Next week the what ifs...are over.

[Seahawkfan80]

United we stand... divided we fall.

We all We Got, We All WE NEED!!!

 

[Siouxhawk]

United we stand... divided we fall.

Exactly. Please tell me that the majority of the 12's do stand behind our coaching staff. That what I have read on here is just a few bitter castoffs. Because we do need unity

 

[grizbob]

United we stand... divided we fall.

Exactly. Please tell me that the majority of the 12's do stand behind our coaching staff. That what I have read on here is just a few bitter castoffs. Because we do need unity

:roll:

 

[hawknation2015]

United we stand... divided we fall.

Exactly. Please tell me that the majority of the 12's do stand behind our coaching staff. That what I have read on here is just a few bitter castoffs. Because we do need unity

Being a fan does not mean blindly agreeing with every decision your team makes like a mindless animatron.

And you certainly don't have to agree with the decision to pass the ball on the one-yard line to be a "true" Seahawk fan. According to Public Policy Polling, only 13% of Seahawk fans agree with the decision to pass on that play.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of fans are solidly behind the incredible job Pete Carroll has done, even though they might not agree with every decision he has made, regarding Bevell and the decision to pass. In that same PPP Poll, only 4% of Seahawk fans disapprove of the job Coach Carroll is doing.

PPP Poll: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... _52215.pdf

 

[HomerJHawk]

the heck? I had forgotten about that when i woke up this morning. thanks. now i'm a little pissed.

 

[LymonHawk]

IMHO: Calling out Bevell without calling out Coach Carroll, is the height of hypocrisy. Did PC fire Bevell? No, he kept him for another year. So who's the idiot, Bevell for calling the play, or Carroll for hiring and keeping him as OC?

And to those who want to use the "He's loyal to his people" excuse, I call BS. The mantra of this team is 'Always compete,' no? If Carroll thought Bevell was as stupid as people on this board are claiming, he would not re-hire him...or he's a liar. Simple.

Can't have it both ways folks. :les:

 

[Siouxhawk]

United we stand... divided we fall.

Exactly. Please tell me that the majority of the 12's do stand behind our coaching staff. That what I have read on here is just a few bitter castoffs. Because we do need unity

Being a fan does not mean blindly agreeing with every decision your team makes like a mindless animatron.

And you certainly don't have to agree with the decision to pass the ball on the one-yard line to be a "true" Seahawk fan. According to Public Policy Polling, only 13% of Seahawk fans agree with the decision to pass on that play.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of fans are solidly behind the incredible job Pete Carroll has done, even though they might not agree with every decision he has made, regarding Bevell and the decision to pass. In that same PPP Poll, only 4% of Seahawk fans disapprove of the job Coach Carroll is doing.

PPP Poll: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... _52215.pdf

First point, I totally agree you don't just blindly follow along in all circumstances. It would be one thing if we were coming off of back-to-back 4-win seasons. But we're enjoying the most prosperity we as fans have ever enjoyed, so to rail against that in my book is threatening that prosperity. It just doesn't make sense, unless you don't like prosperity and relish the days where we were terrible so you could put your two cents in.

I never said I favored the pass, by the way. My contention is that prior history indicated that a pass play in that situation, against that defensive alignment, had a probablity of working. And there certainly was a TD in that play had it not been for a fantastic play by Butler.

Of course everyone likes Pete. You're not breaking any news there. But it's total opinion-based on your part, I believe, when you include Bevell in counting said popularity in fan voting. Pete trusts Bevell completely and I figure he knows best.

 

[hawknation2015]

IMHO: Calling out Bevell without calling out Coach Carroll, is the height of hypocrisy. Did PC fire Bevell? No, he kept him for another year. So who's the idiot, Bevell for calling the play, or Carroll for hiring and keeping him as OC?

And to those who want to use the "He's loyal to his people" excuse, I call BS. The mantra of this team is 'Always compete,' no? If Carroll thought Bevell was as stupid as people on this board are claiming, he would not re-hire him...or he's a liar. Simple.

Can't have it both ways folks. :les:

Carroll does favor loyalty toward his assistant coaches and maintaining continuity.

Did he fire Lane Kiffin after failing to convert a 4th and 2 at the end of the 2005 National Championship, with Reggie Bush on the bench, allowing Vince Young a short field to win the game in the final seconds? Did he fire Steve Sarkisian after leaving John David Booty in the game against Stanford with a broken hand, leading to the greatest point spread upset in college football history? Did he not bring Jeremy Bates with him to the Seahawks after a terrible year of play calling at USC?

By not forcing his assistant coaches to compete for their jobs, does that mean he is not consistently applying his Always Compete mantra? Perhaps, I wish he would allow for some competition at play caller during the preseason. But that does not seem to be the direction he is going in, and he hasn't added another offensive assistant, besides his other son, Brennan. Calling him a "liar" or a "hypocrite" for that seems overly harsh. I would just call him human. He's a defensive-first coach, and that has led to some inconsistency in the play calling on the offensive side of the ball.

 

[netskier]

How about asking Pete to consider fixing the problem by instructing Bevell to improve his play calling process, by implementing some of the ideas discussed here.

I hold Pete responsible for the loss, and I am sure that he does too, given his report of some sleepless nights afterwards.

 

[Tical21]

Still the worst call in the history of American Professional Sports. Possibly the most memorable play in the history of American Professional Sports. It isn't even a "what if" to me. it is a flat-out travesty. I will remember it 50 years from now. It is still beyond my comprehension that Bevell is actually coming back to this team. How in the world does that happen? And I'm a Bevell guy! Just typing his name raises my blood pressure several points. Living with it will be no different next week than it is this week. Living with it the rest of my life will be no different than it is this week.

And yet under Bevell's leadership, the team you proclaim as your own has given you two straight Super Bowl appearances, the most prosperity you've enjoyed in your lifetime. And you're mad? You really can't make this stuff up. Just so very glad that Pete's evaluations are the polar opposite of the football "intelligence" I have read from some of you.

Yeah, I'm with you, we should just hand away another Super Bowl this year and then celebrate doing so.

 

[Tical21]

United we stand... divided we fall.

Exactly. Please tell me that the majority of the 12's do stand behind our coaching staff. That what I have read on here is just a few bitter castoffs. Because we do need unity

If you're going to try to find a bunch of people that are going to bow before the men that a few months ago authored the worst call in the history of sports, you probably need to go check out a Patriots board.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Hopefully mistakes in XLIX were learned from by all involved and now with a deeper more talented team, the Hawks go out and dominate from game 1 until they are hoisting Seattle's 2nd Lombardi in Santa Clara :lol: ...........which I think will happen if we can avoid major injuries. I have a GREAT feeling about the upcoming season. :mrgreen:

 

[Siouxhawk]

United we stand... divided we fall.

Exactly. Please tell me that the majority of the 12's do stand behind our coaching staff. That what I have read on here is just a few bitter castoffs. Because we do need unity

If you're going to try to find a bunch of people that are going to bow before the men that a few months ago authored the worst call in the history of sports, you probably need to go check out a Patriots board.

I was looking bigger picture. Go back and revisit the 90s, then get back to me.

 

[Tical21]

United we stand... divided we fall.

Exactly. Please tell me that the majority of the 12's do stand behind our coaching staff. That what I have read on here is just a few bitter castoffs. Because we do need unity

If you're going to try to find a bunch of people that are going to bow before the men that a few months ago authored the worst call in the history of sports, you probably need to go check out a Patriots board.

I was looking bigger picture. Go back and revisit the 90s, then get back to me.

I'm sorry, I still don't remember any coaches handing any Super Bowls to any other teams in the 90's. But I guess Super Bowls aren't important in the big picture. Too bad fans like me don't have the "intelligence" to see it.

 

[LymonHawk]

IMHO: Calling out Bevell without calling out Coach Carroll, is the height of hypocrisy. Did PC fire Bevell? No, he kept him for another year. So who's the idiot, Bevell for calling the play, or Carroll for hiring and keeping him as OC?

And to those who want to use the "He's loyal to his people" excuse, I call BS. The mantra of this team is 'Always compete,' no? If Carroll thought Bevell was as stupid as people on this board are claiming, he would not re-hire him...or he's a liar. Simple.

Can't have it both ways folks. :les:

Carroll does favor loyalty toward his assistant coaches and maintaining continuity.

Did he fire Lane Kiffin after failing to convert a 4th and 2 at the end of the 2005 National Championship, with Reggie Bush on the bench, allowing Vince Young a short field to win the game in the final seconds? Did he fire Steve Sarkisian after leaving John David Booty in the game against Stanford with a broken hand, leading to the greatest point spread upset in college football history? Did he not bring Jeremy Bates with him to the Seahawks after a terrible year of play calling at USC?

By not forcing his assistant coaches to compete for their jobs, does that mean he is not consistently applying his Always Compete mantra? Perhaps, I wish he would allow for some competition at play caller during the preseason. But that does not seem to be the direction he is going in, and he hasn't added another offensive assistant, besides his other son, Brennan. Calling him a "liar" or a "hypocrite" for that seems overly harsh. I would just call him human. He's a defensive-first coach, and that has led to some inconsistency in the play calling on the offensive side of the ball.

Firstly: I'm not a fan of, nor do I, follow USC, so I cannot comment on what PC did at USC. But for argument's sake; do you seriously believe PC would keep Bevell if he thought it was Bevell's fault we lost the SB? For continuities sake? Please.

Do you not believe RW when he says, it was God's decision we fail on that play? Or do you admit RW's FOS.

By now we all realize this same play was used successfully against Arizona last year. Did you complain at the play then? If so, please furnish your post showing you did so. I've been asking that same question since this whole 'blame Bevell' thing started; and guess what, out of over 9,000 members on this board, NOT ONE has been able to produce such a post. NOT ONE!!

All along I've claimed people only hated the play because it didn't work. No one's proven me wrong yet. Some talking head screams "It's the worst call in history," and the sheep follow. A sad peek at our Society.

 

[hawknation2015]

IMHO: Calling out Bevell without calling out Coach Carroll, is the height of hypocrisy. Did PC fire Bevell? No, he kept him for another year. So who's the idiot, Bevell for calling the play, or Carroll for hiring and keeping him as OC?

And to those who want to use the "He's loyal to his people" excuse, I call BS. The mantra of this team is 'Always compete,' no? If Carroll thought Bevell was as stupid as people on this board are claiming, he would not re-hire him...or he's a liar. Simple.

Can't have it both ways folks. :les:

Carroll does favor loyalty toward his assistant coaches and maintaining continuity.

Did he fire Lane Kiffin after failing to convert a 4th and 2 at the end of the 2005 National Championship, with Reggie Bush on the bench, allowing Vince Young a short field to win the game in the final seconds? Did he fire Steve Sarkisian after leaving John David Booty in the game against Stanford with a broken hand, leading to the greatest point spread upset in college football history? Did he not bring Jeremy Bates with him to the Seahawks after a terrible year of play calling at USC?

By not forcing his assistant coaches to compete for their jobs, does that mean he is not consistently applying his Always Compete mantra? Perhaps, I wish he would allow for some competition at play caller during the preseason. But that does not seem to be the direction he is going in, and he hasn't added another offensive assistant, besides his other son, Brennan. Calling him a "liar" or a "hypocrite" for that seems overly harsh. I would just call him human. He's a defensive-first coach, and that has led to some inconsistency in the play calling on the offensive side of the ball.

Firstly: I'm not a fan of, nor do I, follow USC, so I cannot comment on what PC did at USC. But for argument's sake; do you seriously believe PC would keep Bevell if he thought it was Bevell's fault we lost the SB? For continuities sake? Please.

Do you not believe RW when he says, it was God's decision we fail on that play? Or do you admit RW's FOS.

By now we all realize this same play was used successfully against Arizona last year. Did you complain at the play then? If so, please furnish your post showing you did so. I've been asking that same question since this whole 'blame Bevell' thing started; and guess what, out of over 9,000 members on this board, NOT ONE has been able to produce such a post. NOT ONE!!

All along I've claimed people only hated the play because it didn't work. No one's proven me wrong yet. Some talking head screams "It's the worst call in history," and the sheep follow. A sad peek at our Society.

I had about 53 separate criticisms of Bevell BEFORE that play occurred.
You can read them all here: search.php?keywords=bevell&terms=all&author=hawknation2014&fid%5B%5D=2&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

Abandoning the run in the red zone was absolutely one of my primary criticisms of Bevell. If a low-probability play succeeds, is that supposed to absolve the play caller of responsibility for calling that lower probability/higher turnover risk play?

 

[LymonHawk]

IMHO: Calling out Bevell without calling out Coach Carroll, is the height of hypocrisy. Did PC fire Bevell? No, he kept him for another year. So who's the idiot, Bevell for calling the play, or Carroll for hiring and keeping him as OC?

And to those who want to use the "He's loyal to his people" excuse, I call BS. The mantra of this team is 'Always compete,' no? If Carroll thought Bevell was as stupid as people on this board are claiming, he would not re-hire him...or he's a liar. Simple.

Can't have it both ways folks. :les:

Carroll does favor loyalty toward his assistant coaches and maintaining continuity.

Did he fire Lane Kiffin after failing to convert a 4th and 2 at the end of the 2005 National Championship, with Reggie Bush on the bench, allowing Vince Young a short field to win the game in the final seconds? Did he fire Steve Sarkisian after leaving John David Booty in the game against Stanford with a broken hand, leading to the greatest point spread upset in college football history? Did he not bring Jeremy Bates with him to the Seahawks after a terrible year of play calling at USC?

By not forcing his assistant coaches to compete for their jobs, does that mean he is not consistently applying his Always Compete mantra? Perhaps, I wish he would allow for some competition at play caller during the preseason. But that does not seem to be the direction he is going in, and he hasn't added another offensive assistant, besides his other son, Brennan. Calling him a "liar" or a "hypocrite" for that seems overly harsh. I would just call him human. He's a defensive-first coach, and that has led to some inconsistency in the play calling on the offensive side of the ball.

Firstly: I'm not a fan of, nor do I, follow USC, so I cannot comment on what PC did at USC. But for argument's sake; do you seriously believe PC would keep Bevell if he thought it was Bevell's fault we lost the SB? For continuities sake? Please.

Do you not believe RW when he says, it was God's decision we fail on that play? Or do you admit RW's FOS.

By now we all realize this same play was used successfully against Arizona last year. Did you complain at the play then? If so, please furnish your post showing you did so. I've been asking that same question since this whole 'blame Bevell' thing started; and guess what, out of over 9,000 members on this board, NOT ONE has been able to produce such a post. NOT ONE!!

All along I've claimed people only hated the play because it didn't work. No one's proven me wrong yet. Some talking head screams "It's the worst call in history," and the sheep follow. A sad peek at our Society.

I had about 53 separate criticisms of Bevell BEFORE that play occurred.
You can read them all here: search.php?keywords=bevell&terms=all&author=hawknation2014&fid%5B%5D=2&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

Abandoning the run in the red zone was absolutely one of my primary criticisms of Bevell. If a low-probability play succeeds, is that supposed to absolve the play caller of responsibility for calling that lower probability/higher turnover risk play?

Saying you don't like Bevell's play calling is a far cry from complaining about a particular play. Did you, or did you not, specifically complain about the call during/after the Arizona game?

And what about RW? Is he a liar or not?

 

[hawknation2015]

Saying you don't like Bevell's play calling is a far cry from complaining about a particular play. Did you, or did you not, specifically complain about the call during/after the Arizona game?

And what about RW? Is he a liar or not?

Those are two very different issues.

I don't write about every single play call I disagree with. Which play call in particular against Arizona are you talking about?

In general, Bevell showed a clear tendency to abandon the running game in two instances: (1) in the red zone, where the Seahawks were ranked 20th in red zone scoring, despite having Marshawn Lynch and Russell Wilson, and (2) in the first half of games, after he runs through the initial script and before half time when Carroll can encourage him to run the ball more.

Did Wilson "lie" about hearing God, after the play, tell him that he was using him to show the world how he responds to adversity? I have no idea, because I can't see into Wilson's mind. He was speaking at a Church, and maybe he was playing to the crowd. I tend to think he was being sincere. Many people, for various reasons, have experienced auditory hallucinations in which they believe God has spoken directly to them. Lack of sleep, excessive praying, trauma, concussion, etc. all increase the liklihood of having an auditory hallucination.

I have NO IDEA what this second question has to do with whether Bevell is an above average play caller or whether that was the best play call for that situation.

We were on the one-yard line. We had enough time to run the ball once, call a timeout if the run wasn't successful, throw the ball to stop the clock, and then run again one last time on 4th down. We were the 2nd best power running team in the league (81% success rate) going against the worst power running team in the league (81% failure rate). The probability of a turnover was at least four times more likely by throwing the ball. All this leads me to believe they should have run the ball in that situation. It was the safest play with the highest probability of success.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Continuing to use red-zone TD statistics to prove a point about the Seahawks' offense is conceding defeat as it doesn't really reflect Pete's philosophy as has been explained over and over again.
But if it's your last straw to try to explain the absurd, I understand why a desperate poster would turn to it.

 

[hawknation2015]

Continuing to use red-zone TD statistics to prove a point about the Seahawks' offense is conceding defeat as it doesn't really reflect Pete's philosophy as has been explained over and over again.
But if it's your last straw to try to explain the absurd, I understand why a desperate poster would turn to it.

The abandoning of the running game in the red zone has NOTHING to do with Carroll's philosophy -- which calls for balance. I have no idea what you are babbling about here.