game, week after week. This week we had a mild D meltdown, one that a bit more offense should have overcome...but Pete and his obsession about TOs and clock management (!?!) sorta' let this one get away.

Next week, IMO, will be the biggest test of this season for this young squad. Someone pointed out the team may be losing confidence and questioning the plan. The same thing is happening across the lake with Price and Sark. Coincidence? I dunno...but I do know the offense looked improved this week and showed that the building blocks are in place. IF Pete wants to really win games, he will have to adjust his own pattern, turn this team lose, and win or lose, we'll know much better what we have. I'm keeping my glass half-full and suspect both sides of the ball will show up on Sunday, which would be the first time this season. GO PETE!! GO HAWKS!!

Smoke wrote:

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:The 3rd and 11 play at 17-7 was key for me. I remember watching that thinking... 'get a stop here and get the ball back'. You start to consider a 20-7 or even 24-7 lead. And bang. One play and it's a three point game. That was a killer. I'm not sure how much of that was on Pete though or Gus Bradley and the players. Likewise the draw play that potentially cost us three points at the end of the first half. Is that Pete or Bevell/Cable?

Overall though it's hard to complain too much right now. I remember the road games where it was over at half time. If we'd have won all our road games so far, not sure anyone would've batted an eye lid. We're getting there.

I agree with this fully.

I feel as though this team is on the verge of consistently winning. We still have mostly 2, and 3rd year players on this roster. The game hasn't slowed down for everyone yet. A lot of the plays that we got killed on were do to over pursuit on Defense and simply being behind a step. Small nuances that 2nd and 3rd year players are just starting to learn. Even our O-line which now has only played 5 games together is starting to come around and play on each others level.

Pete started from Scratch, 3 years ago. He has hedged his bets knowing that a Defense and running game typically develops faster than a passing game, a passing game which they haven't even started to build around yet, and we still are competitive. These have been some of the funnest games to watch, and that I giv Pete total props for.

We just haven't clicked yet, maybe we will this year, maybe we wont. I would bet though that given the progression we have seen, its going to be happening, and fast.

I woud have to agree. It reminds me of the way someone described Norv Turner coaching the Chargers as driving a Lambo and just crashing it into a ditch, whereas Pete and Co. have kept the RPMs under 2K when they need to mash on the gas!

pehawk wrote:I'm still in too doc. And, actually, I have a feeling Wilson will cover all Pete's warts as much as Eli covers Sweater Vests (Coughlins).

You called that yesterday and I agree. Wilson better get it done quickly though because the winds of change are starting to pick up. Paul Allen has shown in the past that he doesn't have a problem knocking a guy's ego down a few notches. His football consultants could suggest he demand Pete replace his OC/DC if things get too far off-track.

Something tells me if Pete resigned rather than be forced to make a football move in his staff, John Schneider gets more power. Paul may feel secure in the club's financial management that JS and Idzik have handled. Pete goes, Big Red, Chancellor, Browner, Clemons and Irvin are gone in a year or so (with Clemons, he probably is gone after next year anyway).

pehawk wrote:I think you're short-changing me a bit Vols.

I understand, completely, the rebuild that was required and the job that's been done. My frustration is the fact I've seen more accomplished with less. And right now, this team can run the ball, throw deep, is respectable in other aspects of the passing game, has a talented and good defense and its .500.

I've seen teams win with less than that, period. I'm happy and understanding of the work Pete and staff have done, truly I am, but its time to win now. Teams with less find ways to win. Dolphins, Steelers to name 2 less talented teams winning now, with less.

Just because I'm a Seahawks fan, doesn't mean I need to have less expectations than other fans. If this team was in; Pitt or NY it wouldn't be acceptable, period. Because we're Seahawks fans we need to accept 4 year rebuild plans, that wouldn't fly in more established football towns?

Fact is; Harbaugh, Coughlin, Bellicheck, Tomlin, McCarthy WOULD have winning records with this team. That's what I want Pete to become. And, I think he can.

But this nonsense that Seattle has to judge differently than other NFL cities is just that, nonsense.

Nah, I'm not targeting you here. There are plenty of folks here who can discuss this team and its personnel/coaches without going nuclear, and I wouldn't count this thread on par with those that are just "Fire everyone!" in tone, even if I might disagree with some of the points.

The reason that Pitt or NY wouldn't accept a 4-year rebuild is because the identity of those teams has been set in stone for DECADES. The fans of those teams go nuclear when their teams depart from their identity of a strong defense, efficient (and sometimes explosive) offense, stable coaching. And that's why they never have to go through complete rebuilds - they have a certain kind of player they can target for that identity, and they've been doing it for so long that they are skilled at it and don't tend to have the roster turnover like we experienced in 2010.

Seattle's changed identities multiple times now, and each time, it requires a full rebuild as the team searches for players that can fulfill the new regime's concept. It happened clearly with Holmgren, and the team was mediocre for longer under the Walrus than it's been under Carroll (remember, we didn't get to the playoffs a second time under Holmy until his 5th season). It's happened again with Carroll, and frankly, I'd love it if the identity he's put in place was our identity until the end of time. I love smashmouth offense and dominant defense (and Sunday's result aside, that's what our team is now).

I also think it takes more time to build a team that will be a perennial contender rather than a flash in the pan, because it requires more than just adding a handful of players and selling out for a season or two. It requires putting a system into place that will not only change the culture and identity of the team, but also look down the road to identify how to make sure that once the team achieves contender status, it's not only for a year or two, but for a decade and more. Obviously, that's just my opinion, but I don't think I'm wrong.

I thought the Lions game played out like we might expect; a 10 am road game against a team with a great passing offense and a terrible secondary. It came down to the end, and ultimately they made one more play than we did in the last two minutes. I am not happy about the loss but I am not as surprised by it as some of you seem to be. We were underdogs for a reason and it seems unrealistic to be expecting the road underdog to win by 30 points. The one thing we have been consistent at is underperforming the spread on the road and beating it at home.

The Titus Young play was huge but how can you not give them any credit for that at all? Third and long play call to their burner who got a clean release and outran a good corner. There is a double standard on this forum. Most posters are besides themselves when any other fan base or national source is dismissive to our players, and yet a lot of the posters in this thread are constantly dismissive towards other teams and players. Sad but true; Titus Young has more trade value than any receiver on the Seahawks.

Dismissing the Lions based on their record is pretty funny. Do you really give a 4 loss team no chance at home? That speaks poorly for the 4 loss Seahawks at home against the Vikings then. Or is just other teams that you can boil down to their record and ignore everything else?

I will reserve judgment on whether this season was a success, until the end of the year. 4-4 is about where I thought the team would be, realistically. This team will take a big jump in the second half of the season, much like last year. I don't see it being out of the question to win 6-7 of our last 8, and roll into the playoffs with a head of steam.

HawksFTW wrote:I will reserve judgment on whether this season was a success, until the end of the year. 4-4 is about where I thought the team would be, realistically. This team will take a big jump in the second half of the season, much like last year. I don't see it being out of the question to win 6-7 of our last 8, and roll into the playoffs with a head of steam.

Yup. That's what the Giants did both of their Superbowl years.....got hot at the right time. I'd love to see us do that, and it's what Pete has a penchant for doing.

Still like the training wheels to come off Wilson. I think he can handle it.

I sure hope for Pete's sake we don't lose anymore. Don't want to see you fire him.

BigMeach wrote:I sure hope for Pete's sake we don't lose anymore. Don't want to see you fire him.

Haha! Smartazz quote of the day.

pehawk wrote:I understand, completely, the rebuild that was required and the job that's been done. My frustration is the fact I've seen more accomplished with less. And right now, this team can run the ball, throw deep, is respectable in other aspects of the passing game, has a talented and good defense and its .500.

I've seen teams win with less than that, period. I'm happy and understanding of the work Pete and staff have done, truly I am, but its time to win now. Teams with less find ways to win. Dolphins, Steelers to name 2 less talented teams winning now, with less.

I could not disagree more. There is a segment of fans that just don't like Pete Carroll. He could win a superbowl and people would still dislike him. Calling for his head shows a lack of patience and vision.

pehawk wrote:I think you're short-changing me a bit Vols.

I understand, completely, the rebuild that was required and the job that's been done. My frustration is the fact I've seen more accomplished with less. And right now, this team can run the ball, throw deep, is respectable in other aspects of the passing game, has a talented and good defense and its .500.

I've seen teams win with less than that, period. I'm happy and understanding of the work Pete and staff have done, truly I am, but its time to win now. Teams with less find ways to win. Dolphins, Steelers to name 2 less talented teams winning now, with less.

Just because I'm a Seahawks fan, doesn't mean I need to have less expectations than other fans. If this team was in; Pitt or NY it wouldn't be acceptable, period. Because we're Seahawks fans we need to accept 4 year rebuild plans, that wouldn't fly in more established football towns?

Fact is; Harbaugh, Coughlin, Bellicheck, Tomlin, McCarthy WOULD have winning records with this team. That's what I want Pete to become. And, I think he can.

But this nonsense that Seattle has to judge differently than other NFL cities is just that, nonsense.

Something that just occurred to me, perhaps too late in the process, is that you picked the Dolphins and the Steelers as your two example teams. Both of those teams are in a, let's face it, really weak AFC, so I'd also argue that it's not so much them playing up to their talent, but the whole division sucking and inflating teams' wins.

T-Sizzle wrote:

pehawk wrote:I understand, completely, the rebuild that was required and the job that's been done. My frustration is the fact I've seen more accomplished with less. And right now, this team can run the ball, throw deep, is respectable in other aspects of the passing game, has a talented and good defense and its .500.

I've seen teams win with less than that, period. I'm happy and understanding of the work Pete and staff have done, truly I am, but its time to win now. Teams with less find ways to win. Dolphins, Steelers to name 2 less talented teams winning now, with less.

I could not disagree more. There is a segment of fans that just don't like Pete Carroll. He could win a superbowl and people would still dislike him. Calling for his head shows a lack of patience and vision.

Good thing nothing in my post showed a lack of patience or vision. I'm very happy with him as a coach.

But, I look at the Rams and Lions games as instances where Pete didn't do his best to win those games. Each game had a 100 yard rusher, and the Detroit game had a very productive offense. Carroll admitted that his plan against Stafford didn't work. That plan allowed a 80+ yard drive to the Lions for the win.

It's okay to say, "Pete you've been a maestro in building this thing, but now you need to do more on gamedays".

Sarlacc83 wrote:

pehawk wrote:I think you're short-changing me a bit Vols.

I understand, completely, the rebuild that was required and the job that's been done. My frustration is the fact I've seen more accomplished with less. And right now, this team can run the ball, throw deep, is respectable in other aspects of the passing game, has a talented and good defense and its .500.

I've seen teams win with less than that, period. I'm happy and understanding of the work Pete and staff have done, truly I am, but its time to win now. Teams with less find ways to win. Dolphins, Steelers to name 2 less talented teams winning now, with less.

Just because I'm a Seahawks fan, doesn't mean I need to have less expectations than other fans. If this team was in; Pitt or NY it wouldn't be acceptable, period. Because we're Seahawks fans we need to accept 4 year rebuild plans, that wouldn't fly in more established football towns?

Fact is; Harbaugh, Coughlin, Bellicheck, Tomlin, McCarthy WOULD have winning records with this team. That's what I want Pete to become. And, I think he can.

But this nonsense that Seattle has to judge differently than other NFL cities is just that, nonsense.

Something that just occurred to me, perhaps too late in the process, is that you picked the Dolphins and the Steelers as your two example teams. Both of those teams are in a, let's face it, really weak AFC, so I'd also argue that it's not so much them playing up to their talent, but the whole division sucking and inflating teams' wins.

The Dolphins have impressive wins in Cinci and against the Jets. Yeah, Jets suck, but they dominated there, in a situation where no one would expect the Seahawks to dominate. Steelers play in the 1st or 2nd best division in football.

I'm not saying either team is better. Nor am I saying their coaches are better. All I'm saying that teams can win with less talent in this league.

When did beating Detroit on the road become an easy W?

pehawk wrote:Steelers play in the 1st or 2nd best division in football.

Maybe in years past, but I don't buy that any longer. The Ravens are one of the weaker 5-2 teams I've ever seen and have lost tons of core players to injury this season. The Bengals are trending down in a big way, making last year's playoff run look like a lucky break than something they can build on. And the Browns remain a hot mess. Add in Pittsburgh's struggles so far this season, and I'd put that division as middle-of-the-pack at BEST.

I think the NFC West is clearly better, as is the NFC North. You could probably even make an argument for the NFC South being at least on par, since the Falcons are better than anyone in the AFC North, the Saints remain dangerous (at least on offense), the Bucs are starting to put things together (and I'd take them in a head-to-head over Cincy right now), and the Panthers aren't really any more awful than the Browns.

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:When did beating Detroit on the road become an easy W?

People reset their calendars to 2008.

volsunghawk wrote:

pehawk wrote:Steelers play in the 1st or 2nd best division in football.

Maybe in years past, but I don't buy that any longer. The Ravens are one of the weaker 5-2 teams I've ever seen and have lost tons of core players to injury this season. The Bengals are trending down in a big way, making last year's playoff run look like a lucky break than something they can build on. And the Browns remain a hot mess. Add in Pittsburgh's struggles so far this season, and I'd put that division as middle-of-the-pack at BEST.

I think the NFC West is clearly better, as is the NFC North. You could probably even make an argument for the NFC South being at least on par, since the Falcons are better than anyone in the AFC North, the Saints remain dangerous (at least on offense), the Bucs are starting to put things together (and I'd take them in a head-to-head over Cincy right now), and the Panthers aren't really any more awful than the Browns.

I agree, actually. But, yesterday I heard Clayton say in his opinion the AFC North is the best, the records now validate that. I say the NFC West.

I didn't think winning in Detroit would be easy. Certainly winnable though.

I'm happy with Pete as my coach, but even he admitted they took the wrong approach against their offense. That's something Carroll needs to be better at, period. That plan allowed an 80 yard TD drive - Earl and Browner pointed that out in a respectful manner as well. What he's done previously exempts him from present-day mistakes?

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:When did beating Detroit on the road become an easy W?

There's no easy road W for the Hawks, ever.

pehawk wrote:

volsunghawk wrote:

pehawk wrote:Steelers play in the 1st or 2nd best division in football.

Maybe in years past, but I don't buy that any longer. The Ravens are one of the weaker 5-2 teams I've ever seen and have lost tons of core players to injury this season. The Bengals are trending down in a big way, making last year's playoff run look like a lucky break than something they can build on. And the Browns remain a hot mess. Add in Pittsburgh's struggles so far this season, and I'd put that division as middle-of-the-pack at BEST.

I think the NFC West is clearly better, as is the NFC North. You could probably even make an argument for the NFC South being at least on par, since the Falcons are better than anyone in the AFC North, the Saints remain dangerous (at least on offense), the Bucs are starting to put things together (and I'd take them in a head-to-head over Cincy right now), and the Panthers aren't really any more awful than the Browns.

I agree, actually. But, yesterday I heard Clayton say in his opinion the AFC North is the best, the records now validate that. I say the NFC West.

I didn't think winning in Detroit would be easy. Certainly winnable though.

I'm happy with Pete as my coach, but even he admitted they took the wrong approach against their offense. That's something Carroll needs to be better at, period. That plan allowed an 80 yard TD drive - Earl and Browner pointed that out in a respectful manner as well. What he's done previously exempts him from present-day mistakes?

If we go by straight wins, the NFC North is in the lead with 19 and the NFC West has 17. The AFC North has 14 (with the mitigating factor that all but Cleveland are a game behind after the byes).

JC quoted records against non-division opponents. Maybe he meant the NFC North?

Did I mention I didn't agree with it?

pehawk wrote:JC quoted records against non-division opponents. Maybe he meant the NFC North?

Did I mention I didn't agree with it?

You did. I just think Clayton's either full of crap or you're right that he misspoke and meant to say the NFC North (where 3 teams are above .500 by 2 games or more.)

pehawk wrote:

T-Sizzle wrote:

pehawk wrote:I understand, completely, the rebuild that was required and the job that's been done. My frustration is the fact I've seen more accomplished with less. And right now, this team can run the ball, throw deep, is respectable in other aspects of the passing game, has a talented and good defense and its .500.

I've seen teams win with less than that, period. I'm happy and understanding of the work Pete and staff have done, truly I am, but its time to win now. Teams with less find ways to win. Dolphins, Steelers to name 2 less talented teams winning now, with less.

I could not disagree more. There is a segment of fans that just don't like Pete Carroll. He could win a superbowl and people would still dislike him. Calling for his head shows a lack of patience and vision.

Good thing nothing in my post showed a lack of patience or vision. I'm very happy with him as a coach.

But, I look at the Rams and Lions games as instances where Pete didn't do his best to win those games. Each game had a 100 yard rusher, and the Detroit game had a very productive offense. Carroll admitted that his plan against Stafford didn't work. That plan allowed a 80+ yard drive to the Lions for the win.

It's okay to say, "Pete you've been a maestro in building this thing, but now you need to do more on gamedays".

Pete will never throw his players under the bus like another Hawks coach we had. Pete going to ALWAYS accept blame as a good coach should. He doesn't play on the field and the bottom line is players on defense didn't make the plays..... We have the 2nd youngest team in football, people need to keep that in mind.

T-Sizzle wrote:
Pete will never throw his players under the bus like another Hawks coach we had. Pete going to ALWAYS accept blame as a good coach should. He doesn't play on the field and the bottom line is players on defense didn't make the plays..... We have the 2nd youngest team in football, people need to keep that in mind.

Some people said Pete did throw his defense under the bus after the SF game when he said the defense needed to do better. Better than giving up only 13 Pts?

If he was honest he would have said "our offense needed to do better, too many drops, interceptions and three and outs.........we can't expect our defense to hold good teams like SF to under 15 pts EVERY SINGLE GAME."

If you're on defense, how does that make you feel? You just held one of the better teams in the NFL to 13 pts, and your coach is telling the media that wasn't good enough.

Sarlacc83 wrote:

pehawk wrote:JC quoted records against non-division opponents. Maybe he meant the NFC North?

Did I mention I didn't agree with it?

You did. I just think Clayton's either full of crap or you're right that he misspoke and meant to say the NFC North (where 3 teams are above .500 by 2 games or more.)

Maybe Clayton misspoke. Outside of the division, the AFC North is 10-10. The NFC North is 19-7.

For comparison, the NFC West is 12-10, though we can pretty much blame the Rams for most of that (they account for half our division's out-of-division losses).

bestfightstory wrote:Regardless, Sarlacc, pe is correct. This team has underperformed grossly. That is on the head coach.

Underperformed grossly??? I think we should be thankful they have performed as well as they have. We have a rookie QB, rookie receivers, rookie lineman, 2nd year dbs, 2nd year secondary. Going up against the Lions, whose QB threw for over 5000 yards last year, against the NFL's #1 defense, etc. and has been in every game we've played.

I'm ecstatic about the product on the field. I haven't once felt we didn't have a chance or chances to win, unlike years past. Our team plays with heart and conviction (except apparently on 3rd downs on the road).

the mistakes we've made re mostly inexperience and mental errors - we are chockful of talent...

It's Seahawks Time....

Sgt. Largent wrote:

T-Sizzle wrote:
Pete will never throw his players under the bus like another Hawks coach we had. Pete going to ALWAYS accept blame as a good coach should. He doesn't play on the field and the bottom line is players on defense didn't make the plays..... We have the 2nd youngest team in football, people need to keep that in mind.

Some people said Pete did throw his defense under the bus after the SF game when he said the defense needed to do better. Better than giving up only 13 Pts?

If he was honest he would have said "our offense needed to do better, too many drops, interceptions and three and outs.........we can't expect our defense to hold good teams like SF to under 15 pts EVERY SINGLE GAME."

If you're on defense, how does that make you feel? You just held one of the better teams in the NFL to 13 pts, and your coach is telling the media that wasn't good enough.

I would love to get in a long debate with you...but you seem to reply to EVERY SINGLE post I make with made up information. You need to give me more than "some people said"...sorry bro.

C'mon. This thread makes me sick. Name one single coach on the planet that would have a better record with a 3rd round rookie starting QB. One. We all want to win now, but anybody who was expecting to go 12-4 and win the Super Bowl needs a serious reality check.

Tical21 wrote:C'mon. This thread makes me sick. Name one single coach on the planet that would have a better record with a 3rd round rookie starting QB. One. We all want to win now, but anybody who was expecting to go 12-4 and win the Super Bowl needs a serious reality check.

They'd still complain about the 4 losses.

I never understood the whole "winning has to look a certain way" thing. F'ing stupid, a W is a W, regardless of how it looks.

pehawk wrote:It's on him now, he needs to right this, and soon.

Even before the offense took steps forwards against NE, the offense could always; run the ball, hit any pattern, could throw long WELL. The defense has the players and tools to play well. Plus, this team ALWAYS plays hard, in every facet of the game.

Playing hard usually will beat the likes of Detroit. The talent differential should've beaten the Rams. And, the offense seemed uninterested in winning the SF game (based on poor execution).

I look at a team like Miami, with SO much less, seemingly playing better and just as hard. And, they're winning, ON THE ROAD. So, for all the excuses of how better it is, how much brilliance Pete has shown putting this together, there's no more excuses for not winning.

Yesterday really pissed me off. That's a mentally soft team the Seahawks lost to. The perfect type of learning road win this teams NEEDS to get.

I'm appreciative of Pete. But, there's no more room for losses.

They beat the jets and Cincy didn't they on the road? Rams barely at home...their record is deceiving I think


We had two miser plays and left 10 off te board. He can't throw it and catch it

Tical21 wrote:C'mon. This thread makes me sick. Name one single coach on the planet that would have a better record with a 3rd round rookie starting QB. One. We all want to win now, but anybody who was expecting to go 12-4 and win the Super Bowl needs a serious reality check.

Jim Mora Jr.

Prove me wrong

T-Sizzle wrote:

Sgt. Largent wrote:

T-Sizzle wrote:
Pete will never throw his players under the bus like another Hawks coach we had. Pete going to ALWAYS accept blame as a good coach should. He doesn't play on the field and the bottom line is players on defense didn't make the plays..... We have the 2nd youngest team in football, people need to keep that in mind.

Some people said Pete did throw his defense under the bus after the SF game when he said the defense needed to do better. Better than giving up only 13 Pts?

If he was honest he would have said "our offense needed to do better, too many drops, interceptions and three and outs.........we can't expect our defense to hold good teams like SF to under 15 pts EVERY SINGLE GAME."

If you're on defense, how does that make you feel? You just held one of the better teams in the NFL to 13 pts, and your coach is telling the media that wasn't good enough.

I would love to get in a long debate with you...but you seem to reply to EVERY SINGLE post I make with made up information. You need to give me more than "some people said"...sorry bro.

I heard numerous times on both 710 and 950 during the past couple of weeks, so it's not made up. It's a valid concern, a coach should never publicly criticize his players, keep it in the locker room.

pehawk wrote:Why haven't they clicked, is my question? The Bronco's clicked, a year after sucking, with the worst QB ever known, while devising new offensive and defensive schemes through the season. This year and last.

The Dolphins this year are doing more with less. They're younger and less talented - in vastly different systems.

And it still doesn't change the point that the coaches I mentioned would be winning, period. Lynch topped 100 in SF, Stl and now Detroit, but they're all losses.

The Broncos went 8-8, lost 5 games by scores of 23-49, 10-45, 23-41 and the worst of all - 14-40 to the BILLS. Just because they had a 6 game streak where they were somehow staying in games whilst being dominated then scoring in the 4th quarter doesn't mean they "clicked", especially when you consider 3 of the teams they beat were god-awful AFC West Teams, another was the 3-13 Vikings and another was an overtime win against the same Caleb Hainie and Marion Barber-led Bears that every other team swept aside in that period.

Is that what you want from our Seahawks? They were basically the 2010 Seahawks, and they've accelerated the process by bringing in one of the greatest QBs of all time

The Lions are much better than many of you think they are. If not for three special team TDs allowed they would have been 4-2 going into our game. If you need proof of what giving up a couple of Special Teams Tds can do for your team take a look at the 2010 Chargers who lost to us thanks to Leon Washington's two return TD's and missed the playoffs that season due to that one loss. Their secondary is not "terrible." They are ninth in passing yards allowed and have not yielded more than two passing TDs in any of their games. They also only have only one loss with a point differential higher than one score.

In regards to the OP, I believe that there are no teams in the NFL now that look at the Seahawks as a team that they can't get up for. Whereas, the Dolphins are not a team that people bring their A-game for. We are finally a team that opponents take seriously and that is going to make winning more difficult, especially on the road to a team desperate for a win when they had a few breaks go against them to cost them wins. In addition to the special teams touchdowns, they have also given up two defensive touchdowns.

I agree that Pete needs to step it up with in game decisions though.