The more I think about the interviews for head coaching positions he had during the playoffs the more this whole thing makes sense-Our run defense was INEPT in the first half and secondary porous in the final drive against Atlanta. His second interview with the Eagles was a day before the game; come on man.

The league really has to stop the feeding frenzy on coaching vacancies until AFTER the playoffs. Otherwise we'll miss you Guss...

While I don't really believe that it affected the outcome of this game, it does seem a bit odd to me that coaching vacancies are being interviewed for and filled during the playoffs. I suppose it makes sense that you'd want to fill the position as quickly as possible, and ideally well before free agency starts (as the lack of a head coach would obviously be a serious deterrant to players who want to know who their boss will be), but it does seem like an enormous potential distraction.

Funny how Gus interviewing before the game affected the run-defense in only the first half and the secondary only last 30 seconds.

Not both at the same time, but separate, seemingly random times in the game. Hmmm..yeah, makes sense. Must be the reason.

_________________
I got passion for my Hawks and I ain't afraid to show it

Spooky.

Grow up man, its was the players, not the defensive coordinator, that couldnt stop those running backs.

No; I only chose those two glaring instances for obvious reasons. We came out flat on D and that cannot be denied-

No; the league should not allow interviews of coaching staff until after teams are eliminated or seasons end. He would have had a clearer focus on the task at hand-

Mods, isn't there a way to prevent posters with less than 50 posts to start new threads?



Really dude? Ridiculous...

_________________
...and with one kiss of his bicep he proved, without a shadow of doubt, that he was every bit as much of a DB as his coach, and most of his team's fanbase. Finally, he could call himself a Niner!

So you think that it was okay for Guss to interview with two or three teams before the Atlanta game?

< 50 posts

Come on man, his opinion and right to start a new thread and idea is just as important as yours, mine, and anyone else's here. That being said, I completely disagree with this opinion...... I do actually think they should wait until after the postseason to start interviewing coaches and stuff, much like free agency- some NFL rules are just straight up retarded- but I think it's entirely out of the realm of possibility that it had a legitimate effect on the outcome of the game.

_________________

But that doesn't mean Bradley's interview was the reason for it. Heck, he could have had a short, one hour interview while the rest of the team and staff was watching the Packers-49ers game in their hotel room. We just don't know if it made any difference.

If teams come out flat, why do we automatically blame the coaches for not preparing or getting them ready? The truth is, the players have a responsibility to come out sharp and ready, too, and sometimes, the players don't hold up their end of it, no matter what the coaches do.

_________________
I got passion for my Hawks and I ain't afraid to show it

I'm not buying these woe is me excuses, as a Franchise that has success you learn to deal with these things. If it was a distraction then it's on Pete and the Front Office for allowing interviews during our preperation week.

_________________


To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question................Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
Used to be an Alumni till they pulled a USC on me...
.Net official Clueless, Dumbass, Douche, Simpleton, CensoredTard , and Idiot.

I don't know how many times it has to be repeated by multiple people, but these interviews aren't a big deal. It's a short interview done after the game plan is already installed and it's done in the coaches limited free time anyway. It wasn't a factor.

It's amazing how shitty people can be when someone posts an opinion they don't subscribe to.

Bradley had a relaxed 90 minute interview on Saturday night.

It almost certainly had zero impact on the game.

imo if the gameplan he drew up was solid then the interview shouldn't matter that much.

Game plan was already in place. Players may have been distracted but I really doubt it. Stupid soft zone did us in, and that's on PC and Gus Bradley.

You. Need. To. Let. The. Atlanta. Game. Go.

You've started several threads trying to pick apart the outcome of this game, looking for a way to blame the refs or the coordinators.

"Russell got the play off at the end of the 1st half!"

"Turbin's 3rd and 1 was converted!"

"Bradley interviewing threw everyone off and prevented players from doing their jobs!"

Please, for your own mental well-being, let it go.

Wilson didn't get the play off. Turbin didn't get the 1st down.

And Bradley didn't interview with "2 or 3 teams before the game." It was one team, the Eagles, for a brief introductory interview. As English pointed out, it wasn't even 2 hours long, and it wasn't during a time when the team was supposed to be installing the super-secret special defense that would have prevented us from getting gashed by Turner or giving up big plays to Gonzalez.

Sometimes, the players just don't play well enough. That's what happened in Atlanta.

_________________


Okay, so maybe that pass rush is still an issue. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Gus interviewing with the Eagles had nothing to do with Jacquizz Rodgers and Michael Turner breaking tackles by Red Bryant, Earl Thomas, and ALL our LBers.

Gus interviewing also had nothing to do with Kam Chancellor being beat by Gonzalez in the end zone.

Gus interviewing also had nothing to do with Marshawn fumbling.

Gus interviewing also had nothing to do with Russell Wilson being sacked with no TOs left in the 1st half.

Gus interviewing also had nothing to do with Turbin not being able to get 1 yard on 3rd down and then Robinson not being able to get 1 yard on 4th down.

i agree the interviewing process needs to be conducted after the playoffs... i however do no agree that the interview played some part in the break down of the running Defense or the secondary at the end... our run d has been suspect all year since the SF game, and that stupid zone coverage does nothing to prevent apposing teams from moving the ball in large chunks, i hate it, we should have manned up there.. that's what got us to that point, why go away from it...

_________________
On to the Next Episode