Playing safe will end up costing us in the playoffs.

[chris98251]

We've seen it for the better part of 3 or so years now and specifically almost every game this year.

I promise you this won't be a luxury against a good team, so we should probably stop doing it now, while we still can.

You blow teams out when you have a chance, leave no doubt.

It's obnoxious to watch and infuriates me to no end.

You heard it here first, I hope this doesn't happen in the playoffs but I wouldn't be surprised if this is how we do go out if we do.

Wait didn't we do this in SB 49, nvm.

I've been of this mindset for many years. A lot of fans just like to say a win is a win, doesn't matter if it's by an inch or a mile, winning's winning...err, that might be Dom from the first Fast & The Furious film , but I've long believed (well it's not a belief, it's really a fact) that HOW you win and lose throughout the season has predictive power in the postseason.

If we continue to dick around on offense too much, we're not getting to the Superb Owl...but man, I really hope we do, obviously.

One of the main reasons Chuck Knox had issues, stubborn as hell about the offense winning games, we have the horses and need to open the door more then just a crack each week going into the playoffs, every team is good and given a chance can blow a game open, holding back on the offense creates opportunity for the other team and gives them hope the entire game.

Some times you need to rip their heart out, may not always be great for ratings but sure makes teams think more about playing you.

 

[Hawkpower]

We've seen it for the better part of 3 or so years now and specifically almost every game this year.

I promise you this won't be a luxury against a good team, so we should probably stop doing it now, while we still can.

You blow teams out when you have a chance, leave no doubt.

It's obnoxious to watch and infuriates me to no end.

You heard it here first, I hope this doesn't happen in the playoffs but I wouldn't be surprised if this is how we do go out if we do.

Wait didn't we do this in SB 49, nvm.

I've been of this mindset for many years. A lot of fans just like to say a win is a win, doesn't matter if it's by an inch or a mile, winning's winning...err, that might be Dom from the first Fast & The Furious film , but I've long believed (well it's not a belief, it's really a fact) that HOW you win and lose throughout the season has predictive power in the postseason.

If we continue to d*ck around on offense too much, we're not getting to the Superb Owl...but man, I really hope we do, obviously.

There isnt a team in the NFC that isnt having this exact same thought right now.

We like to think its only in Seattle since we emotionally over analyze every moment of every game.

You think Niner fans are feeling super confident about their team after losing at home to a 4-9 football team?

I mean I agree with your point, I just don't think we are any worse off than any other team right now.

 

[John63]

The play it safe mode is incorporated into many members of the team. Specifically Carson went into a feet first slide instead of getting an extra yard or so within the last drive. Never have I seen a RB make a feet first slide and avoid the tackle unless the first down is made, and the game is wrapped up. The little things about a team are what makes you a champion or an also ran. EVERY SINGLE INCH must be contested. I hope his team mates ride him hard for that one. There are many coaches who would bench him and chew his ear off just for that.

Full disclosure, PC's method of coaching drives me nuts. It seems to work for him, but IMO it is the reason for the many losses in the past that happened at the ends of games when he had a "lights out" D. Not just when he is building a team.

Well to be fair Carson did that to keep the clock moving, if he doesn't, yea he gets an extra 2 or 3 yards but he is also pushed out of bounds and that stops the clock

No...that was dumb and Russ told him as much after the play. At the very least he should have driven forward head first instead of sliding like a qb. In that situation a first down was most important. A

And you know Wilson told him that how? You dont so give it up.

 

[Smellyman]

Injuries or no this is a pattern all year.

Carolina, Minnesota, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Atlanta.

Going soft on D AND O is making it too close fro comfort. A flukey play, turnover, big play etc. and it turns to a loss.

 

[lukerguy]

The reason they keep letting teams back in, is that they don't have an elite D- specifically an elite pass rush. With a pass rush, when you're up, the opposing team takes sacks, hits, fumbles, INTs etc...

If they can play like they did against SF, they can beat anyone... why did the line get home against SF, really the only game this year? Can they do it in the playoffs? That will be the difference between SB win #2 and gone in the first or 2nd round.

 

[RolandDeschain]

The reason they keep letting teams back in, is that they don't have an elite D- specifically an elite pass rush. With a pass rush, when you're up, the opposing team takes sacks, hits, fumbles, INTs etc...

If they can play like they did against SF, they can beat anyone... why did the line get home against SF, really the only game this year? Can they do it in the playoffs? That will be the difference between SB win #2 and gone in the first or 2nd round.

You don't need an elite defense TO AVOID GOING SOFT ZONE ONCE YOU GET A DECENT LEAD, though.

 

[rcaido]

You guys are bunch of clowns...

Im pretty sure Pete knows exactly what he is doing when having the lead. He is playing chess while you guys are playing go fish.

Lets put this to bed. Pete is 56-0 since 2012 when leading by 4 in the half. Let that marinate in your heads. Undefeated for 56 straight!

With that said, we are in first place. Lets enjoy it for at least a week before we start crying for the sky is falling because the Panthers did a rally at the end against our JV team defense.

 

[olyfan63]

The reason they keep letting teams back in, is that they don't have an elite D- specifically an elite pass rush. With a pass rush, when you're up, the opposing team takes sacks, hits, fumbles, INTs etc...

If they can play like they did against SF, they can beat anyone... why did the line get home against SF, really the only game this year? Can they do it in the playoffs? That will be the difference between SB win #2 and gone in the first or 2nd round.

Yeah, that pretty much nails it... an elite pass rush reduces the effectiveness of opposing QBs, and creates turnovers. Clearly we need Clowney back in the big moments, and guys like JReed and QJeff healthy, and Sackquem continuing to develop his pass-rushing skills. Kendricks seems to have skills there too, so we miss him.

Sackquem could be a hidden key against Kyler Murray and other mobile QBs; maybe Pete will start using him as a pass-rusher/spy combo option for some of these speedy QBs we face, and/or create blitz packages to break him free.

For sure, when we had Avril, Bennett, Clemons, in the back-to-back SB appearance years, we had a pass rush. It was losing Avril with a concussion during the game that cost us SB49, with no real pass rush threats to hurry Brady. Also, IMO Avril was the real MVP of SB48 beatdown of Denver. His hit on Peyton was what gifted the pick 6 to Darren Smith.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

11-3 and we get to hear how a team who CONTINUES to win close games is going to lose in the playoffs. I guess they shouldn't even play the games. As if it's fact because a fan says so.
Only on seahawks dot negative is an 11-3 record so downplayed. Oh well. Go Hawks

 

[kf3339]

I don't see why the OP is guaranteeing we will lose in the playoffs, but just that our tendency's this year to play soft defense (and offense) after getting a large lead. I agree completely.

Several games could have easily been loses to this point with just a little bit of change in circumstances. When you play that close to the end score result you leave too many bad things their to cost a game. This year namely the refs. They can steer a game to a negative conclusion right before your eyes and the NFL will not do a damn thing about it. The Hawks are not a legacy team, or one that the league particularly likes. They're favorites that will be promoted over us.

So to prevent that from happening you need to get up hard and stay on a teams throat until the end. Just like the Saints did last night with the Colts. I get some may think PC doesn't like that type of result, but the other option is to invite outside forces to steer the game away from a win.

In that case I will take the blowout every time.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I don't see why the OP is guaranteeing we will lose in the playoffs, but just that our tendency's this year to play soft defense (and offense) after getting a large lead. I agree completely.

Several games could have easily been loses to this point with just a little bit of change in circumstances. When you play that close to the end score result you leave too many bad things their to cost a game. This year namely the refs. They can steer a game to a negative conclusion right before your eyes and the NFL will not do a damn thing about it. The Hawks are not a legacy team, or one that the league particularly likes. They're favorites that will be promoted over us.

So to prevent that from happening you need to get up hard and stay on a teams throat until the end. Just like the Saints did last night with the Colts. I get some may think PC doesn't like that type of result, but the other option is to invite outside forces to steer the game away from a win.

In that case I will take the blowout every time.

While I think we all agree with the sentiment of stepping on team's throats and putting teams away, it's much harder said than done.

Especially when you lose your All Pro LB, who's the leader of your defense in charge of getting everyone in position, your starting FS and your #1 CB was already not in the game as well as a bunch of guys on the D-line missing.

As Pete said in his presser, it was like the end of a pre-season game Sunday, too many rookies and backups getting out of position which is what led to making it FAR too easy for Carolina to mount their comeback.

 

[Chapow]

I don't see why the OP is guaranteeing we will lose in the playoffs...

It's because it's the easy, safe position to take.

If we lose, he gets to say "See, I was right, told you". If we win he'll just be like "Yay! So stoked I was wrong! Go Hawks!".

 

[bmorepunk]

I don't see why the OP is guaranteeing we will lose in the playoffs...

It's because it's the easy, safe position to take.

If we lose, he gets to say "See, I was right, told you". If we win he'll just be like "Yay! So stoked I was wrong! Go Hawks!".

There's probably something like a 5% chance the Seahawks win the Super Bowl. At least if you could mirror parallel universes an infinite number of times (or sufficiently large enough times to start to converge), anyway. If you're a gambler and you could bet straight up whether or not they win a Super Bowl, you'd be stupid to not that bet against them. But gambling is inherently stupid anyway.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

I don't see why the OP is guaranteeing we will lose in the playoffs...

It's because it's the easy, safe position to take.

If we lose, he gets to say "See, I was right, told you". If we win he'll just be like "Yay! So stoked I was wrong! Go Hawks!".

So many people like this..............
Good post

 

[SoulfishHawk]

The Hawks flat out dominated that game. A couple touchdowns against a bunch of backups in garbage time doesn't change that. But then the whole point differential thing comes up, yet again.

 

[RolandDeschain]

The Hawks flat out dominated that game. A couple touchdowns against a bunch of backups in garbage time doesn't change that. But then the whole point differential thing comes up, yet again.

They got within a score. A TD at the end would have resulted in us losing. We've had that happen before - a comfortable lead evaporating due to being very conservative on offense leading to a loss.

Plus with the NFC playoff picture being what it is right now, there is a real chance that point differential might lose us a bye and the division crown.

Pete absolutely needs more "go for the throat" action on offense. I still love him, don't get me wrong; but some of you guys act like he's perfect. Nobody is.

 

[Jville]

To each their own ..................

That Saints / Colt game last night was awful boring. I certainly couldn't get thru it. Nothing to see.

I prefer games whose outcome comes down to the final series.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Absolutely they need to go for the throat. It pisses me off every time. But, once the game is over and grumpiness goes away, you can stand back and look at the game as a whole. They were not going to lose that game. Also, the offense put up 30 points. Not on the offense when the D has to play with 6 starters out the last couple drives. That's just WAY too much to ask of a bunch of backups.

 

[Hawkpower]

The Hawks flat out dominated that game. A couple touchdowns against a bunch of backups in garbage time doesn't change that. But then the whole point differential thing comes up, yet again.

They got within a score. A TD at the end would have resulted in us losing. We've had that happen before - a comfortable lead evaporating due to being very conservative on offense leading to a loss.

Plus with the NFC playoff picture being what it is right now, there is a real chance that point differential might lose us a bye and the division crown.

Pete absolutely needs more "go for the throat" action on offense. I still love him, don't get me wrong; but some of you guys act like he's perfect. Nobody is.

How far down the chain of tiebreakers is point differential?

Just curious.

 

[Hawkpower]

I don't see why the OP is guaranteeing we will lose in the playoffs...

It's because it's the easy, safe position to take.

If we lose, he gets to say "See, I was right, told you". If we win he'll just be like "Yay! So stoked I was wrong! Go Hawks!".

There's probably something like a 5% chance the Seahawks win the Super Bowl. At least if you could mirror parallel universes an infinite number of times (or sufficiently large enough times to start to converge), anyway. If you're a gambler and you could bet straight up whether or not they win a Super Bowl, you'd be stupid to not that bet against them. But gambling is inherently stupid anyway.

They have a more than decent shot of being the 1 seed.

When was the last time the 1 seed had a 5% chance of winning the Superbowl?