Playing safe will end up costing us in the playoffs.

[John63]

" Playing Safe " it's used in every sport every day...only counts if it works...it worked for the Hawks this time.

If by "this time" you mean 56 times in a row, then yes.

I know it's hard, but let the fake narrative die.

Again not totally true, we have lost that lead and gotten it back before. In addition, what about a 4 point lead going into the 4th how are we there? I can think of several games were we lost playing it closes. an SB for one. Playing it lost as another way of saying we have a lead lets play not to loose which we do alot and it has bitten us in the butt alot.

 

[JGreen79]

I can think of another super bowl where playing aggressive cost the game as well. I'm curious at how many times playong safe has cost the game vs how many times it hasn't.

 

[John63]

I can think of another super bowl where playing aggressive cost the game as well. I'm curious at how many times playong safe has cost the game vs how many times it hasn't.

The SB you are talking about would never have gotten to that point had we not taken our foot off the gas on offense, playing it safe or not to lose and our defense let them erase a 10 point lead within 9 minutes. That is an example were we played it safe and it bit us in the backside.

 

[Seatooter]

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.

Hi ya Buzzb05

See you been having fun trolling the WZ loz All out now :49ersmall:

https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/nine ... -playoffs/

 

[Hawkpower]

" Playing Safe " it's used in every sport every day...only counts if it works...it worked for the Hawks this time.

If by "this time" you mean 56 times in a row, then yes.

I know it's hard, but let the fake narrative die.

Again not totally true, we have lost that lead and gotten it back before. In addition, what about a 4 point lead going into the 4th how are we there? I can think of several games were we lost playing it closes. an SB for one. Playing it lost as another way of saying we have a lead lets play not to loose which we do alot and it has bitten us in the butt alot.

Yes, totally true.

56 times in a row, when having a 4 point lead at halftime Seattle has won the game. Including postseason.

Won the game.

All that matters.

It works. It’s proven. Nothing more to argue.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

This time? Hilarious. This team wins close games on the regular, regardless how annoying it may be when teams ALMOST come back and win. Almost.

 

[John63]

" Playing Safe " it's used in every sport every day...only counts if it works...it worked for the Hawks this time.

If by "this time" you mean 56 times in a row, then yes.

I know it's hard, but let the fake narrative die.

Again not totally true, we have lost that lead and gotten it back before. In addition, what about a 4 point lead going into the 4th how are we there? I can think of several games were we lost playing it closes. an SB for one. Playing it lost as another way of saying we have a lead lets play not to loose which we do alot and it has bitten us in the butt alot.

Yes, totally true.

56 times in a row, when having a 4 point lead at halftime Seattle has won the game. Including postseason.

Won the game.

All that matters.

It works. It’s proven. Nothing more to argue.

Hmm so if it works so great how come only 1 SB win, and only 2 SB appearances? Obviously it is not the end all be all you claim.

 

[Hawkpower]

If by "this time" you mean 56 times in a row, then yes.

I know it's hard, but let the fake narrative die.

Again not totally true, we have lost that lead and gotten it back before. In addition, what about a 4 point lead going into the 4th how are we there? I can think of several games were we lost playing it closes. an SB for one. Playing it lost as another way of saying we have a lead lets play not to loose which we do alot and it has bitten us in the butt alot.

Yes, totally true.

56 times in a row, when having a 4 point lead at halftime Seattle has won the game. Including postseason.

Won the game.

All that matters.

It works. It’s proven. Nothing more to argue.

Hmm so if it works so great how come only 1 SB win, and only 2 SB appearances? Obviously it is not the end all be all you claim.

Stay focused.

The conversation at hand is the fake narrative that Pete's conservative nature when having a 2nd half lead is causing the Hawks to lose games.

It hasn't since 2012.

I like wins. Pete's philosophy with a 2nd half lead turns into wins. 56 times in a row.

 

[chris98251]

If by "this time" you mean 56 times in a row, then yes.

I know it's hard, but let the fake narrative die.

Again not totally true, we have lost that lead and gotten it back before. In addition, what about a 4 point lead going into the 4th how are we there? I can think of several games were we lost playing it closes. an SB for one. Playing it lost as another way of saying we have a lead lets play not to loose which we do alot and it has bitten us in the butt alot.

Yes, totally true.

56 times in a row, when having a 4 point lead at halftime Seattle has won the game. Including postseason.

Won the game.

All that matters.

It works. It’s proven. Nothing more to argue.

Hmm so if it works so great how come only 1 SB win, and only 2 SB appearances? Obviously it is not the end all be all you claim.

Well when you look around the league, Chargers, Lions, Jets, Browns, Cards the list goes on would love to have our problem just 3 appearances and 2 in last ten years in Super Bowls with one win and two should have.

We really do suck ass.

 

[Largent80]

Hahahahaha...In the playoffs 8 out of 10 years and jackasses are saying it's not good enough?

Move to Cleveland.

 

[RolandDeschain]

We've had that happen before - a comfortable lead evaporating due to being very conservative on offense leading to a loss........

So someone else posted that the Hawks are 56-0 when leading by at least 4 at the half under Pete Carroll. Seems either you or that person is wrong here. Could you please provide the example to support your statement and thus refuting theirs? You know, give us a date and opponent and what the lead that was lost was.

Since the Seahawks have not lost since 2012 (including the postseason) when leading by at least 4 at halftime, he's gonna have a hard time digging up an example

Of course there may be some game where they led by 3, took a huge lead, and then blew it, but even if that game exists somewhere in the rubble, the point still stands. Huge leads evaporating to losses due to Pete's philosophy just aren't a real thing, but rather something created to try and prove a fake point.

Pete's philosophy has led to 8 years of leads turning into victories. 56-0 since 2012. Guess it kinda works.

Neither of you seem to realize that it's possible to get a nice lead before halftime and have it evaporate before halftime; or to be leading by less than 4, or be behind, at halftime, then go up with a few scores in the 3rd quarter, only to still lose. Assuming the 56-0 when leading by 4+ at halftime is accurate, it's also a misleading statistic compared to most of the rest of the league. We've had a great defense for most of Wilson's tenure here, and we pretty much always start off slowly. The Patriots as of a few weeks ago were 98-1 when leading by any amount at halftime in home games: https://dknation.draftkings.com/2019/11 ... -belichick - that goes back like 12 years.

Either of you think much?

 

[John63]

Again not totally true, we have lost that lead and gotten it back before. In addition, what about a 4 point lead going into the 4th how are we there? I can think of several games were we lost playing it closes. an SB for one. Playing it lost as another way of saying we have a lead lets play not to loose which we do alot and it has bitten us in the butt alot.

Yes, totally true.

56 times in a row, when having a 4 point lead at halftime Seattle has won the game. Including postseason.

Won the game.

All that matters.

It works. It’s proven. Nothing more to argue.

Hmm so if it works so great how come only 1 SB win, and only 2 SB appearances? Obviously it is not the end all be all you claim.

Stay focused.

The conversation at hand is the fake narrative that Pete's conservative nature when having a 2nd half lead is causing the Hawks to lose games.

It hasn't since 2012.

I like wins. Pete's philosophy with a 2nd half lead turns into wins. 56 times in a row.

And yet only 1 sb and in the end the goal is SB stay focused on the ultimate goal the SB.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

11-3, 8 playoffs in 10 seasons. They played in 3 Super Bowls in 10 seasons and won a title.
Yeah, it's so rough being a Seahawks fan. Come on guys, enjoy the ride. Just for once??
Dwelling on how a team WINS games? Assuming they will lose because most of the games are close? You gotta' be kidding me. Has it really come to that? Often they have a comfortable lead and the game isn't even close to being a loss. That point differential is so misleading.
And in what world are the Seahawks NOT focused on the Super Bowl?????
I give up. Appreciating every last minute of this season.

Go Hawks

 

[Sac]

Yup. Ultimately this is what cost us the Owl against the Pats. We were blowing them out and we let them crawl back into the game.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Doesn't mean it will happen again this year. It's not fact, it's an opinion.
The D gave up a 10 point lead. Brady coming back in the playoffs is no new revelation. I doubt a Brady comeback is letting a team creep back in. It's when they are handily beating a crap team and then they get some garbage time TD, but still win. Creeping back in doesn't matter if it ends in a W.

 

[Hawkpower]

We've had that happen before - a comfortable lead evaporating due to being very conservative on offense leading to a loss........

So someone else posted that the Hawks are 56-0 when leading by at least 4 at the half under Pete Carroll. Seems either you or that person is wrong here. Could you please provide the example to support your statement and thus refuting theirs? You know, give us a date and opponent and what the lead that was lost was.

Since the Seahawks have not lost since 2012 (including the postseason) when leading by at least 4 at halftime, he's gonna have a hard time digging up an example

Of course there may be some game where they led by 3, took a huge lead, and then blew it, but even if that game exists somewhere in the rubble, the point still stands. Huge leads evaporating to losses due to Pete's philosophy just aren't a real thing, but rather something created to try and prove a fake point.

Pete's philosophy has led to 8 years of leads turning into victories. 56-0 since 2012. Guess it kinda works.

Neither of you seem to realize that it's possible to get a nice lead before halftime and have it evaporate before halftime; or to be leading by less than 4, or be behind, at halftime, then go up with a few scores in the 3rd quarter, only to still lose. Assuming the 56-0 when leading by 4+ at halftime is accurate, it's also a misleading statistic compared to most of the rest of the league. We've had a great defense for most of Wilson's tenure here, and we pretty much always start off slowly. The Patriots as of a few weeks ago were 98-1 when leading by any amount at halftime in home games: https://dknation.draftkings.com/2019/11 ... -belichick - that goes back like 12 years.

Either of you think much?

Lets not forget that the narrative at hand is a big lead late that turns to a loss late solely due to Pete's conservative nature. Falling behind in the 2nd quarter after taking a 10-0 lead doesn't fit here.

Just to play devils advocate, I would be willing to bet in hours of research, you probably could come up with a game or two where they were behind at the half, came back and took a huge 3rd quarter lead, and then lost the game. I bet you could.

Does 56-2 since 2012 when having a lead late change the fact that Pete's philosophy works? 56-3?

How many outliers would you need to find to make the fake narrative (playing conservative has COST SEATTLE WINS!!!) true?

Thanks

 

[Hawkpower]

Yes, totally true.

56 times in a row, when having a 4 point lead at halftime Seattle has won the game. Including postseason.

Won the game.

All that matters.

It works. It’s proven. Nothing more to argue.

Hmm so if it works so great how come only 1 SB win, and only 2 SB appearances? Obviously it is not the end all be all you claim.

Stay focused.

The conversation at hand is the fake narrative that Pete's conservative nature when having a 2nd half lead is causing the Hawks to lose games.

It hasn't since 2012.

I like wins. Pete's philosophy with a 2nd half lead turns into wins. 56 times in a row.

And yet only 1 sb and in the end the goal is SB stay focused on the ultimate goal the SB.

Well 56-0 tells us that something else is keeping Seattle from reaching your attainable goal of a Super Bowl win every February.

 

[had2bhawk]

11-3, 8 playoffs in 10 seasons. They played in 3 Super Bowls in 10 seasons and won a title.
Yeah, it's so rough being a Seahawks fan. Come on guys, enjoy the ride. Just for once??
Dwelling on how a team WINS games? Assuming they will lose because most of the games are close? You gotta' be kidding me. Has it really come to that? Often they have a comfortable lead and the game isn't even close to being a loss. That point differential is so misleading.
And in what world are the Seahawks NOT focused on the Super Bowl?????
I give up. Appreciating every last minute of this season.

Go Hawks

You "Get it!"
I'm really enjoying this RIDE.
What ever playing it safe means. My thoughts are keeping Diggs grounded through the 9'er game and pray for RAIN, alot of RAIN. Hawks go Ground Chuck and let the chips fall. Key is get Diggs back for Playoffs.

 

[John63]

11-3, 8 playoffs in 10 seasons. They played in 3 Super Bowls in 10 seasons and won a title.
Yeah, it's so rough being a Seahawks fan. Come on guys, enjoy the ride. Just for once??
Dwelling on how a team WINS games? Assuming they will lose because most of the games are close? You gotta' be kidding me. Has it really come to that? Often they have a comfortable lead and the game isn't even close to being a loss. That point differential is so misleading.
And in what world are the Seahawks NOT focused on the Super Bowl?????
I give up. Appreciating every last minute of this season.

Go Hawks

Ahh 2 sb in 10 seasons not 3

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Wrong. 2005 season, 2013 season and 2014 season. That is 10 SEASONS, 3 Super Bowl appearances. 05 was with Holmgren, but that's not my point. They made the Super Bowl 3 times over 10 seasons.
Being in the Super Bowl 3 times in 10 seasons is damn good. It has been a hell of a run here in Seattle. And back to back with Pete. 8 trips to the playoffs in 10 years under Pete.
And look at the team that Mora left Pete with after his one brutal season here.